Emma out in London - November 26th

[Jonny Carinthia]

Oh yeah, individuals are a way different matter than the media at large (look at this thread, for that perfect example). Still the media can affect mass amounts of people. Think of all the people watching shows like TMZ and Entertainment Tonight and these stories are so sensationalized to show someone in a bad light that many start to believe it. And when a "product" is not able to sell to the masses, the directors who know better have to put that aside and focus on what makes them the money.

 

The reason COULD be their different professions, but there's definitely a big heaping serving of sexism in there. There are so many examples of men being vindicated for their behavior while women aren't... Say, Brangelina. In the media it was like OH HERE COMES BIG BAD ANGELINA TO PUSH JENNIFER ANISTON OUT OF THE WAY AND STEAL HER MAN. Meanwhile it's like... BRAD CHEATED. HE was the one with the marriage vows that HE broke, and yet all the responsibility was put on Angelina or Jen (as if Jen couldn't "satisfy" him, like that was her job or something).

 

But, ling, is Emma not also a part of this business, which sell's a product with "sex"? Taking the definition, that "sex" starts with a french kiss, even Harry Potter had sex..... And seeing the first pictures of "Bling Ring", I thought, "now you too, Emma?" Or take "Perks". Put the sexual storylines out of the book, what would remain? The whole story is based on it, with all the possible different facets. And even Emma said she would get naked if a script of a movie would reasonable explain why she should do it.

 

And speaking of marriage vows. I think, that men and women are still running on rules, evolution told them many, many, many years ago. Marriage and the force to be only with one partner is nothing evolution told us; it is a thing society invented for different reasons. And it does simply not work. We are running on instincts, on instinct alone. 200 years ago marriage problems were solved often "discreed", nowadays you can get divorced in public without getting a ban from the church or society. And to break up a marriage needs always two. You do not know how their (Brad/Jen) private life was (privacy, to be respected), so nobody can say if Brad is a always a nice guy or Jen is not a annoying little witch when the front door is closed.

 

Gossip and "look behind closed doors" are part of the media for 200-300 years. Maybe the whole thing is a little bit more aggressiv now due to modern communication, the internet, digital photography and the absolut addiction to money.

[Jo.]

 

The reason COULD be their different professions, but there's definitely a big heaping serving of sexism in there. There are so many examples of men being vindicated for their behavior while women aren't... Say, Brangelina. In the media it was like OH HERE COMES BIG BAD ANGELINA TO PUSH JENNIFER ANISTON OUT OF THE WAY AND STEAL HER MAN. Meanwhile it's like... BRAD CHEATED. HE was the one with the marriage vows that HE broke, and yet all the responsibility was put on Angelina or Jen (as if Jen couldn't "satisfy" him, like that was her job or something).

You are quite right.

In fact a very recent example (i.e) the past week or so - has been the story of Taylor Swift dating Harry Styles from One Direction.

Taylor has had a few high profile boyfriends (or at least is reported to have had) and so now everyone is calling her a slut, a whore and saying things like "She cannot keep her panties on for 2 minutes" - all of which are way harsh.

Harry Styles has admitted to having several "conquests" (some of which have been reported about) but he sure has slept around - but he is painted as some sort of hero. All that is said about him is that "he is young" and "just being a lad" and getting a pat on the back from the male population.

 

Why should Taylor be called a slut and Harry be celebrated if they have both had a few sexual partners? this is a prime example of the media being sexist.

 

And we are also in danger of going waaaay off topic!! :-o it's not even about Emma aymore...perhaps the discussion shold be split and put into the discussion forum instead? :-S

[ling]

But, ling, is Emma not also a part of this business, which sell's a product with "sex"? Taking the definition, that "sex" starts with a french kiss, even Harry Potter had sex..... And seeing the first pictures of "Bling Ring", I thought, "now you too, Emma?" Or take "Perks". Put the sexual storylines out of the book, what would remain? The whole story is based on it, with all the possible different facets. And even Emma said she would get naked if a script of a movie would reasonable explain why she should do it.

 

Yes, sex is a thing. The problem is that women are supposed to be shameful of their sexuality while men can flaunt it (see Jo's example).

 

 

And speaking of marriage vows. I think, that men and women are still running on rules, evolution told them many, many, many years ago. Marriage and the force to be only with one partner is nothing evolution told us; it is a thing society invented for different reasons. And it does simply not work. We are running on instincts, on instinct alone. 200 years ago marriage problems were solved often "discreed", nowadays you can get divorced in public without getting a ban from the church or society. And to break up a marriage needs always two. You do not know how their (Brad/Jen) private life was (privacy, to be respected), so nobody can say if Brad is a always a nice guy or Jen is not a annoying little witch when the front door is closed.

 

That's what I'm saying. It's between those people, but the media gets involved, and when they did (in the Brangelina case) they pit the two women against each other (Team Jen/Team Angie) while Brad Pitt just got to kind of continue his life even though he was the one who cheated and should have been held accountable.

