Emily Ratajkowski feels lucky to do what she wants ‘while still being a feminist’


Sorry for the blurring, but Emily Ratajkowski’s breasts cannot be contained. Emily is on the verge of… something. She plays Andie in David Fincher’s Gone Girl, after Ben Affleck told Fincher that she would be perfect for the role. This could be her big break as an actress. She could be the next… Megan Fox, I guess. Anyway, Emily has a GREAT publicist and she managed to get some higher profile magazine covers and features. Emily got the November cover of Cosmopolitan. You can see Cosmo’s cover preview here. The only quote they’ve given us is: “I feel lucky that I can wear what I want, sleep with who I want and dance how I want, all while still being a feminist.”

Emily also had a nice feature in Vanity Fair about a month ago, plus she’s got a longer interview with the latest edition of LA Confidential. Some highlights:

Emily was born in London: Her mother, Kathleen Balgley, was teaching on a Fulbright scholarship. “I was sort of a last-minute decision,” she admits. “My parents weren’t married when they had me and my mom was 39. But they’re still together, so it’s a good story!” she adds with a laugh. The actress’s peripatetic childhood was spent everywhere from Bantry, Ireland, to Majorca, Spain—“I am pretty damn good at doing accents.”

Modeling as a teenager: “I was making enough money to take myself shopping, buy my lunch, and put gas in my car.”

Falling out of love with acting: “The TV roles I was going up for didn’t really interest me. There were a lot of cutesy, mean-girl, Disney-type things. Not that there’s a problem with that, but it just wasn’t really my style.”

Her Gone Girl character: “It’s funny. I get defensive when people say, ‘Oh, you play the mistress.’ In my mind, she’s just a girlfriend who really loves her boyfriend and has been taken advantage of and doesn’t realize that. Of course, she doesn’t understand the full situation, which really breaks her heart later in the story.”

Filming in Missouri: “It was a bonding experience. It’s a small town; there aren’t a lot of places to go, so the cast and crew spent a lot of time together.”

She’s not into label: “It’s no longer a culture of ‘Are you an actress? Are you a model?’ It’s an overarching ‘You are a figure. What do you want to do with yourself?’ I hope in five years that I’m doing both… and have figured out exactly how to manage that!”

[From LA Confidential]

Maybe I’m looking for drama, but every time Emily talks about filming Gone Girl, my radar pings. I’m not saying she fooled around with Ben Affleck. But I am saying that he probably wanted to. Anyway… I’m fine with Emily as an actress. I mean, I don’t think Meryl Streep has anything to worried about. But Megan Fox should be concerned.


Photos courtesy of WENN and Eric Ray Davidson/Cosmo.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

75 Responses to “Emily Ratajkowski feels lucky to do what she wants ‘while still being a feminist’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Jadrebe says:

    I’m not sure if anyone of you have actually seen Gone Girl but her character was extremely disappointing, she did little to no acting and just took her top off, it seemed slightly degrading to me.

    • MrsBPitt says:

      You got to see Gone Girl???? How was it???

      • Jadrebe says:

        I saw it last night, it was good shot well. Ben Affleck is fine, I would definitely recommend it, it stayed pretty faithful to the book.

        As I mentioned above, the Andi character is terrible and it seems to border on the absurd toward the end, people were laughing in the theatre but I think that’s because it is a crazy concept.

    • Kiddo says:

      It sounds like you’ve seen it. Is the film any good? There is so much hype. I had to do a search to figure out who this woman was.

    • Tiffany27 says:

      Please no spoilers y’all. Seeing it Friday.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I couldn’t read it, is I probably won’t bother to see it unless I hear it’s great. Actually, I heard the book was great and I hated it, so, maybe I won’t see it anyway.

      • Kiddo says:

        What did you hate about it? Was it boring or failed to meet suspension of disbelief? Can you elaborate?

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I thought the writing was mediocre. The diary of the young girl put me over the edge. It was so cringeworthy, so like an older person or a man (I actually thought it was a man) who had no idea what a young girl would think or sound like. I couldn’t care about the characters or what happened. I almost always give a book at least 100 pages, and for some reason, this book just didn’t draw me in. I thought it was a waste of time. Did you read it? I have asked several people if I should give it another try, and they all said no, don’t bother, except one.

      • Kiddo says:

        No, I haven’t read it, that’s why I asked. I think you are a pretty good judge of things.

      • Merritt says:

        @ GoodNamesAllTaken

        It wasn’t a diary of a young girl. Amy’s Diary is supposed to be that of a thirtysomething woman.

