Emma Watson on Feminism

[FireShield]

 

Script from video description:

 

Actress and UN Women Goodwill Ambassador Emma Watson spoke at the United Nations in New York on Friday, stating that she believes feminism has too often become synonymous with "man-hating." 

 

The Harry Potter actress' words came as she introduced the "HeForShe" gender equality campaign, which campaigns for men to speak up against manifestations of gender inequality. Watson said that for there to be true equality between the sexes, men and boys must also advocate for the rights of women and girls. 

[Pepin]

I believe the primary reason is that we are drawn to more extreme cases than modest ones. Feminists who advocate for the equal rights of all genders do not draw any attention as their position is quite agreeable and uncontroversial. Those who make bold or irrational claims draw more attention. Over time, people form stereotypes based of the group based on what is focused on the most, the fringe groups, as opposed to group as a whole.

 

It is similar to how creationists who get the most publicity are those who make the worst case. This is a tactic employed in politics where the goal is to put the focus only on stupid things the opposing side had said, and to create a stereotype of the group based on a minority within that group. Of course, only smart and sensible statements are made the focus for their own group, which is intended to create another stereotype.

 

Over time, people have to mold to the already existing stereotypes in people's head in order to fit in, and base their political affiliation on these stereotypes as opposed to on any argument. It is far easier for people to decide their political beliefs on dumbed down representations as opposed to putting cognitive effort into complex social issues. The question a liberal answers is not "what is the best way to help the poor?", yet rather "do I hate poor people?".

 

I do believe that most feminists are not of the radical kind, though they likely falter on a number of topics, just as we all do. I may be wrong as this as I haven't done any studies or seen any, but I am more inclined to believe that the stereotype may not be representative. Further, I believe those who criticize MRAs are prone to the same stereotyping bias, in that more extreme and irrational statements get more attention, which leads to a stereotype of those in the movement, when such views are held only by a minority.

[Psychophant]

Feminists who have no impact on reality ain`t actual feminists, cuz feminism is an ideology who advocates female supcremacism and the hatred of man. Albeit they use the label feminism wich has a female connotation instead of egalitarian, a form of humanism. That would like be me calling myself a "good" KKK member who doesn´t want to kill niggas or hate on them but complain about a lack of white gangsta rappers or  a being a "good" Nazi with an affinity for jewish prostitutes. People can make up stuff all they want, as long as they don´t actively oppose the bad ones, they don´t have much credibility, haven´t they?

[Archimedes]

She walks the fine line between sounding like a helpless victim and being a supreme master demanding us to submit to her.

[MysterionMuffles]

To end gender inequality, you start assigning moral responsibility to women. Where in her speech does she mention the research about how 90% women in the US still spank their kids? Where in her speech does she mention that women initiate most divorces and suck men's resources dry through this destructive system? 

 

Gender equality does not = men and boys conforming to feminist ideology. 

 

She has a good point on men not having to be aggressive and abrasive, and that men should be free to be senstive and caring. OKAY good! But why doesn't she look into the research that may cause unstable aggressive men?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rossalynwarren/emma-watson-says-that-the-view-feminism-is-man-hating-has-to?bffb&utm_term=4ldqpgp#rtn6ot

[King David]

 

To end gender inequality, you start assigning moral responsibility to women. Where in her speech does she mention the research about how 90% women in the US still spank their kids? Where in her speech does she mention that women initiate most divorces and suck men's resources dry through this destructive system? 

 

Gender equality does not = men and boys conforming to feminist ideology. 

 

She has a good point on men not having to be aggressive and abrasive, and that men should be free to be senstive and caring. OKAY good! But why doesn't she look into the research that may cause unstable aggressive men?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rossalynwarren/emma-watson-says-that-the-view-feminism-is-man-hating-has-to?bffb&utm_term=4ldqpgp#rtn6ot

 

 

Where in her speech does she address that women have their run of the mill with men in general?  That women are the very people that encourage men to be aggressive and unstable and more or less western women get exactly what they want.  Where does she admit that if a woman and man so choose, that a stay at home mother is a perfectly productive life path?

