This seems to be the complete opposite of your usual tack, where people are culpable for merely participating in an unfair system.
As usual you're trying to reduce something complicated to an either / or.
I ask again -- can't an actress participate in Hollywood, benefiting from her looks, and at the same resent the fact that doing so is necessary for her to enjoy success, when male actors don't have to do the same?
You seem to be suggesting the answer is no. A person in Fisher's position has to make a choice -- participate and be silent about it ever after, or refuse and bear the consequences. That doesn't seem fair to me. Why not focus on the writers and directors who bear most of the power in that situation?
I thought I'd revisit the case of the multi-million heir on hunger strike down in Mizzou when Pho said that "privilege is not just based on race" over in the other thread, but figured it's a waste of time.
I mean, it'd be a complete red herring to this discussion, too, so there's that.
To the Mizzou thing, go look up the term "Intersectionality."