Our Shared Shelf discussion

1312 views
Intersectional Feminism > What do you think of Emma Watson as a feminist?

Comments Showing 1-50 of 150 (150 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1 3

message 1: by Jalma (new)

Jalma Fiolka | 2 comments Hello everyone!

Our names are Lotte, Sofia, Nienke and Jalma we are international students at the Hogeschool Utrecht in the Netherlands. We have been studying Emma Watson as a feminist and the responses she receives (especially in the UK) over the last six weeks, and we have been finding Our Shared Shelf very helpful. We have a few questions that we would like to ask and we are hoping that we can get in contact with some of you. The answers will, of course, be treated confidentially and published anonymously on our research blog (https://jalmafiolka.wixsite.com/celeb...). Feel free to have a read!

Overall, we are interested in what your opinions are on Emma’s involvement in the feminist movement (such as the HeForShe Campaign, the Women’s March and this feminist book club ‘Our Shared Shelf’), but also controversial topics regarding her as a feminist such as her role as Belle in Beauty and The Beast and the topless photo for Vanity Fair.

Thank you, we are curious to hear what you have to say!

Lotte, Sofia, Nienke and Jalma


message 2: by Lily (new)

Lily (lilya108) | 5 comments I have grown up with Emma being a role model for me. First I saw her play such a strong female lead in the Harry Potter franchise then into one for 'Perks of Being a Wallflower'.

Just these films alone are inspiring, but, Emma took her influence into the real world as well as the film industry to educate and broaden hers and everyone else's mind.

She has helped further my knowledge and encouraged me to speak up and express myself more.

I hope this helps you.


message 3: by Maurice (new)

Maurice Mertjoe | 2 comments Emma Watson is a true feminist. She is different from all of the other actors/actresses as she is adorable and inspiring to me. Unlike other artists, she is humble. Not only to her loved ones, but to all people. She truly inspired me by reading books and becoming a better person, also realize that men and women should be treated equally. I watched her since she was small as she played her role as Hermione in all of the Harry Potter series and this year playing as Belle in Beauty and the Beast live-action film. She is wonderful and of course, smart. Very, very smart woman. She made me realized that there are much better things to do in this world. I hope one day I could meet her and ask her more things about herself.

Thank you. Hope this helps.


message 4: by Robin (new)

Robin (z_rob) | 128 comments Maurice wrote: "Emma Watson is a true feminist. She is different from all of the other actors/actresses as she is adorable and inspiring to me. Unlike other artists, she is humble. Not only to her loved ones, but ..."

you said it all


message 5: by Ross (new)

Ross | 1444 comments Emma is so hard working and dedicated she will go down as champion of intersectional feminism and architect of the fourth wave if there is any Justice


message 6: by Robin (new)

Robin (z_rob) | 128 comments I think she is the good definition of a feminist. A person who fights for justice and equality, who points real problems and who always dedicates herself to it, whatever it be during awards or in her daily life (I guess!). It's good there are people like her who preach the feminist cause every time they speak in public. That shows she's very into it.


message 7: by Lucía (new)

Lucía Emma is definately one of the most inspiring feminists I have ever seen. She speaks with knowledge and passion, and it really looks like she is going to make a change.

I also want to mention that she is a great role model. She encourages us to become smarter and better people. I would love to have a chat with her some day, and learn from her.

I hope this helps, and in advance, sorry if I spelled something wrong. English is not my mother language.


message 8: by Leah (last edited May 23, 2017 12:07PM) (new)

Leah (vleahs) | 5 comments When people would ask who my role model was as a child, I did not have an answer for them. Growing up, my personal beliefs and ideas were hindered and pushed aside for others agendas. I am sad to say I did not question them and went along with it. Silence is just as bad as the action being done...I felt my voice would never be heard.

Now, when people ask who my role model is, I definitely do not hesitate and state "Emma Watson of course!" She is a person who inspired my voice and realize equality for all should be for all people. I am quite satisfied that I decided to educate myself and pursue intelligence and awareness. A lot of injustice is being done and we can do something about it.

Emma is an individual who fights for our rights as human beings, like a "Declaration for All Nations." Why should we be satisfied with 80% when we all should benefit 100%, all the time.

Like the previous bloggers before me, it would be a privilege to meet Emma Watson and say, "Thank you for helping with the change that needs to be done," {with gratification}. :D


message 9: by Elise (new)

Elise (talkingtoelise) Controversially, I find myself criticising Emma Watson's feminism on multiple stances. I am not declaring her a completely disastrous feminist as her impact on children and adults alike can clearly be recognised. Incorporating knowledge and the 'real world' into the film industry is most probably an arduous challenge, and I wholeheartedly praise her for educating thousands of citizens on the basics of feminism.

Yet, my dilemmas arise regarding her level of intersectionality. I am well aware she previously addressed this issue stating that she 'can't speak on behalf of intersectional feminists specifically' which I partially sympathise with, however, I feel as though her platform and the resources she has could be focused on educating, and discussing the depths of intersectionality at greater lengths. Although she may not have the ability to speak on behalf of these feminists, their ideas and values can be incorporated into her 'feminist agenda'.

In speeches, she has discussed how parents/teachers did not expect less of her than her male counterparts. Nonetheless, she failed to mention how automatic advantages that being a white, cisgender, able-bodied human have coloured her experience of life. As well as this, part of me cannot dismiss how problematic the HeForShe campaign is. The dismissal of gender binary persons who do not fit into tidy gender identity boxes yet are statistically most likely to suffer from patriarchal violence and oppression bothers me. It is encouraging that Emma does have at least some ability to recognise the societal advantages that she was born in but I feel as though, for younger genertaions especially, it would be more beneficial if she acknowledged these facts, and gave more opportunities for marginalised figures such a Laverne Cox to discuss their lives. I think that the campaign, in general, fails to invite people to speak who need the voices the most.

