Emily Ratajkowski has fashioned a second/third career for herself as a feminist who speaks out on issues of nude equality. It’s a weird thing to write, but it’s actually true. Emily is a model, an actress, and she talks about feminism and nudity. Those are her jobs now. Emily did an editorial for the new issue of Harper’s Bazaar – the August issue, on stands on July 19th – and an interview with feminist writer/thinking Naomi Wolff. I’m not going to post the photos because Emily is completely naked, but you can see the NSFW pics here at HB. The interview is what I wanted to discuss! Emily is once again talking about the double standards (and double standards within double standards) of female nudity, how we as a society react to women’s bodies, body-shaming and much more. She even talks about that Kim Kardashian stuff from a few months ago. Some highlights:
When she became a model: “Fourteen, but I looked exactly the same as I do now. They didn’t know what to do—I looked like a woman. I genuinely hit puberty before everyone. So I really was more sexual than my classmates. My teachers, my boyfriends, my parents’ friends didn’t understand how complex it all was. Because of third-wave feminism, I understood that there are all these f–ked-up ideals of beauty put on young women; that there was something to be scared about in the entertainment world. But yet the people I knew in my everyday life, they [didn’t realize] their faux pas, their missteps, and since they knew me it was that much harder because the comments felt personal.
The ideal world: “I loved in your book The Beauty Myth when you talk about this ideal world where women could dress sexually casually and it wouldn’t even be something that anyone would notice. For me, that’s something I’ve lived by. I don’t wear a bra all the time, and I don’t think about it.”
Her defense of Kim Kardashian: “A selfie is a sort of interesting way to reclaim the gaze, right? You’re looking at yourself and taking a photo while looking at everyone. But also who cares? Kim’s allowed to do what she wants. So I issued a series of tweets; she sent me flowers, thanking me, which was very sweet… Also, Kim is someone who could be criticized for a lot of different things about what she represents, but to me it was an important moment to say, ‘Even this person who you could criticize for all these different things doesn’t deserve this response, right?’”
On society’s contempt when women take ownership of their sexuality & bodies: “Kim said that to me. You know, when Lena Dunham takes her clothes off, she gets flack, but it’s also considered brave; when Justin Bieber takes his shirt off, he’s a grown-up. But when a woman who is sexual takes off her top, it plays into something. But there is a distinction in the reaction between, for example, Kim taking off her shirt and Lena. It’s not fair to either of them.
On the ideal body: “…The world should not be exclusive of the ideal body. It has to include all ideals, all bodies. The whole idea is that when Kim takes a nude selfie, she’s just seeking attention. That’s not the issue. A woman can be seeking attention and also make a statement. They don’t need to be mutually exclusive.
Sex is normal: “That’s something we really forget in this world, especially in my industry and being in the public eye as a female. There’s this idea that if a man enjoys a photograph of a nude woman or if he likes your short skirt, he’s taking something away from you. It’s not right. Sex is normal. Desire is normal. Attention is normal, and that’s okay. That’s really what slut shaming is, right? You talk about this in your book Promiscuities. A woman talks about having sex, and it’s like, well, a guy got to have sex with you, so you’re stupid. You’ve given something up.”
I’ll say it: I don’t hate anything she says here. In fact, she articulated several points better than I would have been able to, perhaps because Naomi Wolff was there. Emily really brought her A-game. At one point, Wolff and Ratajkowski also talked about how some celebrity women are shamed for being thirsty, for wanting attention, and Wolff basically says that it’s a way of shaming women for being ambitious, for thinking that they are someone special, that they are actually noteworthy. That was a great point, as was the part about how it’s perceived that men are “taking away” something from women by finding them desirable, that a sexually desirable woman is giving up something by being sexual or desirable. God help me, I’m becoming an Emily Ratajkowski fan.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
“The world should not be exclusive of the ideal body. It has to include all ideals, all bodies.”
Umm, so shouldn’t you tell your bud Kim this, who waist trains, prob has gotten surgery, and is contributing to a younger generation of girls who idolize her looks and want the same (regardless of their natural beauty).
I feel like immediately turning her statement around to criticize what another woman does with her own body, you have missed her point entirely.
Kim Kardashian shills herself to the world and acts like an example to young impressionable girls and women. She shows them how to think of your body as some sort of moldable toy. What a woman does to her own body is her own business, but if said woman makes a poopieload of money with it, then she puts herself up for criticism by people who believe you should accept and celebrate your body the way it is sans plastic surgery and hours of waist training.