      • Chris2 says:

        I felt extremely manipulated by the author…..some time ago now, but I think twas this clever depiction of the girl’s faux-coolness…..by the end I felt Flynn was revealed as equally unreliable. Left a bad taste in my mouth.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Even worse.

      • Merritt says:


        What does a proper diary read like? I’m not trying to be difficult but I would like to know. It seems highly subjective to me. And the point of the diary is how it contrasts to the the actual character.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Good names….the diary is questioned in the end. Your instincts were leading you in the right direction, but reach a different conclusion.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        I found the writing and the “voice” used in the diary to leave me cold. I didn’t finish the book. I started it, hated it and quit reading it. Why are you taking it so personally? Many people loved it. My comments were not intended to put them down. I just didn’t care for it. I didn’t write a thesis on my reasons. It’s just a matter of what appeals to you.

        @Tiffany 🙂
        That’s intriguing. Gah! Maybe I should try it again. Lol

      • Merritt says:


        I’m not taking it personally. I’m not sure where you got that idea. In general, I was just curious.

    • Merritt says:

      I’m really not surprised that is all they her do. In the book the character is rather stupid. Towards the end of she gains some depth, but it is too little too late. She is a caricature of a mistress.

  2. hutter says:

    “I feel lucky that I can wear what I want, sleep with who I want and dance how I want, all while still being a feminist.”

    Huh? Isn’t being a feminist all about getting to do what you want to do (wear, sleep with, dance)? She says it like it’s some amazing feat she’s pulling off. “I can do what I want and still be a feminist.” Crikey…

    • Linn says:

      That’s what I was thinking. Did she ever consider that maybe she can do all those things BECAUSE feminists before her worked for it.

      • Chris says:

        Agree. The journalist should’ve followed up with “so who are some of your favorite feminist authors?”

    • Tulip says:

      Thank-you for mentioning this because it’s what I thought as well. She meant well, I’m sure…but, really?

    • Jules says:

      Hey at least she scores a D+ on the definition, better than other deep thinking celebtards. Baby steps.

    • su says:

      You’d be surprised, the amount of ppl on thIS site that dont share that sentiment. I not surprised she felt she had to clarify.

      Being sexy and be feminist arent mutually exclusive. Remember the annie lennox and Beyoncé “drama”. Somehow singing about how your man makes your kitty purr and performing that song in front of a sign that says “feminist” is a problem. …

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        That a complete misinterpretation of what was being said yesterday, and I’m really exasperated by it. No one was saying that you can’t be sexy and be feminist. Or that Beyoncé can’t be a feminist because she performs in a manner that exploits her sexuality. Or that it’s not her choice as to whether or not she exploits her sexuality. Or that she doesn’t have the right to decide for herself what makes her feel sexually liberated. The point is that wearing lingerie and grinding your crotch around the stage DOES NOT MAKE YOU A FEMINIST. That, in itself, does not empower women. Women have been doing that for centuries, whether because they want to, or because they were pressured or forced to. Commercializing your body and exploiting your sexuality to sell records is not new, it’s not helping other women to gain equal rights, it’s not feminist. That doesn’t mean you can’t do these things and support equal rights for women. But women will be equal to men when they are judged for their musical ability, not their ass.

      • Amelia says:

        Great comment. Have a Dragonfly shaped cookie this lovely Wednesday afternoon 🙂
        As for Emily’s comments . . . well, it’s still not as bad as sunshine vadge. She missed the mark, but I suppose it’s the thought that counts.

      • Diana B says:

        Very well said GNAT. People just like to simplify the matter way too much.

  3. Sara says:

    so is this the new go to phrase for starlets that sell their looks? “im a feminist”.
    we now have everyone claiming to be a feminist but the number of people who believe in full gender equality hasnt changed. it seems to be one of the things nowadays that the PR team tells the star. like lots of actors love to talk about their love for “strong women” which they can never explain what strong means to them and then never date any strong woman.

    seems almost like feminism is the next marketing phrase and that is not a good sign.

    just like everybody in hollywood is full force against racism but people of color still dont get big roles. same for homosexuals. you get the impression that hollywood must be the most gay friendly place on earth. it is not. its all marketing.

    • Chris2 says:

      Check out reports re the Chanel fashion/ feminism event t’other day. Exactly as you say…. It’s *the* current marketing tool.
      It’s a snare too, isn’t it? I fall right in and rant, and am now utterly sick of the subject.
      TKO to the opposition!

    • Kaya says:

      I think they’re also using it to justify the sexual exploitation of women and making it sound as if it’s what these actresses/models/singers/whoever want, or even understand. She can call herself a feminist all she wants (and she probably will, for PR), but making your claim to fame as a pretty thing to look at in a music video that glosses over consent is not a good start.