There is a level of admiration which I have for Emma. Women face consequences when they decide to speak up on feminism and that has been evident through the backlash regarding her. The topless photo, for example, was the centre of so much controversy. Yet, it is so liberating for me, as a sixteen-year-old female, to see young women so comfortable and accepting of their bodies, their sexuality and their views whether or not I am in agreement with their values.

Yes, I agree Emma Watson has introduced so many women into such a deeply socially embedded issue which demands to be addressed and I honour her for the confidence, encouragement and knowledge she has given to people, not only through her actions but her roles in well-known movies. However, I personally do not feel she has yet earned her place as a game-changing feminist of her generation, and believe that perhaps her platform should be used to give voices to less well known enthusiastic intersectional feminists?


message 10: by Georgios (last edited May 23, 2017 12:44PM) (new)

Georgios You do realise that saying an opinion about someone over the internet is not something that is viable right? I mean we are talking a celebrity here who is extremely high profile and therefore a lot of what she has to say is carefully monitored and edited by her team.

I think a term such as "feminist" has a lot to do with someone's personality, and this is not something that can you can assess from a forum or from the web. Most of the times it's even hard to assess the personality of someone you know in real life.

Now if you ask me to tell you how I see her "public persona" I will tell you that she is an educated young woman, she is very eloquent and she appears to be idealistic. Compared to a large variety of other "public personas" she is is better suited for a role model for young women just for that. That's why I like her. Not because she is pretty. And yes sure "pretty" does open doors but it requires talent and brains to stay in the room.

However. Personally I feel that she should have championed Gender equality instead of feminism. Feminism is loaded with a lot of negative things such as man hating, having striking similarities with many totalitarian ideologies, being an inbred ideology and many others. I did not know or notice these things untill very recently, and when I saw them I felt rather let down. Not because I supported an idealistic young woman. But because I let myself openly support a cause without knowing exactly what it was and its drawbacks. I branded myself as a feminist and quite honestly, now I wish I didnt. I would like her to see clarify what she stands for. I would like to know how she feels towards the more extreme elements of feminism such as the Femmen, the militant manhating lesbians that are spewing bile against men, how she feels about the negative speech that feminists use, how she feels about the descration of churches in France by Femen France, hwo she feels about the feminists in Britain becoming blackshirts, what she thinks about the notion of family and so many many more which are controversial about feminism.

As for everything esle that everyone else wrote... what can I say? They are judging a someone's personality from afar. lol. just lol.


message 11: by Pam (last edited May 23, 2017 01:55PM) (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
Emma, with the fame she has received and earned, has done a good job of moving her spotlight to include crucial issues close to her heart.

She has become a or even the new face of the feminist movement. What I find interesting is that her way of handling the title expands upon the earlier movements desire to continue the conversation. Aka, where Dorothy Pitman Hughes and Gloria Stenium created Ms Magazine, Emma has Our Shared Shelf. Where we had rallies and protests, we have viral campaigns and UN appointments today. A sign of the movement's legitimacy and escalating need.

Many of your questions regarding her Vanity Fair picture or Beauty and the Beast or even the MTV movie award has been answered elsewhere.

Controversy will always be apart of who she is. As a public figure, as a political figure, every moment of her life will be scrutinized and reviewed on forums like these and many other platforms. Even more so with the internet. And despite a first hand knowledge of the perils of her celebrity, she still continues to offer an eloquent and resolute push for feminism.

I welcome her as a main representative and have faith in her abilities to continue to be a strong example to believe in.


message 12: by Leah (new)

Leah (vleahs) | 5 comments Georgios wrote: "You do realise that saying an opinion about someone over the internet is not something that is viable right? I mean we are talking a celebrity here who is extremely high profile and therefore a lot..."

Feminism, by definition, is "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities; the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes". (Also the same definition Emma Watson gave when giving her HeForShe speech via United Nations). When you reference feminism as women hating on men, that is not what feminists are apart of. By definition, those individuals who commit those heinous acts are not feminists. Those are extremists who run those organizations to suit their own agendas. Feminism is against gender stereotypes and people who perceive the "men are bad" would actual be known as "anti-feminism." The whole point is to stop associating certain traits with certain actions and to stop judging them based on the gender that they associate with. We can maintain the belief that nobody should feel like they have to be a certain way because of their gender identity.

Also, there is no relationship between being a feminist and having a specific sexual orientation. An individual can be gay and be a feminist and certainly being gay may inform that person's feminism {hence that is what is called intersectionality.]

Emma Watson is all about the above statement I just mentioned and, in time, she shall do great things.


message 13: by Georgios (new)

Georgios Leah wrote: "Also, there is no relationship between being a feminist and having a specific sexual orientation. An individual can be gay and be a feminist and certainly being gay may inform that person's feminism {hence that is what is called intersectionality."

That is absolutely true. But there is a certain feminist sect that is pushing towards that. As a matter of fact there are many feminist sects within feminism. There are also other sects within feminism, that are not feminist but they have been picked up in order to bolster the numbers. Sects that might have nothing to do with feminism (for example) such as veganism. I have seen militant feminists advertise strongly veganism. The end result of all the verious sects that have been picked up is not a proper political movement but an amalgamation of political opinions some of which should be at ends, but they are not. The reason behind this: Feminism has become a social pressure group. Thats what "intersectionality" really is All the inflexibility, all the inability to listen and reasonably debate, all the literature, all the tolerance for extremist groups points towards that direction.

The problem with this though is that when you push hard and without any real plan society will push you back. Thats why Trump eventually got elected, and why there was such a strong backlash from society towards Hillary. If I remember correct she was leading 60 / 40 in the beggining of the campaign. Basically all this congomerate neglected the major player in american politics: The white man. And he pushed back be electing the "opposite".

