# Feminism, Emma Watson, and . . . er. . . tits **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 6, 2017, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544 "2017-03-06T14:56:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/61 "2017-03-07T08:00:42Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > (snip) > The [completely unnecessary gendering of laxatives for constipation](https://thespanofmyhips.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/needlessly-gendered-products-laxatives/) (snip) Thats interesting, thanks. Though I somehow doubt that modern #feminsim cares much about laxatives; the writer in the article excepted. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/62 "2017-03-07T12:24:54Z")
I freely admit the subject matter here is not one in which I have strong expertise. The oeuvre of Beyoncé thus being something I’d probably need to research before offering an informed commentary, I can hazard a brief guess that Watson’s commentary was driven by both the visual images and the underlying lyrics. Is it possible that Beyoncé’s video combined lyrics and look to create an impression that might conflict with Brand W feminism? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/63 "2017-03-07T13:14:59Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I freely admit the subject matter here is not one in which I have strong expertise. > > The oeuvre of Beyoncé thus being something I’d probably need to research before offering an informed commentary, I can hazard a brief guess that Watson’s commentary was driven by both the visual images and the underlying lyrics. Is it possible that Beyoncé’s video combined lyrics and look to create an impression that might conflict with Brand W feminism? I think such a video is possible – perhaps if it glorified rape or the mistreatment of women… but none of Beyonce’s videos that I’ve seen fit this descriptor. ---
**Author:** ![HumbleThinker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@HumbleThinker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumbleThinker)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/64 "2017-03-07T13:26:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So the lovely and talented Emma Watson, of Potterverse and now Disney fame, did a photo shoot for Vanity Fair. Among the shots was one in which the actress is shown wearing a white-rope Burberry open weave top that revealed the shocking fact that she has breasts. > > Since Watson has been an advocate for feminism, her decision to expose portions of her breasts to public view was seen as contradictory by some. Julia Hartley-Brewer, a BBC radio commentator, [tweeted](https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/836873834414366720): “Emma Watson: Feminism, feminism… gender wage gap… why oh why am I not taken seriously… feminism… oh, and here are my tits!” > > This ignited a firestorm of rebuttal from the Watson fandom community and others, suggesting that Ms. Hartley-Brewer did not understand feminism. Hartley-Brewer has defended her point, saying in effect that she believes it’s hypocritical to pose for a picture like that and rail against women being judged for their bodies. > > I don’t see the hypocrisy. > > But perhaps I am missing key insights into feminist theory that would make it clear to me. So I turn to the SDMB. As far as I can tell, the only hypocrisy is from the subset of feminists who think women who choose to expose themselves are doing some disservice to the equality of the sexes. It’s the same subset of feminists who denounced the majority (IIRC) of feminists who found women’s exposure in Playboy to be liberating in the 70s. I of course can only guess at their psychology, but these subset of feminists seem to want women, or at least other feminists, to be pure as the drive snow–the exact patriarchal attitude that feminists fought against during the sexual revolution. But I guess it’s ok in their mind for the matriarchy to force social norms on other women??? ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/65 "2017-03-07T13:30:29Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Oh, okay, sorry. 'sok. Cookie? _offers peace cookie_ ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/66 "2017-03-07T13:49:51Z")
I think nudity and sexuality can strengthen the feminism message when it’s used as a personal expression of who the woman is. But when it’s done much more for marketing purposes, it waters down the message. It seems they’re saying “Don’t think of women as sexual objects…unless it’s to make money and then it’s okay.” Women like Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus, Cher, Madonna, etc. all have sex as part of their public personality, but it seems like it’s an extension of who they really are. They don’t care that they don’t conform to how men think women should act. That makes for a stronger feminism message. But I don’t think Emma is really expressing her personality with that photo. It seems more like a marketing choice where by showing more skin, there are more magazine purchases, more viewers, and more tickets sold for her movies. But if Miley was in that photo, it would be because she wanted to express that she was a strong, sexual woman. ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/67 "2017-03-07T14:28:56Z")