      • Sara says:

        good point. like “ironic” racism or sexism. especially sexism in commercials. its “ironic”.

        marketing takes everything thats en vogue or will get a reaction and squeeze dry and then move on and dont care about the consequences.

      • MaiGirl says:

        Bingo! And that’s why I am so frustrated. There is misunderstanding, and then there is purposeful misdirection, and that’s what’s happening now. Notice how many men are totally happy with feminism as long as it means the same kind of subjugation that has always happened under a new name!

  4. Gayle says:

    What’s with the high-waisted mom jeans? Are they back in style. YIKES

    • Kiddo says:

      Miley has been wearing them for a while.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Where have you been? The high-waisted shorts were all the rage this summer, much to my disgust.

      • Kiddo says:

        I didn’t wear them. I’m behind the curve and clinging to the recent past.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Me too. I don’t need Friends-era fashion to return.

        Except for the flannels-those can stay.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        High waisted jeans were in style my senior year in high school. I was about 107 pounds and for the first time in my life, my boyfriend told me they made my butt look big. That was the beginning of the end of my good body image and it took me decades to overcome it. So, no, I don’t care for them still, just because they represent my giving everyone else such power over me. Plus, now my butt IS big. Lol

      • Kiddo says:

        That’s why you look awesome in beige booty shorts GNAT, you rock ’em.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Lol, Kiddo, I cringe at the thought.

    • lenje says:

      I am in the minority, because I kinda like these “mommy jeans” — they won’t make me worried that my panties will pop up whenever I bow or kneel! 🙂

  5. Tiffany27 says:

    I hate Cosmo magazine.

    • Sara says:

      no spanking for you? oh my.

    • Tapioca says:

      Come now, you’ve got to love it – what other magazine has been at the forefront of illustrating articles about body acceptance and self esteem with airbrushed photos of 16-year old anorexics for forty-odd years?

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Lol. Who else has 42 “secret” ways to make him wild – every single month?

    • Rae says:

      I hate it for that cover alone. She looks about 45 on that cover and around 20 in the bottom pic. I don’t care enough to google her and find out how old she is, but jeez Cosmo.

  6. MrsBPitt says:

    OMG…Ben can’t even be in a movie without being accused of sleeping with someone….He has a wife and three kids and I think, that unless there is proof, that is really crappy. And before someone says, “oh, he cheated on JLO with a stripper”….I don’t know if thats true, but if it was, that was YEARS ago. We let Angelina Jolie grow up and forgave her for her craziness when she was young, we let Robert Downey Jr., be forgiven for his problems, I just don’t get why Ben is the only one that people can’t say “hmmm, that was years ago, and since then, he has changed and grown up”…
    #nodisrepecttoangelinajolieand robertdowneyjr.endofkanyelikerant

    • Jane says:

      Keep living in fantasyland.

    • Kiddo says:

      I don’t care enough about Ben Affleck to care about whether he cheated. Is that horrible? I think he’s kind of an overrated actor who started with more promise than has been realized. He’s not awful, just more of a star than a thespian. Of course it would suck for his wife, but it would seem, on the surface anyway, that they have made some faustian bargain to remain together in spite of his reputation and past actions.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      I agree with you, MrsBPitt. It’s exhausting. Not one iota of proof but of course he cheated. Sigh.

    • Merritt says:

      It does seem like those rumors happen with every movie he does. If he is cheating on every movie set, there would be better proof by now. It seems to me that his vices are more gambling and booze over anything else.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I feel like they were saying these two hooked up even BEFORE the movie was filmed, as soon as it was announced that she was cast.

      At the same time, I think this kind of rumor is part of the reason that Ben is the perfect actor to play this role. Rumors stick to him like glue, some justified some not.

      • Lena says:

        The press has always had it out for him – the insinuations here are just one example of this truism. I hear the movie really slams the press (tabloid and online gossip) for making up its mind without any proof and braying it all over the place. It must have been very rewarding for him to send up the press in Gone Girl. I can’t wait to see it!

  7. Adrien says:

    She’s not the next Megan Fox, Megan has mass appeal. Emily is slightly intimidating. She’s the next Gal Godot.

  8. Allie says:

    I just don’t find her attractive. She has a great body and hair, but hair face is just off to me. I am quite jealous of her upbringing though. Mine seems so vanilla now.

    • Etheldreda says:

      I think she’s got a fantastic body – natural or otherwise – but quite an unattractive face, although she does look lovely in the pictures in the red dress. She also comes across as unlikable and seems to think she’s the only woman in history to have a great rack. Definitely a man’s woman.