Really interesting interview, I’d have liked to hear her expand on the idea of taking back the gaze; a friend of mine based their dissertation around the culture of taking selfies and self-portraiture.
I’m a fan.
I am just not a fan. She says she stopped modelling so much to get roles in movies, but I only ever see her barely dressed and showing up to everything. So, I don’t apologize. She is extra thirsty.
I am with you, seems to me Miss Dehydrated here is taking selfies to get extra attention to get more work and that’s ok just don’t try to dress it up as something deep and meaningful.
DAMN. She showed me. Touche, girl. Touche.
I’m impressed, she seems smart about feminism and has actually thought about these issues and where she stands on them. Selfie culture is complex–sure, women should do as they like, but there is the narcissism and fakery piece of it too.
I get it.. but sadly women have used the I’m powerful when I take off my clothes for years. We say it in every time period: 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s… and at this point if taking your clothes off equaled empowerment.. .
women would be ruling the world.. and we are still talking about the same problems year after year after year.. Maybe we need to find another way.
Ha! So true! If nakedness equaled “power” then the Girls Next Door would’ve been in Congress by now.
Maybe….just MAYYYYBEEEEE……we can think of something else to level the playing field.
Key word…’think.’
*duck-faced hair flip* *shut up I’m thinking*
comment of the day, K.
I agree with a lot of what she says in theory, but I’m never going to believe that Kim K is out to make some sort of feminist statement. Find a better example, Emily.
Agreed, I don’t think Kim s out to make a feminist statement. That being said, I think the backlash genuinely surprised Kim and forced her to think about that moment differently. Had people not lost their minds for no reason, she wouldn’t have needed to issue a statement.
ETA: While she was also adding fuel to the fire, people were coming for her, for no reason. People simply feel she’s an easy target for laughs and publicity at this point.
Yup. This. I just can’t with the Kardashian crew. I. Just. Can’t.
Agreed.
…And meant to say that even though I don’t think Kim k posted that photo for feminism (it was about attention and beauty only, but her and Emily’s responses afterward were definitely feminist statements), Emily is right that someone can be seeking attention/promoting themselves and their career AND trying to make a statement about something they actually believe. So many times with women like Emily R., Ariel Winter, Beyoncé, and other women, it gets treated like an either/or thing: Either this is something you care about, OR you want to promote yourself and your career, and that’s A Bad Thing because it’s somehow not automatically clear to a few people that every celebrity seeks attention anyway.
I agree that it shouldn’t always be an either / or thing.
I think when I start to question it is when there isn’t a career like Beyonce or Ariel have to promote, and by default self promotion becomes the career.
She showed me! I hate her acting (she just stands there and makes sexy faces and it’s just ridiculous) but she seems smart and passionate about this issue. I’m starting to like her.
I don’t understand how not wearing a bra is “dressing sexually”. Isn’t that more just laziness or wanting to be comfortable? Whenever I don’t wear a bra out it’s because I’m either too lazy to put one on or I just want to be comfortable because it’s a quick run to the store.
I’m with you 100% on that, but sometimes when people describe things as ‘sexual’, they’re talking about some others’ reactions to it. In this interview she seems to be using the word to describe clothing or things other people (besides the woman wearing or doing it) see as sexual and have a moral panic about.
Laura Mulvey would disagree. The Hierarchy of the Gaze is not jus the gaze, but the gaze in three part structure. So no Emily.
I hear you, Emily! She does make good points, and doesn’t sound dumb nor ignorant. It’d be really cool if she also spoke on other feminism-related issues other than nudity and beauty, BUT this is still something.
She sounds articulate here — doesn’t mean I’m going to watch her in any new movies though.
I disagree. Selfies are a way of saying, “Look at me!”
Ugh no. Kim K is not making a feminist statement. Neither is Emily. If Kim K or Emily were actually doing something to help and support women who have had their lives damaged and careers destroyed due to revenge porn, then I could get on board. But Emily posing nude constantly and only really getting press for being naked, has little to do with feminism and everything to do with self-promotion and trying to resuscitate her career.
She had implants and inflated lips when she was 14? And NONE of the Kardashian/Jenner coven is a good example of a feminist.