 

This is the only type of rhetoric that a possessed body of liberal lies that is the UN is capable of spewing out,  "if you cannot see how my ideologies would benefit you then you just haven't received the right or enough propaganda materials". 

 

KD

[PatrickC]

Clever speech. She had me going for a moment. Until, I realised that it is men that are expected to help women. It's the same old silliness, including the pay gap. Oh my, where do you start?

[RyanT]

Yeah first time around I was pretty bored, she seemed to be talking a lot and saying very little, maybe she made a few good point but in general, nearly 20 minutes of 'gender inequality is bad m'kay'.  

 

When I actually unpacked some of her statements though the agenda became pretty clear, 

 

''men need to reclaim those parts of themselves they abandoned and in doing so be a more true and complete version of themselves.”

 

In other words, as Stef's summarized this rhetoric many times ''men are just broken women'',

 

we have bits missing from us and its our job to fix that because we're fucking up the entire planet through our shortcomings as human beings 

 

Women on the other hand are just fine and dandy....and when they're not...men's fault!

[MysterionMuffles]

Muh patriarchy is unattracted to Hermoine now!

[kerou]

I liked it and thought it was reasonable other than some same old falsehoods like the wage gap.Though it struck me the topic should have covered a humanitarian effort, not a feminist effort.Part of the reason I cant identify as either side because a lot of these issues that aren't hyperbole are just human ethics questions.

[PatrickC]

I think she meant well.. But still, a massive gender 'empathy' gap on her part (despite her thoughts on her father). That's me being reasonable on the lass too. The insinuation that we (men) are 'broken women' as Ryan pointed out earlier. Well, that's more than annoying.

 

EDIT - The hyperbole definitely lies within the feminist territory for now.

[Kevin Beal]

She recognizes that it's widely regarded as man-hating with what appears to be genuine confusion. But if it's confusing, then why don't you look into it? Well, we just must be mistaken, I guess.

 

And the solution for this terrible public image? Get men to be the workhorses to change that. As if to suggest that the people not carrying their weight in this fight for gender equality are men, not women. This is a subtly damning message of men, and it's brilliant.

 

And the examples she chose for the ways that men are disadvantaged are interesting. She talks about suicide rates and then immediately follows that with the fact that a lot of boys and men are often attacked and called "sissy" and have their manhood challenged, as if that's causal in the suicide rate. And I'm sure that it is sometimes, but this issue of men being called "sissies" is always used by feminists as an example of how they support and sympathize with men, and the reason? Because it's damning of men! That us guys wouldn't want to be called anything "feminine", in the same way we wouldn't want to be called "gay", because we must somehow hate gay people, and similarly must hold latent hatred of women deep in our engorged phalluses! And it tends to be men wielding the "s" word. (Although it hurts a lot more coming from the ladies).

 

Forget the man behind the curtain (i.e. the mothers who raise every generation).

 

I don't think Emma Watson is being malicious or anything. I believe that she has the noblest intentions and she appears to honestly believe that what she's promoting is virtue. No ill will coming from me; I'm just saying that this is contemporary feminism under the guise of something nobler. Same old misinformation about positions of power and the wage gap, well, insofar as they must necessarily be manifestations of something sexist.

 

Want to appeal to men's desperate desire to serve women? #Heforshe is perfect.

 

Want to appeal to men's actual virtue? Maybe explain how this is going to actually serve them and their relationships, the lives of their daughters and sons. But it won't. It's just the same shit with a nice new marketing campaign. Briteweb did a fantastic job on their branding, gawd. But it's still the same man-haters and the people who enable them that we recognize as contemporary feminism.

[Psychophant]

And the examples she chose for the ways that men are disadvantaged are interesting.

 

 

Interesting in this context means someting like "I don´t give a shit but I am trying to look concerned."

[Kevin Beal]

Interesting in this context means someting like "I don´t give a shit but I am trying to look concerned."

I don't believe she chose her talking points. She even said that she didn't really understand what she was doing up there. She was chosen because she's a very beautiful celebrity who young men lust after.

 

Somebody told her what areas to focus on and then vetted her speech before she gave it. Somebody with an ideological agenda.

