Our Shared Shelf discussion

924 views
Emma's Picks > Interview of V.M. Hudson by Emma

Comments Showing 1-14 of 14 (14 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Charles (new)

Charles | 24 comments Hello every one,

I just found Emma Watson's interview of Valerie M. Hudson for Teen Vogue, I put the link below for those interested.
Emma makes revelations of her own Camino, path, to find answers, it's really fascinating and there are no taboo.

Emma's interview

lots of love


message 2: by Cyn (new)

Cyn | 80 comments thank you!


message 3: by Charles (new)

Charles | 24 comments In the role of the most talented woman to manage her public image : Emma Watson.

The title not only changed, but also the whole interview... Way more serious, and may be closer to the real interview, less axed on Emma's sexual life, which is nothing else but another "Microagression".

The link is still active and leads to the interview Emma has shared on her Instagram.


message 4: by Charles (new)

Charles | 24 comments I was lurking on the internet this morning and checked Emma’s actuality and I found many articles about her slightly interest from in the BDSM (Kink) culture which was pretty fun but also disappointing.

I think that the message she tries to share with us with such an interview is not relayed enough by the media and it’s a shame but quite usual... I call it the journalist syndrome.

May be the support chosen for such a message wasn’t adapted, I mean « Teen Vogue », for example, has a scope of readers that are more interested in Emma’s sexual relationships than in politics even is there is a really big amount of fan reading it. May be such a message should be relayed in the « NY Times » for example as she is a real Goodwill Ambassador or such a media, the scope of readers may be more interested in the political view than « Teen Vogue’s » readers. I don’t really know how Emma manage her sharing of articles neither with whome, but it might be interesting to try change the support to see if she can have more impact and can be taken more seriously than by being shared on « Teen Vogue »
What do you think? Let me know


message 5: by Pam (last edited Apr 03, 2020 08:04AM) (new)

Pam | 1070 comments Mod
I think we can also point out that in reporting this tidbit you ended up doing the same things as the journalists you're calling out.

Her full quote is A lot of the healthiest relationships I’ve seen have been between same-sex couples because, I think, they have to sit down and agree [on] things. They agree [on] things between them as opposed to [accepting] certain sets of assumptions and expectations that are made. I’ve also kind of become slightly fascinated by kink culture because they are the best communicators ever. They know all about consent. They [smash that stuff because they really have to get it — but we could all use those models; they’re actually really helpful models.

The conversation is about consent. Specifically about those marganlized groups that tend to have the best track records on consent and where all people can look to as guides. It has nothing to do with her own sex life.

But by only mentioning that the journalists are only discussing one throw away bit and not explain the context, you are also adding to the speculation and missing the point of the conversation.


message 6: by Charles (new)

Charles | 24 comments Pam wrote: "I think we can also point out that in reporting this tidbit you ended up doing the same things as the journalists you're calling out.

Her full quote is A lot of the healthiest relationships I’ve ..."


Ok, wow, I didn't expect such a reaction, I've read the full interview, and I know that the point is about consent and healthy relationship.

I didn't want to put a link to that article because I didn't want to relay that shitty article...

For your information (I'm gonna do something forbidden by Emma because she don't want me to tell someone I knew her on social media) Emma and I had such a discussion about healthy relationship Ten years ago in 2010, back when we used to be friend before she went to the US for her studies, and we already evoked those marginalized groups, ten years ago while discussing, and we already said exactly the same phrase almost word for word, so I don't think I miss the point of example to follow for to have healthier relationship.

I don't want to add to the speculation, because it's not something that will cross my mind at all, but after her reaction on Instagram, it made me laugh that other media she may not have worked with did the same thing "Teen vogue" did. One thing is for sure, this is the way they sell their papers and that's not my fault if there is speculation.

I wish it's clear between us that I'm really interested in the subject and I dont want to add any speculation about Emma's orientation, because, it's none of my business. I made a constat that despite she reacted to the first article of teen vogue, which doesn't exist any more, there is still other medias that prefer to speculate instead of taking her seriously, and I feel sad for her, because, tell me if I miss the point but, I think she is fighting with gender inequality and microaggressions as defined on the book she shared, and those articles are considered if I don't misconstrue : Microagressions.


we started off on the wrong foot, I'm not an enemy !

with love


message 7: by Pam (last edited Apr 03, 2020 12:10PM) (new)

Pam | 1070 comments Mod
I feel that your taking my comment as a full blown attack. That's not the case.

It's a dialogue, where you say something, we respond and say something back.

Such as this:
Charles wrote I didn't want to put a link to that article because I didn't want to relay that shitty article...

My response is; That's odd. As you linked the article and created this thread. Why, as the thread and article are already here, and you are referring to it in the fourth response, do you not want to explain to everyone how much the journalists got wrong?

In addition I would add: Journalism is supposed to give both sides to a story, or else it's sensationalism and belongs in the tabloids.

If you wanted individuals to understand your argument about why journalists be so bad these days, than you should also explain why they failed, or else you run the risk of doing exactly the same thing.

Putting something out into the world that doesn't offer the full context but only to invite reaction is the same thing that you did in your reaction to journalism these days. By failing to offer context you just wrote an inciting thread meant to jolt responses.