Ok, bit of a long post but I have some thoughts and I’d love to start a conversation about this because maybe I’m reading wrong and this is an interesting subject.
Isn’t the reason that women could have the ability to walk around topless and not be harrassed due to desexualising breasts? Like the way we can find men’s chests attractive but because they’re not sexualised like women’s breasts we don’t grope or harrass shirtless men? Hyper sexualisation leads to objectification and men’s entitlement to women’s bodies as they are always presented for men’s consumption and enjoyment (infamous male gaze) so lessening these things leads to women’s freedom to display their bodies as is without fear, they way men can do.
“Kim said that to me. You know, when Lena Dunham takes her clothes off, she gets flack, but it’s also considered brave.” But she is brave because her body doesn’t meet society’s standards of what is considered sexy in a woman. Kim K would never take her clothes off if she looked liked Lena Dunham. KK will only ever post a selfie when she feels she will meet expectations of what is considered sexy. She’s directly pandering to the male gaze and her behaviour is dictated by it. Lena Dunham knows her body doesn’t conform but displays it anyway, KK hides until her body itbis perfect through dieting, surgery, makeup and photoshop then displays it. She needs the approval of the male gaze, Dunham doesn’t and that IS brave.
I also resent the idea that a woman/her body is only sexual according to Ratajkowski if she looks sexy. She puts her body and KK’s in the ‘sexual’ category while Dunham’s is outside that. How hot you look doesn’t have anything to do with how sexual a person you are. Isn’t that not really sexist? We don’t apply that to men, men are considered sexual beings all the time apart from their looks. Does she think she’s more sexual than Dunham? Purely by comparing their bodies and finding hers more attractive? Like if a woman has wonky boobs, a tummy, cellulite, stretch marks she can’t be sexual? Is she denying women who don’t look Iike her or KK their sexuality. I think she’s confusing being sexual and sexualisation. It’s also kind of a dangerous opinion. I know there have been a few cases where minors have been groomed by men and the men defended because the girls had developed bodies and were therefore sexual beings. Their age, emotional & psychological maturity, own feeling on the matter plus the fact they were groomed is secondary to how they looked and justifies the man’s behaviour. The most infamous case I can think of is Cherice Moralez, who committed suicide after her teacher raped her and got 30 days in jail because the judge thought the 14 year old girl “seemed older than her chronological age” and was “as much in control of the situation”. Trust, the reason she she seemed older to that despicable judge had nothing to do with her personality and everything to do with how she looked.
I agree with all of this. She seems to conflate being sexual and being conventionally hot. That’s where she usually loses me. Lena Dunham’s “brave” nudity is absolutely partially because she bucks the system in terms of what women are “acceptable” to disrobe, but also she displays nudity in both sexual and non sexual settings. Sometimes she’s having really weird sex with a dude and sometimes she’s just playing ping pong totally naked or hiking in some terrible bikini.
Additionally Lena Dunham and Hannah Horvath are incredibly sexual people. Lena writes about her sexuality often and Hannah has some kinks, masturbates regularly and isn’t remotely shy about her sexuality. To me Dunham’s sexuality is far more empowering to plebes like me than seeing a woman who looks like she was created on Weird Science computers posing on a horse like she’s teaching a course on The Patriarchy’s Guide to Giving Dudes Bonerz.
I didn’t think she was implying that Lena Dunham isn’t a sexual being (it didn’t even seem like a statement about Lena’s sexuality at all, but about how her skin-baring is judged based on the body she has). She was pointing out that people have different responses to different people’s immodesty based on the bodies they’re in. And she’s not exactly wrong. Gender, race, age, and body type all effect not just whether or not it will be read as sexual, but also the level and type of criticisms (if any) will be directed that person’s way. Lena’s doing it may be more brave in terms of the beauty standards issue, but they can both be equally as brave when it comes to the modesty and victim-blaming issue because men finding a woman attractive in some way (whether it’s because of age, physical fitness, curves, femininity, etc.) isn’t a shield from that. In fact, straight male desire is always used as a reason for why it’s dangerous/not empowering/harmful/bad for people who aren’t either male (Bieber, Tatum, Levine) or outside of specific conventional beauty standards (Dunham) to do the whole immodesty thing.
