Love is the one thing that transcends time and space

Christian Dior Haute Couture Spring/Summer 2013

Drake - 2 On/Thotful

For Frances, it was a point of pride at one point that she was undateable. This feeling that she didn’t fit into hetero-normative structures, that she wasn’t able to settle down, and no man would be able to handle her.  She thought that she and her friend were like that and that they would grow old together and be spinsters or something.  As the movie goes on, she realizes that she doesn’t want to be left out of that aspect of life.  I don’t think she becomes worried about it so much as there’s just a moment where she sees a man, Benji (Michael Zegen), who she could have probably dated, with another girl, and she thinks, “Everybody is moving on and coupling off and doing these things, and I haven’t done it and maybe that was the wrong choice.”  For her, it’s more about that.

Greta Gerwig

Thoughts on Emma Watson

deathwalkingbackwards:

Like, good for you for speaking up about feminism and gender roles and sexism. Glad you are using your privilege as a celebrity to discuss these issues (albeit in a pretty basic ass speech).

But all I kept thinking when I saw all these silly articles claiming that Emma Watson gave a “game-changing” speech at the UN is that the only reason she has this opportunity and is receiving all this praise as a pioneering “game changer” is because she is a (wealthy, straight, young, Eurocentrically/stereotypically pretty, able bodied, cis) white woman. And she hasn’t even said anything really revolutionary that other feminists have not said before.

Notice how, unlike Beyonce and Nicki Minaj and other PoC celebs who have claimed and defended their feminist identity, Emma Watson’s feminist self- identification/speech has not been immediately contested or rejected because of her work or profession.

Notice how she spouts ideas about “gender as a spectrum” that queer scholars, activists, and theorists, many of color as well, have been saying for decades.

Notice how she pulls out the trope of rural African girls not receiving an education as a marker of gender progress- as if Africa is a monolith, as if other European and non-European nations don’t also have problems with disparities in women’s education, as if that statement doesn’t revive troubling, racist stereotypes about Black nations.

Notice how she places the impetus on men to spread gender equality- as if masculine identified people have not already been part of feminist movements, as if the only way to make feminism acceptable and effective is to invite men for the sake of their “sisters, daughters, and mothers” and not because people of all genders are human beings who deserve rights/respect, whose freedom is inherently interconnected.

Notice how her discussion of feminism does not include the intersectional weights of racism, classism, homophobia, transphobia, and ableism.

I appreciated some aspects of the speech- tying up men’s liberation from the limits of gender roles alongside other genders within feminism, for instance. And I understand that she is promoting some kind of UN program for men & gender equality, that perhaps she saw her speech as an introduction to feminism, that she is probably not being intentional in her mistakes.

But I can’t see past the flaws of her words and her undeniable privileges that have made her the spokesperson for feminism in the UN’s eyes, therefore lending her limited vision of feminism more international/mainstream weight. And how the contributions of so many women of color, queer peoples and other marginalized groups who ACTUALLY have shaped and led feminist movements are being erased in one fell swoop by the kind of widespread media attention she is receiving.

Mila Kunis in Seventeen Magazine, 1999

hommesclub:

Adonis Bosso | Richard Chai SS15 Backstage MBFW New York, ph. Chelsea Lauren

20ad:

// “Easy Easy” - King Krule //

goldenlocket:

Elle Fanning for New York Magazine

amal's themes