Humble Thinker: > [@](#): > > I of course can only guess at their psychology, but these subset of feminists seem to want women, or at least other feminists, to be pure as the drive snow I think it has less to do with neo-puritanism than the idea that accomplished women should be celebrated for their accomplishments rather than for their looks. It doesn’t mean that women can’t or shouldn’t have the freedom to expose themselves if they wish to, but it does mean that focusing on the looks rather than on the accomplishments is the wrong way to view that woman, and promoting such a view is wrong as well. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/68 "2017-03-07T15:19:02Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > 'sok. Cookie? _offers peace cookie_ Thanks! Mm, lemon square, my favorite. > [@clairobscur](#): > > Dressing sexy, regardless of your reasons, will have an affect. Sometimes the effect you seek, sometimes the effect you don’t seek. If you dress up so as to give your husband a hard on, for instance, it might give me one too. You can’t really have your cake and eat it (and by the way, there definitely are women out there who wants exactly that : that men they find attractive have sexy thoughts and men they don’t find attractive will refrain from having them. I think you exaggerate somewhat. The problem isn’t that some other guy out there may be having sexy thoughts when a woman dresses sexy. The (extremely common) problem is when those other guys **demand or feel entitled to a woman’s attention in response to their sexy thoughts because of her sexy appearance**. Because a woman’s sexy appearance gives you sexy thoughts doesn’t give you any right to catcall her, or send her dick pics, or comment on her appearance, or try to let her know about your appreciation of her sexiness in any way. **Keep your sexy thoughts to yourself where they belong, and no woman is going to try to get you to “refrain from having them”.** Especially since she won’t even **know** you’re having them. A woman is not trying to “have her cake and eat it” if she’s encouraging sexual attention from a **specific** man such as her husband, while at the same time not wanting other men to creep on her with unsolicited advertisements of their sexual reactions to her sexy appearance. She’s just adopting the reasonable position that men in general should mind their damn manners and their own business. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/69 "2017-03-07T15:22:35Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I think it’s reasonable to say that there’s certainly a (meaningless) double standard in place. Emma Watson’s nipples will cause no greater number of people to turn into serial murderers than mine, nor any other human beings. We won’t really know until we try. Probably not the thread to have said that. Oh well. I agree, anyway. If we were talking about a leaked paparrazi photo of her after some random bystander had torn off her clothes, it would be one thing, but I don’t get the impression that Emma Watson is doing any of the things because she was in any way coerced, including coercion by male-dominated society. As a feminist, it’s her choice to bare her breasts or not bare them, for whatever reason, or no reason, as she sees fit. Once you’ve bared your breasts, you no longer have control over the photons that bounced off them, or what happens in the minds of the people who see the images, but I don’t see her fretting about that either. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/70 "2017-03-07T15:29:58Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Thats interesting, thanks. Though I somehow doubt that modern #feminsim cares much about laxatives; the writer in the article excepted. I think you’re probably right, in so far as no one cares much about laxatives (until you need one). But the gendering of personal care products, clothing, toys, even tools\* is a very hot topic. \*My 70s era feminist mother was OUTRAGED that I bought my 10 year old daughter a pink toolkit “for women”. I pointed out that I didn’t buy it because it was pink, I bought it because the tools were all scaled down in size and weight. I wanted my daughter to have a toolkit, but I wanted the tools to be real tools, not toys, and smaller tools, for her smaller hands and arms. If those goals had been able to be accomplished with a toolkit that wasn’t pink, I’d have gotten it. But it was pink or full size. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/71 "2017-03-07T15:40:45Z")
Emma Watson posted the Beyonce comment in its full context on her twitter today. I think it absolves her of the hypocrisy charge. Still-figuring-things-out, sure. But far from decrying Beyonce as antifeminist, she actually found her to be empowered. So, much ado about nothing. A fragment of a quote taken out of context and used against Ms Watson because she dared expose her underboob. This is why we can’t have nice underboob. > ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/72 "2017-03-07T16:02:28Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > Emma Watson posted the Beyonce comment in its full context on her twitter today. I think it absolves her of the hypocrisy charge. Still-figuring-things-out, sure. But far from decrying Beyonce as antifeminist, she actually found her to be empowered. > > So, much ado about nothing. A fragment of a quote taken out of context and used against Ms Watson because she dared expose her underboob. This is why we can’t have nice underboob. > > [x.com](https://twitter.com/EmmaWatson/status/839005241978675200/photo/1) Thanks for finding this! I agree it eviscerates the claims. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/73 "2017-03-07T16:14:54Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So the lovely and talented Emma Watson, of Potterverse and now Disney fame, did a photo shoot for Vanity Fair. Among the shots was one in which the actress is shown wearing a white-rope Burberry open weave top that revealed the shocking fact that she has breasts. > > Since Watson has been an advocate for feminism, her decision to expose portions of her breasts to public view was seen as contradictory by some. Julia Hartley-Brewer, a BBC radio commentator, [tweeted](https://twitter.com/JuliaHB1/status/836873834414366720): “Emma Watson: Feminism, feminism… gender wage gap… why oh why am I not taken seriously… feminism… oh, and here are my tits!” > > This ignited a firestorm of rebuttal from the Watson fandom community and others, suggesting that Ms. Hartley-Brewer did not understand feminism. Hartley-Brewer has defended her point, saying in effect that she believes it’s hypocritical to pose for a picture like that and rail against women being judged for their bodies. > > I don’t see the hypocrisy. > > But perhaps I am missing key insights into feminist theory that would make it clear to me. So I turn to the SDMB. Which type of feminism. I think we’re on Feminism 3.xx or 4.0 ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/74 "2017-03-07T16:26:18Z")
