To be disappointed that feminist Emma Watson has posed topless

[MutePoint]

To promote her new film. Can't these A listers just wear a classy outfit?

YABU. There's a whole Feminism section for you to post this boring crap in. Please use it.

YABU to use words you clearly don't understand to headline grab. She's not topless.

YABU. She didn't ask to be a 'Role Model'. She's an actress.

YABU. The photo was for Vanity Fair not Kids Weekly. How many young children do you know that read VF?

YABU. Her body - her choice. THAT is Feminism.

I don't just think I called the shots, I most definitely did call the shots

Singing - my comment was not aimed at any individual; it was trying to address my thoughts on the subject matter generally.

Yank but that's the problem with generalisation and not respecting other people's choices. I was just using my experience to illustrate that.

"YABU. There's a whole Feminism section for you to post this boring crap in. Please use it."

And you posted exactly why?

She can do what she wants..

But I am really disappointed.

She's said some good things in the name of feminism, don't think these photoshoots are feminist... the are objectifying.

I'm pretty sure the OP would get an equally sceptical response (though slightly differently worded) if she had posted in Feminist Chat.

To the pp who said Tom Hiddlestone got away with posing in his pants ... are you joking? There were many critical comments on Mumsnet alone.

It's a "get your tits out for the boys" shot.

THEN WHY IS THERE NO NIPPLE AND WHY IS IT IN VANITY SODDING FAIR????

It doesn't have to have nipple to be sexualised. And have you ever read Vanity Fair? It's not a women's magazine.

This isn't a feminist q, but is there not a difference between men posing topless and women posing topless? After all, I'm not sure men's chests and nips are sexualised by women to the extent that women's breasts and nips are sexualised by men. Or am I wrong? (And I'm well aware that women go bare breasted in many cultures, past and present, but we are considering current Western values in this instance.)

YANBU it's a shame women in films always seem to have to comply with this sort of image of availability/nudity/shite.

I really doubt women in films call the shots until they get very high up. How many female actors can we name who get really high up, since most films will have many more male actors to female ones.

Emma Watson is neither pretty or clever. Or amusing. She's a former child actor, she's boring. She really ought to go away!

So a thread complaining that Emma Watson isn't feminist enough with a load of women judging how good she is at her job, her choices and her hairstyle.

Who the fuck needs men to keep us down?

Actually, on feminism chat there would probably be more accusations of "pearl clutching" and claims of the empowering effect of getting your kit off. Nothing mysogenists like more than a bit of
Feminist baiting!

I am really disappointed.

She will totally cry about it when cashing her cheque for the shoot and hanging up her designer wear.

It doesn't have to have nipple to be sexualised.

In the context of this tame and tasteful picture, you are projecting more than my local Cineworld. She actually showed more skin than this in her backless shot in Deathly Hallows (when the Horcrux showed her kissing Harry, and that was indeed a sexualised shot). This is one picture from a high fashion shoot in a magazine primarily read by middle aged, upper middle class women. I swear you're one of those people who's not happy unless they're outraged. BURN THE WITCH AND HER COVERED TITS. BURN HER!!!!

And have you ever read Vanity Fair? It's not a women's magazine.

Have you ever seen a lads' or porn mag? It's sure as fuck not one of those. Do you really want to be offended by the objectification of women? I could show you much, much worse than Emma's crochet-covered tits and fully dressed lower body.

If this is a tits-out-for-the-lads shot, I'm Emma Watson's body double.

I don't think feminism and non topless posing are mutually exclusive

Not saying I disagree yorick, but showing plenty of skin on other parts of the body doesn't equate with showing boobs (minus nips), unless she showed the exact same in Harry Potter? So that's a bit irrelevant in this context.

I thought the same as the OP. She is like Angelina Jolie and her UN charitable work... all done to build a fanbase. Yawn...

I love the styling of that photo.

It is not a titllating Page 3 glamour shot.
it is strong and hard and beautiful.
I think what it portrays is way suitable to be used as a role model for young girls/women.

Feminism is about allowing ALL women to chose their own path.
i have no idea how much control EW has over her public image, but surely being a feminist does not mean that her every move Must Be A Feminist One?? Not that I think that this photo is non-feminist, mind

...... because feminism is such a very popular cause.........

She tried change her image from child actor and she chose a feminist route, has been quite active about her new brand, which I thought was refreshing.

That is why I suspect OP is disappointed as she didn't choose the 'do a raunchy photoshoot' route like loads of actresses (and actors)

But now she's got a film to promote this seems like a bit of a U turn. So I get it OP. I saw it and my heart sank a bit. Not because its not up to her, just because I think its great when high profile women speak up, I want more diverse role models for my daughter and i don't want them to objectivity themselves to sell a film - its a sell out.

comeonspring have you seen the rest of the pics? its hardly a raunchy photoshoot. Its more weird than anything, theres a topless man in an underbust corset covered in chalk running about the place.... at one point shes wearing giant culottes inside some sort of cage, another point she is coming out of a giant upsidedown mirror.....
i mean its not Zoo or Nuts is it.

Vanity Fair is an adult magazine she is not posing for a teenage magazine is she. I don't see what the problem is.

YABU - she can do whatever she pleases. I despise that comment 'better role model to young girls' - "celebrities" are actual individual people, people go topless sometimes. Not her responsibility to be a role model to any young girl - young girls should have their own role models at home and you know, at some point in their lives, they will realise that there are photo shoots like this (unless they live in a tower) and then they too make their OWN choice.

And you lost me when you seem to assume all women share the same view of feminism as you do, she wanted have done that shoot if she didn't want to. Who are you to criticise someone elses choices?

Typo; wouldn't, not wanted