 

Older men are not likely to do anything because of a campaign like this, but younger men and boys will if they think that it could get them closer to getting female approval. If they are the best #heforshe person they can be, then that makes them the most virtuous and thus the object of women's desires. That's how mangina's get made. 

 

She herself probably does care about us guys to some degree, and she herself may have chosen the suicide issue. It is one of the first things you see when you look up what men actually consider men's issues. Most other men's issues make feminists uncomfortable, because they either shift focus away from women or are damning of the women's movement.

 

It would be interesting to see each of the drafts this went through...

[PatrickC]

Yes, me and Ryan were discussing this last night and he thought the whole thing had been scripted by someone else, which in hindsight seems pretty obvious now.

 

I read another article that criticised the speech, but only on the last five words of it...

 

"At last! How long have I waited for this? Finally we see a body like the United Nations issue a clarion to the world, to stand as one against all forms of violence and discrimination…"

 

“…faced by women and girls.”

 

http://freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2014/09/23/the-five-little-words-that-betrayed-emma-watson/

 

That said, I still prefer Ryan and Kevin's interpretations above.

[shirgall]

The "women and girls" phraseology was used by Hillary when she was the Sec'y of State, too. This effort is nothing new, it just has a new face.

[PGP]

Excellent analysis above. I am suspicious:

1. Why she was chosen.

She had a prominent place in the life-experience of many children/teens for their formative years. After the HP years, back when I still watched TV and followed pop culture, she seemed to attempt a break from the HP character she had to avoid type-casting. This took the form off more adult-oriented photo-shoots, forming a "celebrity couple", change in appearance and attitude etc. All carefully prescribed and crafted.

2. Role of PR/agent.

I haven't been following her career but I would be interested to know if she was requested for this position, requested it or if there was an equal reciprocation. The transition for a child-star to adult-star has been generally difficult. A polyanna position with the UN will appeal to her direct target audience: young females who (I posit) generally decide which movie is seen at the cinema. Rom-com and all that. She's the empowered multi-millionaire who triumphed in the face of adversity in the patriarchy and now she's part of the establishment come back to give all girls/women the same opportunity. All it needs is for men to change. 

 

It is interesting the contrast between this and the Scarlett Johanssen thing over SodaStream. She gave up the position to make money in a sexy ad. Her reputation suffered to anyone with a conscience but who cares, shes hot as hell?

 

It appears Watson, in contrast, is lamenting sexualisation of women in her position in order to raise her profile in order to make money. 

 

I suppose men are to blame for both outcomes?

[Psychophant]

I don't believe she chose her talking points. She even said that she didn't really understand what she was doing up there. She was chosen because she's a very beautiful celebrity who young men lust after.

 

Somebody told her what areas to focus on and then vetted her speech before she gave it. Somebody with an ideological agenda.

 

Older men are not likely to do anything because of a campaign like this, but younger men and boys will if they think that it could get them closer to getting female approval. If they are the best #heforshe person they can be, then that makes them the most virtuous and thus the object of women's desires. That's how mangina's get made. 

 

She herself probably does care about us guys to some degree, and she herself may have chosen the suicide issue. It is one of the first things you see when you look up what men actually consider men's issues. Most other men's issues make feminists uncomfortable, because they either shift focus away from women or are damning of the women's movement.

 

It would be interesting to see each of the drafts this went through...

 

Yeah, but she chose to hold a speech. I would refuse to hold a speech I didn't wrote and I couldn't agree 100% with. Sophistry drives me nuts. Especially the umbiquous statement about feminism and hate. Does she wants to shut those people down who perceive feminism as a hate movement or does she wants to turn the sistahood into an egalitarianhood?

[Kevin Beal]

Does she wants to shut those people down who perceive feminism as a hate movement or does she wants to turn the sistahood into an egalitarianhood?

I don't think she entirely knows. I'm betting she just wants to do something to help people and doesn't really know how.

 

When you are a celebrity, lots of special interests come to you trying to convince you to push their cause, and appeal to either your vanity or a genuine (albeit misguided) desire to help people. Half of the athletes and movie stars who push some cause probably have no idea what they are doing. They probably just think that they can really help and rely on other people to tell them how. Kinda like how people feel like they've actually accomplished something when they vote, ewww.

