When inclusivity goes wrong: the #DearSister campaign

To celebrate the release of its movie Mary Queen of Scots, about the relationship between cousins Elizabeth I and Mary (Queen of Scots), Universal Pictures UK partnered with Women for Women UK, a charity helping “women survivors of war rebuild their lives”, for a user-generated content campaign focused on sisterhood.

In posts on both their channels, the organisations encouraged followers to share stories of what sisterhood means to them.

I get how they reached this idea. It’s 2019 and brands want in on the female empowerment movement. Movies featuring two female leads and leaders are rare.

Promoting women supporting each other is a great idea, and according to Women for Women Executive Director Brita Schmidt, the campaign was inspired by “the letters that Elizabeth and Mary wrote to each other as rivals in power and in love”.

But here’s the thing. At the end of the story, Elizabeth got Mary beheaded. There is just no way round it. And that is just not my idea of sisterhood, or social media’s apparently, as the #DearSister hashtag was quickly flooded with slightly ironic comments on the campaign (to be fair, alongside some heart emojis).

How this could have been avoided

Celebrating women’s leadership is not a bad idea as such but in this case, we’d suggest something as simple as a history book.

When inclusivity goes wrong: Johnny Depp in a Dior campaign to support girls’ education

“What would you do for love?” asks Johnny Depp, alleged wife beater and face of Dior’s Eau Sauvage fragrance, in the French luxury brand’s latest philanthropic initiative.  

The actor is one of many Dior celebrities featured in the #DiorLoveChain launch video. The fashion house will donate $1 for each user-generated post on Instagram, Twitter or Weibo to girls’ education charity WE.

Depp has been fronting Dior’s Eau Sauvage campaign for over two years. Despite the domestic abuse allegations and receipts, calls from charities and customer complaints, the house decided not to drop him last summer, yet another proof that as a famous and wealthy white man, you can get away with so much. Donald Trump is in the White House, Casey Affleck won an Oscar, Mel Gibson was nominated for an Academy Award. And so on, and so forth.

In this context, the Dior marketing department didn’t comment on the domestic abuse allegations (“Dior declined to comment”-type statements), probably hoping that as a result, they would be kept out of the conversation.

It’s been just over a year since Depp and Amber Heard reached a divorce settlement and released a joint statement which, the way I read it, confirms domestic abuse (I know some people read it differently, it was drafted for that express purpose). Yet between the Pirates of the Caribbeans 5 flop and a messy suit and countersuit against his former management The Management Group, it hasn’t been the greatest year for Depp.

So Dior could easily have not included him in their roster of #DiorLoveChain celebrities and influencers. This is exactly what the BS “scheduling conflict” excuse was created for.  

Instead of which, they have him endorse a campaign for girls’ education, contributing to the narrative of Johnny Depp, good with (for?) women, which also included his exes defending him.

As men’s fragrances are mostly bought by women as presents, Dior has a vested interest in some semblance of Johnny Depp rehabilitation. Yet the company clearly isn’t concerned by the optic of their campaign, or any possible backlash. 2016 reminded us that (white) women don’t always vote in their interest, whether with their ballot or their wallet.

Male or female, everyone posting content with the #DiorLoveChain hashtag or buying a bottle of Eau Sauvage is contributing to how easily society rehabilitates white men guilty of domestic abuse, to the fact that we always question and suspect the victim and ultimately, to rape culture.

There are hundreds of ways you can contribute to girls’ right to education, including donating to the Malala Fund. Just don’t make it one that has a negative impact on other aspects of women’s rights.