  9. Nene says:

    What’s with all these feminist questions on celebrities? Is there a great revolution on female equality that am unaware of?
    Someone please help me out?!

    Off topic: are her boobs real? She has nice boobs and in every photo(the few I’ve seen), she puts them on display.

    • Kiddo says:

      Equal pay, freedom of choice, coverage of birth control through health insurance, etc. have made headlines and are always hot topics in the political sphere.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        Yes, but what about her boobs?

      • Kiddo says:

        lol, O’kitt. Hard to tell through the blurring and looking her up to find out who she was, was much more than my apathy for her could take.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        Kind of like how China was the “Sleeping Giant” (aka the mass of consumers newly introduced to global capitalism and trade)….does that make the female population the new Sleeping Giant? We seem to just be waking up to the realization that our numbers and power are not reflected in the world we live in and there seems to be a united effort to change that.

        Should we call our movement “The Sleeping Boss”, awakened and ready to take charge?

  10. belladonna says:

    Were these photos chosen because they arent particularly attractive? I’ve never seen her look like this, not that she’s horrid… but she just doesnt look like her usual self. She normally oozes sex appeal in a very genuine way.

    • Sarah says:

      I was thinking the exact same thing! She usually looks effortlessly gorgeous and in these photos she looks completely different. Why would they make her look worse?

    • Dany says:

      yes, she looks so pretty and sexy in the red dress on the red carpet, but in the Cosmopolitan pictures her face looks strange

    • Tiffany :) says:

      If I had to guess, I would say that in the Cosmo pictures she had lip injections and they have since settled.

      I hate what lip injections do to mouths and facial expressions.

  11. Rachel says:

    Is it like required that every actress, singer or whatever has to talk about feminism now?

  12. Josefa says:

    She just sounds so dumb whenever she opens her mouth. This interview is better than the other one about Europe’s irrelevancy, but it’s still not good. But it’s Cosmo, so you’ll inevitably get a quarter of your brain cells fried but just opening a copy of it.

  13. Ash says:

    Emily’s mother is an English professor and a feminist. I think Emily might have a slightly better grasp about what feminism is than many of her celebrity peers.

    Emily doesn’t bother me much. I think she’s pretty too. YMMV.

  14. Grant says:

    She is so basic looking to me.

  15. Kylie says:

    She is not attractive at all in my opinion. Classic butterface.

  16. Jayna says:

    She was so pretty in the music video. It must have been the lighting, that very pale look with the brown hair..

    Her interviews are a bore and eye-roll inducing at times. Her body seems to be her only asset. LOL

  17. Julie says:

    She’s honestly such a moron. “It’s funny. I get defensive when people say, ‘Oh, you play the mistress.’ In my mind, she’s just a girlfriend who really loves her boyfriend and has been taken advantage of and doesn’t realize that. Of course, she doesn’t understand the full situation, which really breaks her heart later in the story.” — Uh, the character knew that the dude was married when she seduced him at his bar. Then after his wife goes missing, she keeps texting him about calling her and seeing her and it’s all about her. Yeah the mistress is SO misunderstood. As for the Disney type roles not being good enough for her, … the Blurred Lines mess WAS? Oh okay. From what I understand Emily does not have much of role in this movie, 3-4 scenes at most, but the way her PR is working it, you’d think she was a lead or major supporting role. Ridiculous. She’ll get a few girlfriend roles and then fade into the background.

    • Merritt says:

      Exactly. Andie knows Nick is married from the start. She was just stupid and bought the whole “my wife doesn’t understand me” line. Then when Amy goes missing, she is still acting stupid, wanting him to be with her all the time. She is not misunderstood, she is just a stupid character. I guess it is good that Emily’s PR is milking this role and getting what they can now, because if your body is your only asset, you’re going to fade fast in the entertainment industry.

  18. hethre says:

    I posted this in another thread, but wanted to add it here.

    I have been anxiously awaiting the chance to post about this. I remember a post just a bit ago about Ben personally requesting Emily R. for the role of Andie.

    I have always rooted for Ben Affleck, but this, if in fact true, skeeves me the f*** out. Why did he choose Emily R. for this role if for no other reason than he wanted to be able to motorboat her breasts? She is no actress, and with the high profile nature of this film, I am sure there would be 100 better-suited, bigger names that would jump at the chance to have even that tiny role just for the exposure. Doesn’t it feel unethical and essentially equivalent to sexual harassment to hire someone just because you want to engage in sexual activity with them (which they have to do for their part in the film)? I guess I am just naïve, but this is just majorly gross if it is true.