Such social pressure is not the way to do this it brings the opposite results. Social evolution is the only way to go forward.

What is worst though is that the groups that tag themselves together with feminism and social pressure are doomed to fail. Why because their own needs are drowned in the screams of feminism. And while there could have been change because in modern times people listen, they are condemned because of the bad practices of feminism.

None has answered me yet or told me this: Why does not feminism clear the record and does not condemn extremists? Why feminism does not create a streamlined ideological structure defining exactly what it is and what it is not? Are they afraid that they will loose their social pressure strength?

And my last question. Why feminism and not Humanism?


message 14: by Pam (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
Georgios wrote: " why feminism and not humanism"

Why black lives and not all lives?
Why endangerd species and not all species?

Bc while there are issues affecting the whole, I'm concentrating on this fraction - working to fix the wrongs at this level that allows for other's to fix problems at other fractions that will simultaneously fix the whole.


message 15: by Pam (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
Georgios wrote " Why does not feminism clear the record and does not condemn extremists? Why feminism does not create a streamlined ideological structure defining exactly what it is and what it is not? Are they afraid that they will loose their social pressure strength? ."

It is not fear. It just happens when you have a general idea. Different sects appear. Its strategy as much as problem.

Christianity : multiple sects - Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, etc. For priests, monks, nuns of Benedictine, Jesuit or Frannscican orders. All are Christians but see the world differently than those who swear to the KKK

Animal lovers: conservationist, vegans, veterinarians and rescue operations. All love animals but may not go as far as PETA.

So dont think feminism is alone in having extremists. We do shush the extream voices and other times we keep sklent as the push, scream and bulldoze through areas that the other side of the group is afraid to go.

Like all other large groups united under a simple message


message 16: by Dena (last edited May 23, 2017 07:35PM) (new)

Dena Gregoire (dysprosium) | 10 comments You know I fully support and honour anyone who speaks out when it comes to inequality. There are a lot of inequalities in this world and we need more warriors to speak out with dignity, intelligence, compassion, and passion. We need to embrace this fully. Futhermore we need to discourage this notion that - oh but because she does these controversial things is she really a good role model feminist crap.
Why is that viewed as controversial? That view alone screams of inequality and the view that women should behave in a certain way to be role models.



As far as the controversy around Beauty and the Beast and Topless photos I want to know what is wrong with any of that? If it's ok for men to be topless why not women? Why? What is the root cause of this view? Men can prance around shirtless in public but a woman stops to feed her baby and it's time to shame them? I find these views shameful! We need to address this inequality and the root cause that underlies it!

Women's bodies are sexually objectified by some in the population. Given this current state of our society I think there are two options we can persue:
1. We go out and tell women they should cover up because their bodies are objectified - and that if they don't they're not 'good' feminists.
or
2. Address the real issue- the actual act of objectification.

To me feminism is about being who you are, expressing who you are, as equally as any other member of society, and not having to shove yourself into gender boxes (and other boxes) that society has built for you. That's what equality is all about.

Men can currently play roles in movies that portray them in a stereotypical manly way and no one points fingers saying they are controversial.
Men can currently pose shirtless and no one accuses them of being controversial.

Why can't a woman do the same without being called a controversial feminist?


message 17: by santerro (new)

santerro | 62 comments She's doing great
she is very funny and pretty so we get her message better


message 18: by Georgios (new)

Georgios Pam wrote: "

Why black lives and not all lives?
Why endangerd species and not all species?

Bc while there are issues affecting the whole, I'm concentrating on this fraction - working to fix the wrongs at this level that allows for other's to fix problems at other fractions that will simultaneously fix the whole."


Well in statistics there is a simple rule. An empirical rule. Its called the pareto rule. It states that 20% of the reasons will cause 80% of the problems. And somehow pareto rule holds very true for all things social and natural.

Whatever is causing the loss of Black lives is also causing the loss of other lives. We are talking about police violence here. I will go straight to the solution for this (so i will not derail what we are discussing) and I will say that police stations should have policemen that are representative of the (local) population they are policing. It's a proven historical fact that populations do not like the enforcement of law by populations that are different than they are. But who cares about history nowdays? "History will teach us nothing" right?

So basically when we riot for "black lives matter" we do not focus on the cause that is Police Violence. We focus on the specific which is that blakc lives are getting lost. What about all other lives that are getting lost? Are they less important?


Pam wrote: "Christianity : multiple sects - Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, etc. For priests, monks, nuns of Benedictine, Jesuit or Frannscican orders. All are Christians but see the world differently than those who swear to the KKK"

You do realise that there have been several different sects of Christian Groups some of which had much different opinions on what Christianity is. There was a clear definition what christianity is and what is not at the Council of Nicea in the 4th century. A number of groups that self defined as christian were deemed that they were not, such as the gnostics. There have also been groups such as the Cathars that were actively persecuted. There were those that were deemed heretic such as the Monophysites. Today protestants are considred heretic, but Catholic and Orthodox churches have exactly the same tenants of faith. There have been several All christian councils since Nicea and they did give answers and direction to Christianity. Do know that KKK is not considered to be a Christian group and it has been excomunicated. Also keep in mind that many of the groups that you mentioned are not in Communion with the Roman Catholic or the Orthodox Catholic (as is the proper name) Church.

Same goes for communism. There have been many different communist sects. We have the first international which unified Communists and anarchists. Eventually it split in two because the anarchistrs believed in different ideals. Then we have the second international which was the founding stone of modern communist. Then third international which was the result of the anarchists leaving. Then what followed was the third international which was dominated by stalinists. We then had the fourth international that was formed by Trotskists in order to combat stalinism. They got hunted down by the stalinists and Leon Trotsky himself was Assasinated. They are trying to make a call for a fifth international now whatever that wil be.

