Emma Watson

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheLiberator
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheLiberator

Guest
Has anyone read/heard Emma Watson’s recent UN Address?

I think that Watson is incredibly beautiful and talented, but at one point in the speech, she mentions something about women being able to control their bodies. This kind of language is often euphemistic for being pro-abortion or pro-abortifacient-drugs. Do you believe that that was her intent? It didn’t help that she idolized the pro-abortion, pro-war Hillary Clinton at one point in her speech, but I’d be willing to brush that off, given that she is British and might not be familiar with the many violent policies the Clintons have pushed.

I believe that humanity is inherently good, but I will be very disappointed if someone I admire (like her) is subtly pushing a pro-abortion message.
 
I just saw the speech today on facebook.

I too was a little put off by her comment about “controlling our own bodies” and the round of applause she received as I knew she was talking about abortion. While I agree with classic feminism, meaning equal pay for equal work, I don’t believe men and women are equal. I don’t believe men are better than women or vice versa.

The speech was good, but not quite on point.
 
TheLiberator said:
Has anyone read/heard Emma Watson’s recent UN Address?

I think that Watson is incredibly beautiful and talented, but at one point in the speech, she mentions something about women being able to control their bodies. This kind of language is often euphemistic for being pro-abortion or pro-abortifacient-drugs. Do you believe that that was her intent? It didn’t help that she idolized the pro-abortion, pro-war Hillary Clinton at one point in her speech, but I’d be willing to brush that off, given that she is British and might not be familiar with the many violent policies the Clintons have pushed.

I believe that humanity is inherently good, but I will be very disappointed if someone I admire (like her) is subtly pushing a pro-abortion message.
Click to expand...
I have not read/heard the speech, but I do think it is part of the folly of treating actors as though their fame brings wisdom and knowledge.
 
Well, I found it to express typical western/euro centric concerns over feminism. Quibbling over the use of the word bossy, or other terms. Who defines feminism- is it the academics teaching that heteronormative sex is inherently oppresive and that all men are rapists? That only lesbianism is free of oppressive characteristics? Or is it the women who simply want equal pay, opportunity and respect? Perhaps Emma could have addressed the concerns of women in her own country at Rotherham who were systematically abused and raped as part of a culture.

She is a UN ambassador, I think she should have taken a much broader view-- women in the rest of the world have a different view of oppression. Kidnapping and being forced into marriage, honor killing and rape, denial of the right to vote or drive, mandates over the manner of dress, death penalty for adultery, mandates to be escorted by male relatives, genital mutilation. She seemed to restrict herself to some fairly trivial matters in the grand scheme of things… the concerns of folks who have it very well wanting things to be perfect, vice using the opportunity to focus on women who have it very badly.

as discussed in the following.

thefederalist.com/2014/07/07/the-pathetic-provincialism-of-american-feminists/
 
The corporations that own the media are controlled by fewer people today. Those corporations greatly influence many national governments, and the UN. Ms. Watson expresses the views of the media, so she is allowed the big microphone. People who have different views don’t get the big microphone. Each year, diversity is decreased, as the range of permitted views gets narrower.
 
Laura2287 said:
I just saw the speech today on facebook.

I too was a little put off by her comment about “controlling our own bodies” and the round of applause she received as I knew she was talking about abortion. While I agree with classic feminism, meaning equal pay for equal work, I don’t believe men and women are equal. I don’t believe men are better than women or vice versa.

The speech was good, but not quite on point.
Click to expand...
Are you positive she was talking about abortion? I like to believe that people who might support it are misguided, and that they have never been exposed to the images of unborn children being murdered. The pro-life movement is, without a doubt, the civil rights movement of the present era.

Furthermore, I find it troubling that she would subtly sneak such a message in. I mean, I really think she’s a beautiful woman, and I was hoping she would be above the stereotype of the liberal, elitist celebrity. Sigh.

Does anyone know of a way to write her a letter in regards to her UN work? I doubt she reads fan-mail, but who knows?
 
Melissa said:
I have not read/heard the speech, but I do think it is part of the folly of treating actors as though their fame brings wisdom and knowledge.
Click to expand...
I agree. Watson is often given a pass by many (young) “Harry Potter” fans, who act as if she’s “one of them”. I guess growing up watching a particular actor or actress makes one feel as if they are like a friend. Clearly a foolish perspective.
 
styrgwillidar said:
Well, I found it to express typical western/euro centric concerns over feminism. Quibbling over the use of the word bossy, or other terms. Who defines feminism- is it the academics teaching that heteronormative sex is inherently oppresive and that all men are rapists? That only lesbianism is free of oppressive characteristics? Or is it the women who simply want equal pay, opportunity and respect? Perhaps Emma could have addressed the concerns of women in her own country at Rotherham who were systematically abused and raped as part of a culture.

She is a UN ambassador, I think she should have taken a much broader view-- women in the rest of the world have a different view of oppression. Kidnapping and being forced into marriage, honor killing and rape, denial of the right to vote or drive, mandates over the manner of dress, death penalty for adultery, mandates to be escorted by male relatives, genital mutilation. She seemed to restrict herself to some fairly trivial matters in the grand scheme of things… the concerns of folks who have it very well wanting things to be perfect, vice using the opportunity to focus on women who have it very badly.

as discussed in the following.

thefederalist.com/2014/07/07/the-pathetic-provincialism-of-american-feminists/
Click to expand...
As a Muslim, I hate it when Islamic fundamentalism spills over into the oppression of others. The country from which my parents hail has policies in place which restrict the rights of women. Now, I am not referring to abortion or abortive drugs when I say this. Those things infringe upon the rights of children and ought to be banned. (Plus, I’ve already clearly stated my opposition to such policies…)

I have deep cultural ties to my Middle Eastern background, but I am capable of recognizing the dangers of extremists in the region. The atrocities you described are definitely part of the problem.
 