A big part of the entitlement problem is that men and boys are taught that in order for them to function like normal people and act right, and in order for the fact that they’re not entitled to be clear to them, they’re entitled to a world where nothing a woman is wearing or doing is a sexual turn-on for them. With the whole women& modesty debate, whether it’s religious people, MRAs, feminists, or others- the reasons given for why women shouldn’t wear or do whatever thing that’s seen as immodest/sexual/’slutty’/etc. almost always comes back to how people fear the (mostly straight) male population will or won’t respond to it. Male toplessness being allowed to be shown in both non-sexual (Dad at the beach, dude mowing lawn, etc.) and sexual (romance novel covers, certain male celebrity photoshoots, and certain music videos and movies) ways in society without it being implied that men should only show it in non-sexual ways would just be a sexist response to a sexist problem, and isn’t really different from the “Never ever show that in a sexual way so that men and boys will know they’re not entitled” training men have already received since the beginning of time.
While I don’t totally agree with some of her points, I do think women are unfairly scrutinized for selfie culture. We live in a world where women are pressured to look beautiful and to value their looks above else but are discussed negatively or described as vain when they celebrate their own beauty.
Nicely said. I agree.
It’s hilarious to me that women objectifying themselves is the new feminist movement.
That being said, I have no issue with people who take selfies, sexy or otherwise, to each her own. Just don’t wrap it up in feminist paper, it wreaks of pretension.
Completely agree with you, benchwarmer.
Honestly, to me, so many of these selfie queens like Kim post nude (or nearly nude) pics because they want to be seen as “hot” and cry “anti-feminism” or “body/slut-shaming” when anyone disagrees with them. It’s taken the power away from those things and turned it into an exercise in narcissism.
As a society, I think we’re still finding that line between a woman “owning her sexuality” and simply taking sexy photos and calling it “feminism.” To me, it’s about who it’s for. I feel for Kim, it’s still about men finding her hot.
Nope, just thirsty.
If she could dress sexually casually with no one noticing what would she do with her life?
The problem is that we live in a world where beauty is the only power a woman is allowed to have. And it’s a passive power – the power to captivate the male gaze, and it’s utterly transient. It’s not even really power in any real sense, but beautiful and desirable women have harped on about it for years because it’s the only thing they have to cling to. The fact is Emily is a model perfect female and that generates a particular response from men. Of course she feels like she’s on top and that desire and attention are wonderful things. But when that is the only card a woman has to play it becomes problematic.
Bingo
More faux feminism. Let me press the snooze button.
This^^
Just like with religion and the whole “no true Christian” card that the conservatives play with people who identify with their religions but dare to be critical of or reject some of the restrictive rules about the body, there will always be people ready to cry ‘fake feminist!’ or ‘no true feminist’ whenever a woman who they want to be more modest with her body (or stop doing whatever other things they don’t want women doing with their bodies, like wearing make-up, using a surrogate, having casual sex, or wearing a hijab, just to name a few of the things some feminists will do this with) identifies as a feminist and expresses her feminist beliefs. Channing Tatum taking his clothes off, sexualizing himself, and describing it as empowering while identifying as a feminist and defending women’s agency is fine because he’s a man, Adele and Zendaya identifying as feminists and calling out slut-shaming is fine because they’re more modest ladies, but Emily Ratajowski and Ariel Winter identifying as feminists and calling out the same problems is a problem or ‘faux feminism’ because they’re women who don’t present themselves like Adele and Zendaya. Doublethink is amazing.
And not too long ago people were like, “Why does Emily need to state the fact that sexual nudity involving a woman doesn’t automatically make that woman anti-feminist? Doesn’t everybody already know that?”
Lol, how did you build all that on “faux feminism”? I didn’t give me my reasons why I believe it to be, but you sure responded as if I did. You’re arguing with yourself there. And most of what you wrote in your imagined idea of why I called it faux femenism is bunk. (You could have asked me why I think it is faux before listing the ways you think I’m wrong. Just a thought.) But I don’t feel the need to explain my reasons to you. Also, there are a few posts (from jennimari, LooseSEal and Otaku) who have done a bang up job of it already.
ETA: I just noticed you are the writer of one of the comments I agreed with?
This woman has absolutely nothing insightful, original, or important to say. She sounds as if she skimmed through “The Beauty Myth” and parroted a few parts to its author that pertained favorably to her own already established (and quite limited) opinions. I’m not impressed by her at all.
Using feminism to explain away her cringe-inducing addiction to constantly posting pictures of herself wearing barely any clothes. STFU.