In communism there have been many sects: Marxism, Maoism, Lenininsm, Trotskism. In teh begging there have even been anarchistrs. But they had a very clear picture of what it meant to be communist. The ones that did not match in ideology were outsted such as the anarchists.

However I will point out to this: Exactly because there there were many sects in communism and there was (political) need to encompass them all, communism started becoming from a revolutionary ideology to an establishment ideology. Eventually it became extremely rigid and inflexible and it collapsed on itself. Thats the way of all revolutions by the way. They tend to implode. They have within them the seeds of their own destruction.

At any rate. Christianity has lasted for 2000 years and will last for many more because they were very clear about who was christian and who was not and they adapted in every era. Communism started in 1860, innitially they were clear about their ideology in which time they boomed and eventually, because of the need to encompass many different sects, they became too rigid and they became politically and ideologically irrelevant.

I have donated to PETA in the past especially about the issue of dog slaughter in China for food. But then again we have a very good tradional guideline in the west for what constitues animals that can be eaten and "unlclean" animals. The latter being animals that we do not consider ethical to eat (cats, dogs, horses and other companion animals) and animals that may create health problems if we eat them: Rats, lizzards etc.


message 19: by Georgios (last edited May 24, 2017 03:00AM) (new)

Georgios Pam wrote: "So dont think feminism is alone in having extremists. We do shush the extream voices and other times we keep sklent as the push, scream and bulldoze through areas that the other side of the group is afraid to go."

Sorry Pam I dont think I heard that correcly. What was it that you said? Can you repeat it? I think i heard "The end justifies the means."


message 20: by Prats (last edited May 24, 2017 03:37AM) (new)

Prats (pratyusha5924) Elise wrote: "Controversially, I find myself criticising Emma Watson's feminism on multiple stances. I am not declaring her a completely disastrous feminist as her impact on children and adults alike can clearly..."

I completely agree! Yes she is a good role model for young girls and a smart and strong woman, however she is quite privileged.

And her feminism can be quite cis-centric. (if that makes sense)

Besides, being straight, white and cis already puts you on a higher pedestal then those who are not. (Trust me I'm pansexual and brown and have had my fair share of terrible experiences)

Anyhow, at least she's making an effort to speak up and educate many people about feminism! (Which a lot of privileged people don't bother about) Although, I do wish she'd invite some POC, LGBT speakers so that they could speak about their problems as well!


message 21: by James (new)

James Corprew Since i dont know EW personally my opinion would be a bit limited to her public persona. But on the surface she seems like the genuine deal and a very caring person. She seems very dedicated to helping others and works very hard from what i can tell.


message 22: by Pam (last edited May 24, 2017 07:13AM) (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
Georgios wrote: Do know that KKK is not considered to be a Christian group and it has been excommunicated. Also keep in mind that many of the groups that you mentioned are not in Communion with the Roman Catholic or the Orthodox Catholic (as is the proper name) Church."

And that is exactly my point Georgios. KKK may have been excommunicated by a Christian Leader, but the KKK still see themselves and label themselves as Christian.

We can excommunicate and distance ourselves as much as our Muslim brothers and sisters are doing from ISIS or Boko Haram, but that does not mean that ISIS will turn around, agree that they aren't Muslim and apologize for slandering the Muslim brand. We can denounce extremists until we are blue in the face but it does not matter because the sub-group will not stop labeling themselves. And outsiders will not stop associating them with the main group.

How is that for the Praeto Rule? Where the KKK, ISIS, and all other extremists make up a small percentage of a group population and yet they still manager to cause most of the problems / issues / and controversies.

And don't expect 1 leader to make a difference, again, look to the Pope as in the Western Schism in the 14th century. Look to the President of the US - anyone had his share of dissenters who disagreed with their leadership.

Extremism will always happen when you have a population larger than 1. You will always have people clamoring that we are not going far enough, fast enough, etc, And you will always have opinions saying we are going too fast, too far.


message 23: by Pam (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
Georgios wrote: "Pam wrote: "So don't think feminism is alone in having extremists. We do shush the extreme voices and other times we keep silent as the push, scream and bulldoze through areas that the other side of the group is afraid to go."

Sorry Pam I dont think I heard that correcly. What was it that you said? Can you repeat it? I think i heard "The end justifies the means."


Once again, do you think my denouncement of a group is going to have any affect on that group at large? Let me be clear, I do not like extremists. But I also am not going to spend all of my waking time to police them. Just as I am not going to spend all of my waking time trying to convince outsiders to become feminists.


message 24: by Jennifer (new)

Jennifer DuBose (jenndubose) | 1 comments I think Emma Watson is a great feminist. She really puts her money where her mouth is. You can tell that she is genuine and everything she says, she does/ believes. She is in this for the long haul and not just jumping on the bandwagon. Long after the Pantene-strong-girl commercials go off the air, she'll still be working and using her resources to help women. We can count on her not to flake out.


message 25: by Georgios (new)

Georgios Pam wrote: "We can denounce extremists until we are blue in the face but it does not matter because the sub-group will not stop labeling themselves. And outsiders will not stop associating them with the main group. "

Well maybe thats because all this time you did nothing to stop them. Nothing. Nada. Zip. Zero. Null. Nicht. Τιποτα. Instead the attitude was as you put it very nicely:

Pam wrote: "other times we keep sklent as the push, scream and bulldoze through areas that the other side of the group is afraid to go. "

So how can you expect me to believe that you have pure intents, especially if you cannot be bothered to condemn the extremists?