Does anyone have any information for contacting Emma outside of Facebook or Twitter? I know that she probably doesn’t read fan-mail, but it’s worth a shot.
 
TheLiberator said:
As a Muslim, I hate it when Islamic fundamentalism spills over into the oppression of others. The country from which my parents hail has policies in place which restrict the rights of women. Now, I am not referring to abortion or abortive drugs when I say this. Those things infringe upon the rights of children and ought to be banned. (Plus, I’ve already clearly stated my opposition to such policies…)

I have deep cultural ties to my Middle Eastern background, but I am capable of recognizing the dangers of extremists in the region. The atrocities you described are definitely part of the problem.
Click to expand...
Well, it’s not just a Middle Eastern/Muslim issue, and I hope you saw my comment as broader. Internationally, trafficking of human persons for sex/labor involves folks of all faiths or no faith. It exploits,many, many, women and children. Again, as a UN spokesperson Ms. Watson could be speaking to these uncomfortable truths vice whether overbearing superiors are only seen as such when they’re women.
 
Melissa said:
I have not read/heard the speech, but I do think it is part of the folly of treating actors as though their fame brings wisdom and knowledge.
Click to expand...
This.

I mean, good for Emma for being chosen as a celebrity ambassador - wasn’t really out of reach due to her personality & recognizable name (she has a very likeable public persona and was attached to a couple of other non-profit orgs.) - by the UN. but the moment I read that news - that she was chosen - I immediately concluded that whatever she says will be of the “One World, One Soul, One Heart” type of rhetoric and any periphery modern day “empowerment” talking points. The speeches they give/statements are usually written by a publicist, so famous people are really gullible tools.

Celebrities aren’t chosen for their knowledge or experience for a good majority of these appointments (Kristen Stewart is the celebrity face for Chanel for God’s sakes); they’re chosen to target specific demographics (young girls & their fans) and to bring notice to certain causes (ALS Ice Bucket Challenge) because the mentality is the same for any marketing: If it’s supported or advocated by [insert famous person] then it must be important and enlightening. It’s kinda like a rock star endorsing a politician. If they were pressured to talk about whatever cause cold, without any publicist or others doing their info seeking for them, they’d look like a fool.

If Jay-Z & Beyonce decided to sign a deal to make their “own” lemonade, people would buy it not because it taste so amazing, but because it has their name on it versus the kid down your street selling lemonade for 25 cents whose lemonade is freshly squeezed. Poor kids who sell lemonade …
 
It is a sad commentary on the UN that they allowed a woman to address them who’s only claim to fame is she played a witch in 8 movies.
 
estesbob said:
It is a sad commentary on the UN that they allowed a woman to address them who’s only claim to fame is she played a witch in 8 movies.
Click to expand...
They didn’t just allow her to speak, she was chosen as the UN spokesperson on the issue. They deliberately chose as a spokesman for women’s issues around the world, a woman with limited experience of it and a first world perspective. They chose someone who’s only background was playing a witch in 8 movies for a reason. As opposed to choosing an outspoken advocate for women’s issues with a third world and broader perspective and background, like Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
 
I think we attach far too much importance to the opinions of celebrity actors.
 
tomarin said:
I think we attach far too much importance to the opinions of celebrity actors.
Click to expand...
Agreed, and in all directions. They are “faces.” That being said, I think Ms. Watson did did a fine job delivering her speech and her interpretation of control was likely contraception. Few wealthy women have abortions.
 
estesbob said:
It is a sad commentary on the UN that they allowed a woman to address them who’s only claim to fame is she played a witch in 8 movies.
Click to expand...
Who should they have chosen instead? Or perhaps they should just let men speak for women?
 
estesbob said:
It is a sad commentary on the UN that they allowed a woman to address them who’s only claim to fame is she played a witch in 8 movies.
Click to expand...
It’s sort of funny that you minimize that accomplishment. Not many actresses have that many films racked up at that age. After that she acted in other films and graduated from Brown University. She didn’t have to pursue an education. Most of her co-stars haven’t. She’s 24. She’s only getting started.

Also, I don’t appreciate the dig about her playing a witch. It is a character not her religion. And more over the witch aspect was just a vehicle for story-telling. She was the “brightest witch of her age” and her character acknowledged there were more important things than being smart, listing the virtues of bravery and loyalty. It’s kind of interesting that Hermione became an activist for those who she considered oppressed and that the actress, the woman who played that character, is doing that now.
 
simpleas said:
info for anyone who hasn’t heard the speech 🙂

facebook.com/heforshe?ref=profile
Click to expand...
If He for She starts promoting abortion or abortive forms of “birth control”, then Watson will have played a large role in empowering them. Simply disgusting.

I’m holding out hope that she wasn’t talking about abortion, and I sincerely hope that that wasn’t the message she was trying to convey.

As for playing a witch for eight movies: the Harry Potter books and movies don’t promote witchcraft or anti-Christian themes. They’re entertaining novels. Fantasy. Not The Catcher in the Rye by any means, but enjoyable works of fiction regardless.

You know who was a great cinematic artist? Stanley Kubrick. Stayed out of the public limelight and stuck to doing what he did best: telling stories

“You are an idealist…and I pity you as I would the village idiot.” -Paths of Glory (Kubrick, 1957)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top