 

I think it's more naivety than anything else on Emma's part.

[Psychophant]

I think it's more naivety than anything else on Emma's part.

 

Yeah, but she is responsible for the drivel she spouts. Ignorance is really no excuse, unless she was mentally retarded. i like cutsie chicks as long as they are as smart and witty as cute.

[PatrickC]

Yeah, but she is responsible for the drivel she spouts. Ignorance is really no excuse, unless she was mentally retarded. i like cutsie chicks as long as they are as smart and witty as cute.

 

Sometimes, (actually most times). I have to wonder what you are actually talking about skirtilator. It rarely ever seems to be about the topic in hand.

[PatrickC]

Here's a video that rebuts quite well Emma's position, with a rather surprising but interesting conclusion that I think many here will quite like. It could do with some up voting as it's been festooned by progressive concern trolls.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbraAnXS1Fc

[Psychophant]

Sometimes, (actually most times). I have to wonder what you are actually talking about skirtilator. It rarely ever seems to be about the topic in hand.

 

Easy fella, looks add nothing to the validity of the statement and she is fully responsible for what she said.

[Xdreamist]

Another good article on this:https://time.com/3432838/emma-watson-feminism-men-women/

[Kevin Beal]

Stef's recent video is quite good:

 

[Bipedal Primate]

Yeah first time around I was pretty bored, she seemed to be talking a lot and saying very little, maybe she made a few good point but in general, nearly 20 minutes of 'gender inequality is bad m'kay'.   When I actually unpacked some of her statements though the agenda became pretty clear,  ''men need to reclaim those parts of themselves they abandoned and in doing so be a more true and complete version of themselves.” In other words, as Stef's summarized this rhetoric many times ''men are just broken women'', we have bits missing from us and its our job to fix that because we're fucking up the entire planet through our shortcomings as human beings  Women on the other hand are just fine and dandy....and when they're not...men's fault!

Well said.

 Forget the man behind the curtain (i.e. the mothers who raise every generation).

Whenever I use this argument when speaking with other women, I always get the same blank expression as if I suddenly started speaking a foreign language. Why is this so difficult for women to hear, absorb, or even consider?I have a 16 year-old-son, therefore I have a vested interest in him not growing-up in a world of complete idiocy. My son is the evidence that Stay-at-home mom + Peaceful Attachment Parenting + Exclusive Breastfeeding +Co-sleeping works! He is literally the happiest and most laid back easy-going young man I know. He oozes kindness and empathy for others. My son was born in Hong Kong, where I was a volunteer La leche league leader for several years. I offered 24-hour phone support and led a monthly support meeting for pregnant and new mums interested in Breatfeeding, natural child birth, and Attachment Parenting.I can't tell you how resistant most women were to the idea that they would actually need to 'alter their lifestyle' for the benefit of their child. Very few stayed home, most weaned to artificial powdered milk by 3 months, and it was impossible to convince these moms that the cry-it-out method doesn't get your baby to go to sleep faster. I eventually had to stop because it was so freaking depressing to watch moms openly support eachother's choice to abuse their babies. Outside of my attachment parenting family friends I was viewed as a complete freak for carrying my baby in a sling, co-sleeping, cloth diapering, and Breatfeeding on cue. This is a battle that I have fought on the front line, and I was defeated. I'm not sure what needs to happen for women to wake-up and admit they are the problem -- they choose not to stay home with their baby, they choose not to breastfeed, and they choose *not* to practice gentle non-violent parenting. Ultimately, they choose to go through life with their head inserted in their asshole and then blame others when their sons grow-up detached and violent. [this is such a hot spot topic for me]

[MysterionMuffles]

 

I have a 16 year-old-son, therefore I have a vested interest in him not growing-up in a world of complete idiocy.My son is the evidence that Stay-at-home mom + Peaceful Attachment Parenting + Exclusive Breastfeeding +Co-sleeping works! He is literally the happiest and most laid back easy-going young man I know. He oozes kindness and empathy for others.