> [@Aquadementia](#): > > Julie Andrews had boobs too. > At least that’s what I hear. I’ve only seen the edited version of that particular movie. Buy you know, those boobs must have been there all the time. The boob exposure seemed gratuitous in that movie, they also seemed like she had a body double for the boobs, there were what looked like edit lines around them (they might have been the residue of removing censorship blackout) and they seemed to move independently of the rest of her body. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/75 "2017-03-07T17:31:05Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Which type of feminism. I think we’re on Feminism 3.xx or 4.0 Lefty fems have hoped for a fourth wave that would move away from a focus on individual choices to structural issues, something that’s critical of the beauty industry or the pornified culture in general. The third wave satisfies capitalists and men so it’s not going anywhere. Lefty feminists will be marginal in America for the same reason lefty-anything will stay marginal. ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Blucher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Count\_Blucher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Count_Blucher)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/76 "2017-03-07T17:48:56Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > That post is more than a little creepy dude. I said she was wise beyond her years. (I’ll compare her to Every child star screw-up since the 80s as my cite.) I indicated she was very talented for her age. (Her speech to the UN a year or so back was very good I thought). I tangentially compared her entertainment skills to Mozart. (Perhaps an over statement, but I didn’t think she was a horrible actress and its now coming out that she has a very good singing voice, even by competitive Disney standards.) I agreed she had breasts & I proceeded with a “so what” attitude. (We’re MAMMALS. Get over it.) You find that creepy? That’s just Weird. But, two posts later you’re jumping into the discussion of laxatives (SO not creepy :rolleyes: ), so it must be a whoosh. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/77 "2017-03-07T18:14:36Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The boob exposure seemed gratuitous in that movie, they also seemed like she had a body double for the boobs, there were what looked like edit lines around them (they might have been the residue of removing censorship blackout) and **they seemed to move independently of the rest of her body.** Real boobs do that. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/78 "2017-03-07T19:59:22Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > The boob exposure seemed gratuitous in that movie, The gratuitousness was the whole point of the shot ( and the movie, really ). Not a great film ( I assume we’re talking about **S.O.B.** ), but the whole thing was a satire, including of the images of director Blake Edwards and his wife Julie Andrews. > [@](#): > > they also seemed like she had a body double for the boobs, Nope, they were real. She has said so herself. ---
**Author:** ![HumbleThinker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@HumbleThinker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumbleThinker)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/79 "2017-03-07T20:19:10Z")
> [@cmkeller](#): > > Humble Thinker: > > I think it has less to do with neo-puritanism than the idea that accomplished women should be celebrated for their accomplishments rather than for their looks. It doesn’t mean that women can’t or shouldn’t have the freedom to expose themselves if they wish to, but it does mean that focusing on the looks rather than on the accomplishments is the wrong way to view that woman, and promoting such a view is wrong as well. Ehhh, I think that subtly is a hypocritical problem, though. On the one hand, some say women should be free to express themselves as freely as men, including sexually. But on the other hand, a subset of these same people will deride women for expressing themselves sexually because other men and woman may be objectifying them or celebrating them because of their looks. It seems anti-feminist to lay down such derision as it is the effectively the same derision that puritanical men have been laying one women for centuries and is the very same derision that feminism has been fighting against pretty much since its inception. A common feminist point is that a man’s reaction to a woman’s looks, dress, actions, etc. are the fault of the man, not the woman. In general, isn’t telling a woman not only how she can express herself but how she should express herself anti-feminist? Isn’t a part of feminism women being free to want to be objectified as well as being free to express themselves sexually without them being blamed for others’ objectification of them? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 7, 2017, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544/80 "2017-03-07T20:27:32Z")
> [@HumbleThinker](#): > > A common feminist point is that a man’s reaction to a woman’s looks, dress, actions, etc. are the fault of the man, not the woman. If you’re talking about feelings, then the vast majority of feminists don’t care at all about how men feel. It’s about actions – and yes, a man’s actions (or any person’s actions), whether in response to a woman’s dress or anything else, are entirely the responsibility of the person who did them. It’s entirely a man’s fault if he catcalls a woman (or anyone), or gropes, or insults, or otherwise mistreats a woman or anyone else. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/feminism-emma-watson-and-er-tits/781544.md?page=5)