Well here is the response. Be better. Give your audience the full scope so they can agree or disgree with your opinion that journalists need to do better.

It doesn't matter if you know Tarana Burke, Valerie Hudson, or Rosemarie Aquilina personally. You have to supply context when you are berating someone for not supplying context.


message 8: by Charles (last edited Apr 04, 2020 01:10AM) (new)

Charles | 24 comments Pam wrote: "I feel that your taking my comment as a full blown attack. That's not the case.

It's a dialogue, where you say something, we respond and say something back. "


Yes I took your comment as a full blown attack, may be because English is not my mother tongue there are misconstructions.

So, first thing first : I shared an article of teen vogue that was supposed to give us the full interview of Valerie Hudson by Emma, so I created a thread with the link believing it would be useful for the community to have the interview.

A couple of hours later Emma who had worked on that article, discovered that article and made an Instagram post, where she expressed her disappointment toward not only the title but also the article, I shared a couple of hour before.

The day after, the same article was completely modified by the journalists due to Emma's reaction, which leads to the Third comment, and was really more serious and less sensational.

The day after I was checking if there were new articles about the interview and I saw :

ELLE article

another article

one another

one another

and a last one

I saw all these articles, and many others in many languages, about her slightly interest in Kink culture, which leads to the fourth comment...

That's the context before your comment. My purpose creating the thread, was being helpful to the community by sharing the interview.

And what leads me to say, it could be better to share such an interview with the NY times for example, is a post on Instagram from Times up now NY Time article which was sharing that article. who kind of talk of the subject of average unpaid women work, and gives kind of an echo to that study made by V. Hudson and somehow to that interview and to the book.

So my bad, I wasn't really sure this trade was the place to share all of that but I understand you also needed more information to make your opinion. One more time, my purpose, was to just share the interview I found, I actually didn't know Emma was going to react to the title and she did and she succeeded being taken seriously, but only by teen vogue... that's what leads me to say I was disappointed and also what leads me to say it's a microaggression, because she is famous, and single and it looks like only tabloids cares about. Their only way to sell is to use sensational titles, which leads to assumptions.

I hope I gave you enough of context for you to understand, I'm not like them, it's pretty uncomfortable to hear that, it hurts because your mistaken about me or my intentions.
I thought people who are in the book club may have had their eyed peeled on the Instagram, and knew what happened with the first interview, so I was guessing it was easy to understand for every body...

So yes to answer you I felt a lot of anger against me and took it as a full blown attack, while I just wanted to help by sharing the interview.


Agnes Szalkowska | 386 comments Charles wrote: "Pam wrote: "I feel that your taking my comment as a full blown attack. That's not the case.

It's a dialogue, where you say something, we respond and say something back. "

Yes I took your commen..."


Well even if she wrote the article for NY Times or any other political paper. Still the shity and small papers pick up the dirty stuff first. They always read between lines and think that what she got in mind.
that goes to people working in Teen Vogue as well.

Is Like i was be celebrity and feminist and i would say that for example : "I hate what going on in the middle east. I hate that men treat a women like shit or even worst like slave all this violence need to be stop. I make a research about aggression by men towards a women. I read a lot of stuff including rape statistic. I make psychological profile about potential killers, rapists base one the statistic. And I fascinating about this stuff from a psychology point of view . "

and the papers pick the thing like : "Agnes likes killers ","Agnes Hates men" etc
that is my story :) but every paper in the world like to pick up the text between the lines .
I hope you see my point or understand it. Some times I difficult for me to express my feeling what piss me off on paper.


message 10: by Florian (new)

Florian (laughingflow) | 215 comments Here is my little opinion, when an interview is released we only see the surface of what has been said during the meeting.
In other words, parts are probably erased or highlighted.
So, we probably miss a lot of information.

Then, for some people business is business. They need sensational to attract people's attention no matter if they hide specific information to transform the whole interview and to distord in order to serve their purpose/business.

In that context, I prefer to not read many journals/media/journalist because of what they did in the past. I think we all have to be critical (even though we are sometimes fooled).


message 11: by Charles (new)

Charles | 24 comments Agnes Szalkowska wrote: " I hope you see my point or understand it. Some times I difficult for me to express my feeling what piss me off on paper. "

I definitely understand your point, that's exactly what I believe can change if people like Emma fight for it to change by underlining these microaggressions.

The way she is treated by these paper (tabloids essentially) doesn't give her the real attention she need but give an angle of attack toward them, by underlining the fact that she can't be taken seriously because she is a famous woman. I still believe that a journal like the NY Times gives a better audience to political subjects like those treated in the book she picked, because, for I'm reading it right now, it's pretty touchy and really serious studies about woman condition.

Florian wrote: "Then, for some people business is business... "

Yes business is business, but we can do something about it by making people expectations change. The audience of tabloids by raising the education level, could also change, in my opinion...


message 12: by [deleted user] (new)

Emma is so open in these interviews. It boggles my mind how much empathy she has!


message 13: by Charles (new)

Charles | 24 comments Today I have empathy for her after the release of her new boyfriend’s name...


message 14: by Annie (new)

Annie | 44 comments Yeah, it's gotta stink knowing how judgmental people are going to be given that it's no bodies business.


back to top