Opinion: As ever, a woman's body is the distraction from real news
Just like Emma Watson herself, I am also not interested in Emma Watson's tits. That makes about two of us, I think.
I don't think me also having a pair of them gives me an automatic right to comment on whether she can be a 'proper' feminist or not for showing a glimpse of them in Vanity Fair.
This whole saga shows that a woman's body is the public property of the media. That we truly think the only interesting thing about an interview with a famous woman is her body.
We have swallowed that subliminal message and are even trying to validate it as a legitimate part of the debate on feminism.
"This whole saga shows that a woman's body is the public property of the media. That we truly think the only interesting thing about an interview with a famous woman is her body. "
What did Emma Watson actually talk about in that interview? Does anyone know? Has anyone bothered to read what this actress, the most commercially successful British actress under 30, actually have to say about her career and her opinions, or even her life in general? Or is that because we, the media, are busy implying that the only thing of interest about her is her body? And possibly, if she was going to get married and want a family soon?
Feeling able to sit in judgement on another woman is playing into the hands of newspaper proprietors who are delighted to see women tearing each other apart. It feeds into their stereotype of the feminine.
Let us, as women, shift the conversation. Who cares what Emma wore? What does she want to say?