 

thank you for not corrupting your son! he must be lucky to have a philosophical mother. What made you take on the path of peaceful parenting 16 years ago? was it from your own conscience or was there resources you came across that inspired you?

[Bipedal Primate]

 

 

 

thank you for not corrupting your son! he must be lucky to have a philosophical mother. What made you take on the path of peaceful parenting 16 years ago? was it from your own conscience or was there resources you came across that inspired you?

Right after my husband and I became pregnant, I immidiatly went online and joined a discussion board for pregnant moms. I just started reading about cloth diapering, breatfeeding, child led weaning, homeschooling, natural child birth, and back then non-violent parenting was called 'gentle parenting.' When I first read about Attachment Parenting, it seemed like common sense. Then when I read the forums for bottle feeding, daycare babies, cry-it-out in a crib, working moms, -- I started to cringe. I then sought out like minded families in Hong Kong for support and joined 'la leche league International' and volunteered.

[iHuman]

I Think Stef Summed things up Rather Nicely, although he didn't appear to take into account her obvious nervousness at Speaking Publicly.

 

I know Firsthand how that can make many people botch/miss-word/forget things they wanted to say, even if they have a speech all written out in front of you.

 

and to look on the bright side, this is at least a "start" in the right direction.

[shirgall]

The "women and girls" phraseology was used by Hillary when she was the Sec'y of State, too. This effort is nothing new, it just has a new face.

 

I should point out that Michelle Obama currently runs a "Council on Women and Girls" too at the White House.

[PatrickC]

Yes, I'm not convinced this is going in the right direction. More like one step forward and two back.

[Josh F]

History is a often a history of the extremes influencing the center.  Its nice that this lady has to pay service to the idea that feminism is anti-man, even if she is defending it, it was an issue not to be mentioned for quite some time.  Similar to the Adrian whatever NFL guy who hit his kid, its really nice to see the media actually jumping on that topic.  Its a positive sign that the messages of peaceful parenting, or male disposability, have entered the mainstream dialogue.  

I don't think she entirely knows. I'm betting she just wants to do something to help people and doesn't really know how.

 

When you are a celebrity, lots of special interests come to you trying to convince you to push their cause, and appeal to either your vanity or a genuine (albeit misguided) desire to help people. Half of the athletes and movie stars who push some cause probably have no idea what they are doing. They probably just think that they can really help and rely on other people to tell them how. Kinda like how people feel like they've actually accomplished something when they vote, ewww.

 

I think it's more naivety than anything else on Emma's part.

Excellent point.  I mean if I wanted to know something about acting I'd defer to her wisdom, so in that sense it makes sense to defer to wiser people.  Problem is, and having lived in Los Angeles you see this kind of shit a lot, is that there is a massive billion dollar market in trying to get celebrity endorsements to anything from their pet cause to their new smart phone accessory.  

[Psychophant]

I Think Stef Summed things up Rather Nicely, although he didn't appear to take into account her obvious nervousness at Speaking Publicly.

 

I know Firsthand how that can make many people botch/miss-word/forget things they wanted to say, even if they have a speech all written out in front of you.

 

and to look on the bright side, this is at least a "start" in the right direction.

 

You don´t know whether or not she forgot something to mention, therefore you can only judge her by what has been said. I am always nervous while holding a presentation but that doesn´t mean I spout sophist drivel by making ambiguous statements and using fussy terms. There is nothing bright about it and here is why:

 

[iHuman]

You don´t know whether or not she forgot something to mention, therefore you can only judge her by what has been said. I am always nervous while holding a presentation but that doesn´t mean I spout sophist drivel by making ambiguous statements and using fussy terms. There is nothing bright about it and here is why:

 

 

 

I didn't say I knew she had forgotten or mis worded something, and If I implied it I apologize.I was saying that I recognized the Nervousness and that forgetting and or mis wording can be very likely to happen, as to if that did or did not actually happen, I have no idea.

[PatrickC]

Yes, I think she was nervous, but it didn't muddle up much of what she had to say.

 

Since she hasn't really cleared up any ambiguity I think we can safely say it was probably a cleverly designed speech to create ambiguity.