 

But yes, this is way off-topic. Definitely everything about Emma dealing with paparazzi stems from the same patriarchal beliefs that women should be quiet, well-mannered and sex-less, though.

[Neve]

Maybe Dan is just something smarter and more imaginative when it comes to the question how to deal with paps. And as far as I know he normally is not wearing a kilt (what brings me to the point that is is not forbidden for women to wear trousers).

I don't think it has to do with being smarter with the paps. Women have it worse because pap pictures of them interest a broader spectrum of the population. Potentially interested people include men who don't say no to oggling a girl leaving the gym in a skimpy outfit, women that enjoy gossip and/or criticising fellow members of their gender and women interested in fashion who want to see what It-girls are wearing. I guess Emma being a rather high-profile, beautiful and stylish actress definitely makes puts her among the people whose picture is worth enough money for a pap to camp out a hotel or throw himself on the ground. Which is rather sad. But that doesn't mean we should expect Emma to consider wearing the same clothes everyday in order to get rid of paps. The mere idea is outrageous. She has stated often enough that she enjoys the process of dressing up and clearly fashion played a big part in her career being taken to the next level. Why on Earth would she want to renounce something that she enjoys and that is part of her "brand" anyway just to try and get rid of those pathetic paps with no life of their own (who would probably keep chasing her anyway, in case they could spot her in the vicinity of any guy that could pass as a new boyfriend)?!

Then, of course, there's the issue of double standards being applied to women, but quite frankly, it's not an issue that's specific to tabloïds. I have to deal with double standards on a daily basis. Yes, it's frustrating. I'm pretty sure most girls and women on these boards know exactly what I'm talking about. What you read in tabloïds is just a symptom of a disease that society is not exactly getting cured of anytime soon.

[Jonny Carinthia]

I don't think it has to do with being smarter with the paps. Women have it worse because pap pictures of them interest a broader spectrum of the population. Potentially interested people include men who don't say no to oggling a girl leaving the gym in a skimpy outfit, women that enjoy gossip and/or criticising fellow members of their gender and women interested in fashion who want to see what It-girls are wearing. I guess Emma being a rather high-profile, beautiful and stylish actress definitely makes puts her among the people whose picture is worth enough money for a pap to camp out a hotel or throw himself on the ground. Which is rather sad. But that doesn't mean we should expect Emma to consider wearing the same clothes everyday in order to get rid of paps. The mere idea is outrageous. She has stated often enough that she enjoys the process of dressing up and clearly fashion played a big part in her career being taken to the next level. Why on Earth would she want to renounce something that she enjoys and that is part of her "brand" anyway just to try and get rid of those pathetic paps with no life of their own (who would probably keep chasing her anyway, in case they could spot her in the vicinity of any guy that could pass as a new boyfriend)?!

Then, of course, there's the issue of double standards being applied to women, but quite frankly, it's not an issue that's specific to tabloïds. I have to deal with double standards on a daily basis. Yes, it's frustrating. I'm pretty sure most girls and women on these boards know exactly what I'm talking about. What you read in tabloïds is just a symptom of a disease that society is not exactly getting cured of anytime soon.

 

Besides the fact that this time I can agree 100%, the example of Dan was just to show, that you CAN deal with paps in another way then looking angry and "ignoring". And how nice would be the pics of a very "different" dressed Emma (not using the word 'tempting') if she would smile "her" smile.

[KS987]

I just want to check that you know...

 

Red Carpet premieres & Press junkets, Chat shows etc.. All of these things are part of being an actor, they are written into your contract as things you do to help promote a movie.

 

Okay, with me so far?

 

Getting your photo taken whilst out walking your dog, eating dinner with your friends or just getting out of your car are NOT written into your contract, you are NOT paid for that and it is NOT part of your job.

 

Can you see the difference?

 

If you were a doctor, would you really want to drive home from(sometimes a long grueling day at work) and have your photo taken by a group of men the very second you get into AND out of your car? No. Emma should never have to get used to this, she is not like Katie 'Jordan' Price or Kerry Katona that craves this sort of attention. She has had to get used to it more over the years yes, but she shouldn't have to get used to it - this is extra unwanted baggage of being a pretty, young actress.

 

So WHY should she smile and hence then PRETEND that she is enjoying this treatment she is getting? Just like the rest of us, she just wants to do her job and go home. What is the purpose of seeing pictures of her getting in and out of her car? nobody gains anything from it, yes in a way it gets Emma publicity - but it's not publicity that Emma seeks, she doesn't want it.

 

It's not just Emma either obviously.

 

This whole Leveson enquiry in the UK was about how the press have gone too far, not just with the treatment of celebrities, but also the treatment of everyday people, such as the parents of a murdered schoolgirl.

 

Paparrazzi and sections of the press are intrusive and vile, and i hope David Cameron has the balls to do something about it after this damning report.

 

This. I've been saying for years that Emma shouldn't have to put up with this crap, with the response being the same old excuses people having been giving for this behavior. I'm happy to see that more people are comng out seeing the problem with this. Even though I'm not from the UK, I signed the petition.