And how about the pareto rule? Well. Lets see ISIS and the KKK are extremist groups. But they are the tip of the iceberg. There are huge chunks of society that have their orientation pointed towards that direction. The Tea party in US. The AfD in Germany. The National Front in France. UKIP in Britain. They may not be outright extremists. But their belief system sets up the background for extremists to act.

Likewise. You might not be an extremist. But your tolerance and your attitude for moral discounts (The end justifies the means) sets up the background and allows these people to act.

Also keep in mind this:

Pam wrote: "outsiders". You are already entrenched. That will not help you to convince none else. Actually that kind of attitude will further distance others.


message 26: by Pam (last edited May 24, 2017 09:28AM) (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
Ok. So if I follow you...

Because I am not constantly policing sub groups within my own group I am allowing sub groups - of various extremes- to exist.

And that I cannot work with any individual outside of the large group - outsiders- because they have already came in contact with a tainted or bastardization of the Group's message because of these extreme groups.

So, if I follow, your argument is that the main group cannot grow or make lasting change while these extreme groups prevail?

Is that correct?

If so, I understand.

What I do not understand, is why you left feminism. If the group cannot make lasting change without denouncing these militant lesbians pushing a anti-male / vegetarian agenda or femmen or other radicals and essentially kicking them out of the group, then why did you leave? It seems like you would be passionate about trying to refocus and purifying the group from within.


message 27: by Georgios (new)

Georgios Pam wrote: "If the group cannot make lasting change without denouncing these militant lesbians pushing a anti-male / vegetarian agenda or femmen or other radicals and essentially kicking them out of the group, then why did you leave? It seems like you would be passionate about trying to refocus and purifying the group from within. "

Who denounced what? I did not see a feminist movement trying or even attempting to denounce the extremists.

Also you do not have to police anyone. However you gonna have to be part of an inner feminist dialogue that manages these exremists. And you will have to make sure that others know about your opinion about them so they will not confuse you with them.

Now about me leaving. I am still here am I not? Only I prefeare to call myself humanist rather than feminist. It has a much broader scope and it does deal directly with what we have come to call "the human condition", and not with the limited scope of feminism. And no its not intersectionalal feminism when feminism absorbs other human righst movements. As I said I feel that intersectionality drowned other human rights movements.

Also given the fact that feminism with intersectionality turns out to be a rather large pressure group I would rather not participate there. Society gets lasting benefits from social evolution, not social revolutions. Revolutions usually implode. Why evolution? Because the world changes when you show them there is a better way, a way that can be more beneficial for everybody. When you change it with creams and shouts and force, societies will return back to their previous state the first chance they get. So the only way for social progress and evolution is to create a vision for everyone. Not spit in their eye.

Also: keep in mind that as you said feminists do not give equal status to men. They wil call them "allies of feminism" or whatever else but they will not give equal status to men. But seriously do you want me to join or stay in a group that has members that say that any sexual intercourse between men and women, even consending one, is rape? Members that would call me a rapist for no other reason than enjoying sex? Are you kidding me? What about the totalitarin leanings in Feminism, the fabricated language and the inbred ideology? You want people to join you while you have these? How would they join? Why would they join? With these kinds of stuff you get men like (i dont want to point any fingers so I am ommiting the name) not freethinkers.

As I said. Egalitarian Humanist. It sounds really good to me.


message 28: by Gerd (last edited May 24, 2017 11:49AM) (new)

Gerd | 428 comments Georgios wrote: "Feminism is loaded with a lot of negative things such as man hating, having striking similarities with many totalitarian ideologies, being an inbred ideology and many others"

You do realise that saying an opinion about some movement over the internet is not something that is viable right? ;)


message 29: by Georgios (last edited May 24, 2017 03:08PM) (new)

Georgios Gerd wrote: "Georgios wrote: "You do realise that saying an opinion about some movement over the internet is not something that is viable right?"

Why is the movement an individual human being with physical existance?

I have met politicians in Person who i was previously seeing on the news. A couple of center-right party ministers. A number of members of the Greek Parliament from all political spectrums. Their actual personality is far different from what you see on camera. I actually liked a few of them better in real life. I have even spoke with Wolfgang Schäuble. He is very polite man actually. However i must note that I strongly disagree with him in a great deal of issues.

If that holds true for people over the television, where you can see their facial expressions, their tone of voice, and their overall mannerisms then its pretty damn impossible to judge someone's character over the net.

But the ideas that are behind a political movement can be discussed easily. Ideas do not physically exist as you know. However they have a corporeal form that we all have access to and it affects the way we interpret reality.


message 30: by Pam (last edited May 24, 2017 02:37PM) (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
I really like talking with you and we're getting into it items that are hard to read with all the back and forth. So I want to propose the following key.

Key:
Georgios text :
Pam

"Who denounced what? I did not see a feminist movement trying or even attempting to denounce the extremists.
Ok. We could be better. Could you give me examples and where and how we could start? We could start a thread for OSS to identify extremist groups and also identify groups who are denouncing them as well. What else would work?

'Cause I agree, as I stated above, extremists are not kosher.

Also you do not have to police anyone. However you gonna have to be part of an inner feminist dialogue that manages these exremists. And you will have to make sure that others know about your opinion about them so they will not confuse you with them.
:) I think we are creating that dialogue right now.

And if I may also offer some feedback. Phrases like "you will" or "you have to" aren't very friendly dialogue terms. They sound more like demands.

Now about me leaving. I am still here am I not? Only I prefer to call myself humanist rather than feminist. It has a much broader scope and it does deal directly with what we have come to call "the human condition", and not with the limited scope of feminism. And no its not intersectionalal feminism when feminism absorbs other human righst movements. As I said I feel that intersectionality drowned other human rights movements.

