Rose McGowan is outraged. Boiling over, explosive. She is angry about sexual assault, rape, complicity and the use of the word "alleged" in connection to accused sexual predator Harvey Weinstein. And some of that rage is being aimed at her fellow actresses who intend to wear black to the Golden Globes awards in January - to call attention to the same epidemic of harassment and assault that has enraged McGowan herself.
Her disdain for this silent form of protest was expressed in a now-deleted tweet in which she reserved particular wrath for A-lister Meryl Streep, whom McGowan blasted for working with Weinstein. (Streep has said she knew nothing about the producer's behavior.) As with so many tweets that involve all-caps disgust, McGowan's led to a heated thread full of public shaming, righteous explaining and lots and lots of flame-throwing from the sidelines.
Nonetheless, McGowan has a valid point. Walking the red carpet dressed in black is a feeble form of protest.
Why is a symbolic gesture even necessary? Are we not beyond symbolism? There has been an ongoing lament that women on the red carpet are only asked about their attire - expected to twirl in front of a glamour-cam and let another camera ogle their manicure and jewelry. In recent years, the #askhermore movement demanded that interviewers talk to actresses about their work, about their philanthropy, about something other than who designed their dress.
Yet this awards season promises to be one in which every actor walking the red carpet can be assured of being interrogated about a whole lot more than their frock. They will most certainly be asked about sexual violence, the culture of silence and what constitutes justice. Those are weighty topics to chew on during a 45-second interview on the red carpet. Still, a lot can be said in that short amount of time. Fashion can speak volumes in a single glance, but nothing is quite as eloquent and powerful as words spoken from the heart and the head.