Taylor Swift on TIME
Should Taylor Swift have been on the front of TIME magazine?
The TIME front cover has taken the online world by storm, celebrating The Silence Breakers from the #MeToo movement. Created by Tarana Burke in 2006, who is also one of the women part of TIME's piece who supporta the current social coinage of the term, it has since grown as the Harvey Weinstein boulder gathers momentum down the speeding hill of sexual harassment claims.
On the cover features the following women: Ashely Judd Taylor Swift, Adama Iwu, Susan Fowler and Isabel Pascual, and an elbow of an unknown woman. There are subtly and beautiful nuances that show the detail that went into it; the gap beneath the 'Me' of 'TIME' to include all women, the elbow showing that it could be any of us.
Time explained in an editorial regarding the arm: "It belongs to an anonymous young hospital worker from Texas. She is a sexual harassment victim, who "fears that disclosing her identity would negatively impact her family. She is faceless on the cover and remains nameless inside Time's red borders, but her appearance is an act of solidarity, representing all those who are not yet able to come forward and reveal their identities."
Yet one problem to have been found is whether Taylor Swift should have been on the front cover. Many have felt that she should not have been, having not spoken out in the MeToo movement, and is anther case of a white washing so a famous woman on the front will sell copies.
It is easy to see that side of the argument, as she has come under fire for remaining quiet in recent political situations in 2017. Alternatively, others have said that it isn't her words, but her actions that have allowed her a place on the front cover.
Having been sexually assaulted herself by radio DJ David Mueller who grabbed her bottom, she successfully took him to caught and sued him for $1, wining the case. Not only standing up for women, but also causing a 35 per cent spike in calls to Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) the weekend the counter lawsuit was thrown out, according to ABC.
It is a tricky one to decide on: the whole point of the movement is to show that no act is too small or too great, no assault no matter the brevity to be excluded.
My feelings stem somewhere in the middle. I fully believe she should be part of the #MeToo piece in the TIME magazine. What I do feel would have been a stronger move is using one of the many other famous names that appear in the magazine to go on the front. Terry Crews bravely spoke out to break the stigma of men being sexually assaulted, making many finally understand that simply being famous or a man does not stop you being attacked, and has everything to do with power and control. A male face would have had a much stronger impact on showing the sheer strength of this movement, one that I feel would have been perhaps more inclusive than Taylor Swift, who could have perhaps been relegated to Page 2.
Despite this, the strong cover has hit a chord with many who are proud to see them being celebrated for their bravery, despite the fear that will always emerge from speaking out against your accuser, saying: "You will be believed. Thank you."