Very true. I can only speak for myself, but I'm glad you are here to speak about this. To help bounce ideas in and around this particular echo chamber. I do caution you though, that to me, sometimes you can come off as a bit angry and demanding of feminists. As if, as a humanist you are working hard to fix that darn extreme group feminists who only care about one gender. Work with us as you mention in your next comment. Many of us do not hate men.

Society gets lasting benefits from social evolution, not social revolutions. Revolutions usually implode. Why evolution? Because the world changes when you show them there is a better way, a way that can be more beneficial for everybody. When you change it with screams and shouts and force, societies will return back to their previous state the first chance they get. So the only way for social progress and evolution is to create a vision for everyone. Not spit in their eye.


Also: keep in mind that as you said feminists do not give equal status to men. They wil call them "allies of feminism" or whatever else but they will not give equal status to men.
Be careful, not all feminists think that way. Are there some that do? Sure, but your falling into that trap that dissolves evolution and dialogue. I for one have stated many times here and elsewhere that things like gender bias for parental rights is wrong. That just because someone is a woman does not mean she is the person who should keep the kids. Etc.

But seriously do you want me to join or stay in a group that has members that say that any sexual intercourse between men and women, even consending one, is rape? Members that would call me a rapist for no other reason than enjoying sex?
Yes. Very much so. Because as you mentioned, we need to be the ones who correct the dialogue and return it to promoting equality. Not enemies. Not a superior and an inferior. We and others like us should be able to denounce those who twist consensual sex and overuse the idea of rape. Let's work on ending rape culture that exploits victims and protects rapists be they man or woman / gay or straight. Let us also make sure that while we are doing so we also look into this over generalization that then goes about calling anything rape.

Are you kidding me? What about the totalitarin leanings in Feminism, the fabricated language and the inbred ideology? You want people to join you while you have these? How would they join? Why would they join? With these kinds of stuff you get men like (i dont want to point any fingers so I am ommiting the name) not freethinkers.
I mean, I understand if that is how you feel.

But there are inherent difficulties with trying to change a group as an outsider. From the inside, you help change the internal dialogue.

As I said. Egalitarian Humanist. It sounds really good to me
Ok. Thank you for adding to our discussion otherwise.


message 31: by Pam (new)

Pam | 1071 comments Mod
But the ideas that are behind a political movement can be discussed easily. Ideas do not physically exist as you know. However they have a corporeal form that we all have access to and it affects the way we interpret reality

I like that. I liken Groups as amoebas. In three dimensions there are arms (sects or subgroups) branching out, subgroups folding in on itself, subgroups that are working in unison with others, gobbling up areas, or scooting out of the way all depending on actions and popularity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pR7T...

And with that lovely image, I wish you all a good evening.


message 32: by Georgios (new)

Georgios Pam wrote: " And with that lovely image, I wish you all a good evening. "

Goodnight pam.


message 33: by santerro (last edited May 24, 2017 11:26PM) (new)

santerro | 62 comments Georgios wrote: "Pam wrote: "

Well in statistics there is a simple rule. An empirical rule. Its called the pareto rule. It states that 20% of the reasons will cause 80% of the problems. And somehow pareto rule holds very true for all things social and natural.

Whatever is causing the loss of Black lives is also causing the loss of other lives. We are talking about police violence here. I will go straight to the solution for this (so i will not derail what we are discussing) and I will say that police stations should have policemen that are representative of the (local) population they are policing. It's a proven historical fact that populations do not like the enforcement of law by populations that are different than they are. But who cares about history nowdays? "History will teach us nothing" right?

So basically when we riot for "black lives matter" we do not focus on the cause that is Police Violence. We focus on the specific which is that blakc lives are getting lost. What about all other lives that are getting lost? Are they less important?


Hello, i've heard something that is always useful in life, it was if one solution is good locally, this solution can be reproduced and will work at a greater and general level.
Which means in a difficult problem, it needs to find a solution and focus on it locally and if it works fine and solves the problem, this algorithm can be the solution in the general picture


message 34: by Gerd (last edited May 24, 2017 11:43PM) (new)

Gerd | 428 comments I only know Emma Watson from her renown as child actress of an iconic character and later celebrity status. Hard to say much about her as a feminist from that. I do however believe that celebrities like Emma Watson or Beyoncé using their poularity and greater reach to speak out on behalf of feminism and women’s rights are of more importance for girls and young women than the writings of figures like Gloria Steinem.
Their work does more to put important issues in the focus of and reaching the masses than human rights and/or feminist organizations could achieve by themselves.

Things like acting in a movie that in itself is perceived and is produced by a company which is perceived as if not directly anti-feminist at the very least as not supporting feminism, does not withstand her possible personal believes.
Emma Watson is an actor, as such she has like everyone of us to keep an eye on doing her job, ideals are a fine thing to hold but they do not put bread and butter on the table.

On her doing a topless shooting, that should if anything at all, only remind us that she is a young woman, first and foremost.
Even as a feminist she stays a human being, she’s not just an idealistic idea having taken on corporeal figure, she’s out there wanting what we all want, and what we try our best to fight for other’s to have the right and possibility to do, to enjoy her life – enjoying your body, being proud of it, does its part in that.


message 35: by MUSIC IS (new)

MUSIC IS MY LIFE (erindevanadera) | 2 comments she is doing good and emma is really such an inspirational woman
and she is brave and i admire her and good job for emma keep it up!


message 36: by MUSIC IS (new)

MUSIC IS MY LIFE (erindevanadera) | 2 comments she is doing good you know she is a good role model to the young girls


message 37: by Georgios (last edited May 25, 2017 05:15AM) (new)

Georgios Gerd wrote: "On her doing a topless shooting, that should if anything at all, only remind us that she is a young woman, first and foremost. "

That was a topless photoshoot? Really? lol. Come on. She is being unjustly critisized here. They are just targeting her here for reasons unknown to me. But the thing is if people want to blame you for something they will find the smallest excuse to do so.

What she did was definately no "topless" photoshoot. It was more artistic if anything else. I mean if they critisize Mrs Watson for that photoshoot what would they have to say to Monica Bellucci or Emily Ratajkowski? Arent they actresses as well? Arent roles with intense nude and sexuality part of an actors or an actress Job? But had they tried to judge Monica Bellucci for her recent nudes everyone in the world would have laughed at them, men and women included. They just targeted Mrs Watson because they knew that they would cause personal trouble there.

Also I am a bit confused here. These feminists that are against nudes... dont they understand how close they come to social conservatism and the suppression of sexuality? They view that sex is for reproduction alone and not for enjoyment? Sexuality is part of what we call "the human condition" and suppressing it with such rules and unfair judgements is simply idiotic.


message 38: by Gerd (new)

Gerd | 428 comments Georgios wrote: "That was a topless photoshoot? Really?"

"Topless", "Artistic", "Strangely dressed", "Fashion shot" ... people may call it what they want far as I'm concerned. :D

The relevant discussion is over here, btw:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...


message 39: by Georgios (last edited May 25, 2017 03:37PM) (new)

Georgios You are directing me to another forum thread to discuss about a nakid (:-P) lady. Shame on you Gerd. Can we discuss other nakid (:-P) ladies as well or just this "strangely dressed" one?

Daryl Hannah was far more "strangly" dressed in blade runner. Margot Robbie was a little bit less dressed than both of them in Wolf of Wall street (and i believe we should all thank God and Martin Scorsese for that), but none even dared to say a peep about her.

Also the thread you are directing me to has been silent since May the 4th.


message 40: by Marina (last edited May 26, 2017 08:28AM) (new)

Marina Williams | 4 comments I think that one, important quality Emma exhibits that proves she is truly dedicated and committed to the cause and making the world a better place (that maybe other celebrities who say they are fighting for a cause don't show) is a willingness to learn and a hunger for knowledge. I believe that Emma has already had a crucial impact on the feminist movement by bringing it to the table for conversation and introducing a whole new generation of women and girls, and boys and men, to the issue. Emma has made it "cool," in a way, to be a feminist, and has allowed many to feel more comfortable and free to discuss these issues that they once may have shied away from. To me, Emma's admittance that she does still have a lot to learn and her willingness to continue reading and reading and speaking to other women pioneers in the field such as Bell Hooks and Gloria Steinem prove that she is truly dedicated to having a large impact in the world and that she wants to grow her involvement in the movement.

It's always easy to criticize and say she should be discussing intersectionality more or that she shouldn't do this or that, however, in the last few years she has done an amazing job by simply making feminism more relevant in people's lives and raising awareness - which is honestly still so necessary in our world today because surprisingly, so many people are still not aware of the inequality women face. I think as Emma continues to learn and grow as a woman she will address even more issues and bring new insights and discoveries to the world.


message 41: by Gerd (new)

Gerd | 428 comments Georgios wrote: "Also the thread you are directing me to has been silent since May the 4th..."

Well then, sometimes it just ain't enough when the 4th is with you, it seems. :)


message 42: by Georgios (last edited May 26, 2017 10:49AM) (new)

Georgios Gerd wrote: "Well then, sometimes it just ain't enough when the 4th is with you, it seems. :)"

Well... Yesterday was the 40th anniversary of a EP IV: A New Hope. And today I recieved the X-Wing that will become Red-5.

However all this discussion we have made before about the artistic photos. It is tied directly into this topic. I found it extremely strange that Mrs Watson was attacked by a large number of "feminists" for this photoshoot.

Basically since Feminism has no clear boundaries and rules about what it is and what it is not I have to assume that it is a personal point of view, a personal life stance if you want. This is the reason we have a lot of different points of view and they are as different as the people who apartise (the parts who make up the whole - direct translation of a Greek word) feminism. So basically the only way that Mrs Watson can be judged as a feminist is if she has been good and honest to herself and her beliefs. That's it.

As far as I know she has been really shy to do nude scenes. Its allright and fine if thats her choice as a person, but what really concerns me is that as a high flying actress she should not have such reservations. Nude scenes can be essential for a film, and the film might be telling a story worth watching.


message 43: by Alyson (new)

Alyson Stone (alysonserenastone) | 149 comments Franki wrote: "I have grown up with Emma being a role model for me. First I saw her play such a strong female lead in the Harry Potter franchise then into one for 'Perks of Being a Wallflower'.

Just these films..."


Yes, I agree. I think she is an inspiration to us all.


message 44: by MeerderWörter (new)

MeerderWörter | 2388 comments Hm, shall I really answer that question? I guess it's rather long than short, I hereby begin:

Emma's moves are seen quite controversial by some. They say she's a white feminist and that she's not really a feminist at all.
I DON'T think so.
You can't compare Emma with Gloria, who is now in her eighties and had way more time to understand and think about the issues that are at stake.
In my opinion, Emma Watson, a very privileged person, makes quite a good job. She unites us all in our struggle for equal rights and is not transphobic, which is VERY important to me. While she still has her fields which she has to discover and further learn about, she is not a person who is saying it's easy, and she nevertheless doesn't step back. She fights for her rights and the rights of others, invited men to feminism, which is something I really appreciate and she also has given us all an opportunity to learn more when she founded this book club, which I visit on a daily basis and has taught me so much yet. I heard that she reads a lot of the comments and if she does, that makes her only better as a feminist, because the demographic of OSS is rather diverse and therefore one can learn even more.
She sees beyond - feminism is for men and women and she knows that and acknowledges that men are too harmed by the social norms, if by varying degrees.
Her book choices have been covering many different issues, from a MOGAI perspective like The Argonauts, to a muslim perspective like Persepolis.
While Emma made it "cool" to be a feminist, she also reminds us again and again that we really need to work towards equal rights, we mustn't decorate ourselves with the term and then do nothing for it.
To warm up the Vanity Fair cover shoot, where I'd like to refer you to the topic Gerd mentioned, in which I have discussed too, my answer is as simple as that. First, she wasn't even bare-chested, secondly, feminists who make a fuss about that really need to think about what feminism means. If feminism means that a woman has the freedom to choose, then this is very feminist. She chose to make a photo shoot where she showed a bit more skin than she usually does, and suddenly everyone complains? That's not feminist if one does that. I can not better say it than Emma herself, so I allow myself to quote her here:
"Feminism is not a stick with which to beat other women with".
PERIOD!
When it comes to Beauty and the Beast, which by the way I really enjoyed very much, what people are getting at is the Stockholm Syndrome question. It may seem to be Stockholm Syndrome at first sight, but in fact it isn't Stockholm Syndrome. Now, I would still say it is a dysfunctional romance, but that is worth another topic.
(https://www.bustle.com/p/the-beauty-t...)

Overall, Emma chose feminist characters, from her most famous role of Hermione to now Belle in Beauty and the Beast. All of her characters show different qualities in women and girls, and almost all of them are positive.
She needs to learn more tho when it comes to intersectionality in my opinion. Or maybe she did already but she needs to speak out more on it. She wore an ampersand, the "logo" of the GLAAD - Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation - and while some wonder what she might want to tell us with that act, for me, it's great because she showed us that day that for her, LGBTQA people are worthy, and need the same respect as everyone else.
Now, where I think she really needs to educate herself on is intersex, but that is a very vast topic, and I think she'll come around it in the coming years.


message 45: by Ross (new)

Ross | 1444 comments Odd thread this not sure I would want my progress as a feminist put up for scrutiny. But mods have left it so...

Emma is a brilliant. feminist I'd one measures by results. She will I am sure continue to assimilate and progress Fourth wave (intersection) feminism as I hope we all will here.

how about we expand the question deal with the converse;

What do you think of yourself as a feminist.


message 46: by Lotte (last edited May 28, 2017 02:51PM) (new)

Lotte Houghton | 2 comments I think that Our Shared Shelf is an absolutely fantastic initiative and that Emma Watson is a really effective ambassador and leader of the project. She seems genuinely dedicated to promoting women's rights and acknowledges the trailblazers of the community like Gloria Steinem and bell hooks.

I was a bit alienated by the way that the version of Beauty and the Beast starring her tried to reinvent itself as a feminist tale...I'm not convinced about that. I wouldn't have had a problem with her being in a fairy tale but it was as if it was capitalising on her work as a feminist campaigner to promote the film.

The UN speeches that she has made...I felt were quite vague and wishy-washy on her own personal definition of feminism, what gender equality achieves and what needs to be done to progress the cause. The response to it from others was positive though so I still admire hugely the way that her appointment inspired young females. She's a good egg.


message 47: by MeerderWörter (new)

MeerderWörter | 2388 comments Ross wrote: "Odd thread this not sure I would want my progress as a feminist put up for scrutiny. But mods have left it so...

Emma is a brilliant. feminist I'd one measures by results. She will I am sure conti..."


How we both say just Emma tho:) She's my Emma to me, the one I literally grew up with. Feels weird to put a Watson after Emma:)


message 48: by Georgios (new)

Georgios MeerderWörter wrote: "You can't compare Emma with Gloria, who is now in her eighties and had way more time to understand and think about the issues that are at stake.

I actually like Gloria Steinem a lot. First of all she is educated. Second she is very smart. She has worked for the CIA something that she has admitted in the past. Only really smart people get to Work for the CIA.

MeerderWörter wrote: "When it comes to Beauty and the Beast, which by the way I really enjoyed very much, what people are getting at is the Stockholm Syndrome question

That Stockholm Syndrome is something completely different than what it looks. It appears that it was critism of the movie randomly made from the internet. Personally I loved the movie.

However i believe that this critisim was done to actually hurt Mrs Watson. Why am I saying that? Because from what I heard she is known to turn down scenarios quite easily if she does not like something. So if they create psychological pressure for her for things that do not exist, she will not only second guess which senarios are good but even tripple guess and quadraple guess. If "Star Wars" and recently "Deadpool" have tought us anything is that movies that we do not expect to be good might even become huge.

So basically they are making her put higher standards (if not impossible) in selecting roles, to basically put a hurdle in her career.


message 49: by Georgios (last edited May 28, 2017 05:35PM) (new)

Georgios MeerderWörter wrote: "You can't compare Emma with Gloria, who is now in her eighties and had way more time to understand and think about the issues that are at stake."

May I also point out something else about Gloria Steinem? Maybe she is in her 80's but she is still a "hot girl". What do I mean by that? Obviously not the external appearance, but her philosophy and her way of thinking. She has much more modern ideas and much more relevant insight than many other feminists who are much younger in age, but have ideas that would classify them as "old hags". (and no I do not mean Mrs Emma Watson by this but others who bring up non existant or resolved issues)

And yes as far as thinkers go the more time and experience they have the better they will sort out things for everyone. As long as they can stay modern, up to date and be in touch with society's real problems. This way they can contribute to the wider societal debates.


message 50: by MeerderWörter (new)

MeerderWörter | 2388 comments Georgios wrote: "MeerderWörter wrote: "You can't compare Emma with Gloria, who is now in her eighties and had way more time to understand and think about the issues that are at stake."

May I also point out somethi..."


Oh, I totally agree with you. And Gloria Steinem is maybe more progressive than some of the young folks (TERFs...). You know, I think Emma has potential to become a second Gloria in her own way.


« previous 1 3
back to top