Here are some photos of Jennifer Lawrence at two pre-Oscar events in the past two days. As I keep saying, J-Law has been really good about not oversaturating the media with photos and interviews in the past few months. She was everywhere last year, and after she got her fourth Oscar nomination, she proceeded to not campaign for it at all. But she’s still J-Law, and she’s still the biggest star of her generation, and she’s still one of the biggest deals in Hollywood, so that’s why she came out for some events for Oscar weekend.
First, the fashion. For last night’s Women In Film pre-Oscar cocktail party, Jennifer wore this absolutely awful Dior ensemble – the white jacket over what looks like an enlarged black fishnet dress. This should totally be considered a preview of things to come, because I’m sure she’s contractually obligated to wear Dior at the Oscars. And it might be bad. I think Dior is making gowns especially for J-Law, so maybe it won’t be THIS bad. I’m also including photos of Jennifer at that Dinner for Equality event two nights ago. She decided to forgo the Dior and went with Naeem Khan velvet pants and an embellished top. I would have enjoyed this more if the embellished top was a full-on dress.
At the Dinner for Equality event, J-Law made some prepared remarks around pay equality (the event was co-hosted by Patricia Arquette, whose comments you can read here). J-Law said, in part:
“It’s weird being a public figure talking about all of this stuff because you put a target on your nose. When I wrote that essay I got a lot of support but I also have a Republican family in Kentucky who told me my career was effectively over.” Lawrence said it’s vital to shed the notion that we live in a post-feminist era. “I don’t know who came up with that term, but it’s the most damaging term that we have, because it’s just not true.”
For what it’s worth, the Dinner for Equality event seemed like a very substantive discussion. At the Dinner for Equality event, they had feminist male allies from major studios talking about the importance on internal audits within studios to insure that women are being paid fairly and equally to their male counterparts.
J-Law also said some words at the WIF event about pay equality:
Photos courtesy of Getty.
her stylist (or her) have the worst taste in fashion. dior makes some gorgeous outfits, but she never seems to wear them, she always goes for the crappy ones.
she’s right about the post-feminist era though.
ITA – scrolling down the pics my first thought was: wow, her stylist must really hate her. How can you make someone with her banging body look so stumpy and shapeless??
I like her hair color, though.
I personally avoid the term feminism, especially when talking to men. As soon as they hear it, they start shutting down. So I usually use terms like gender equality.
Dior gives all the good stuff to Marion and Charlize
Have you seen what Charlize wears? No, she definitely does not get the good stuff from Dior. Though she and Jennifer have very different aesthetics so it’s not like they’d be choosing the same thing anyhow.
Charlize’s gown are simple, cause dressing her is simple. She’s skinny, tall and evenly-proportioned, you just put on a tight straight-down gown and you’re sorted, she looks like a freaking statue.
@Qwerty: you’d think, but Dior has put her in some awful stuff. Remember the purple gown with the cinnamon bun boobs? The weird white gown with the netting instead of straps?
the eyeliner on the wetline is never a good idea imho
Well, then feminism needs to get it together. There are major problems with feminism, especially right now that aren’t being addressed by its own self proclaimed supporters. Like inter-sectionaliism for starters. Maybe if we were asking WHY people are avoiding the term and saying that we’ve reached the post feminist era and start listening to some of its critics feminism would be moving forward rather than being a trite buzzword on social media. It seems like meaningful discussion of the issues gets shouted down more often than not because someone doesn’t want to admit that there is a problem, or that they are part of it. The focus stays on a select few topics/people. I do call myself a feminist, but it’s getting really hard to ignore that I really don’t like what a growing number of media outlets, bloggers and major players are saying and doing in the name of feminism and assuming that all who call themselves feminists will support them and attack anyone who doesn’t. They act like being a feminist is like being knighted and that the queen can take away someone’s feminist title whenever for whatever. It’s not damaging to address issues within and there is obviously still a need for feminism in the world. But I refuse to be a blind feminist because J-Law and other celebs tell me so. The feminist posers seem to have taken over and I’m sick of it. Maybe I’m having a bad day.
Had to vent.
It seems like if you don’t meet a blogger’s/site’s idea of a feminist, then you are not one. Some feminists are clearly killing things with their elitism.
“I do call myself a feminist, but it’s getting really hard to ignore that I really don’t like what a growing number of media outlets, bloggers and major players are saying and doing in the name of feminism and assuming that all who call themselves feminists will support them and attack anyone who doesn’t. ”
what do you mean, what things? honest question.
For example:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/us/politics/gloria-steinem-madeleine-albright-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html
They can step right off with this one. This was the biggest one that happened recently. I don’t have a lot of time to reply (at work) but I’ll try to answer better later if I can.
yeah, this one was incredibly manipulative.
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. I can be an elitist, too – but generally with things like white feminism (which is not real feminism, and I’m assuming you’d agree since you discussed intersectionality). The Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright got me as well – just because Hillary’s a woman, doesn’t mean her stances on issues necessarily benefit me. For instance, I’m a middle class girl about to graduate from college. What would be beneficial to me would have been free tuition – but Hillary’s opposed and Bernie’s for it.
My preference for Bernie is entirely based on his stances on the issues. All of Hillary’s personal shortcomings, email scandal, the fact that she’s a woman, whatever – have nothing to do with this preference. Gloria and Madeleine should know better.
And I definitely agree that there isn’t enough discussion about the real issues within the movement. Until we can fix those and find away to come together as a whole – women across the world of all different races, ethnicities, class backgrounds, sexualities, etc. – we’re not really moving forward.
She had a designer clothing store in soho closed to the public for an hour so she wouldn’t have to shop with any other women in the store…
yeah she sounds like a true role model a spoiled rich bitch who clearly has no interest in anyone but herself.
Shops and boutiques close regularly for famous people to shop, and it’s not always at the famous person’s request. It’s hardly anything new or a “Jennifer Lawrence only” thing.
Boutiques do that often for frequent buyers, not because J. Law “didn’t want to shop with other women.” One of the posters here pointed out that her grandmother was often given that privilege, and she wasn’t batting the millions around that A-listers were. Frankly, it was probably better for the story – a large crowd gathering around a major celebrity is the perfect opportunity for shoplifting to occur, AND it would likely push out other consumers.
It’s not uncommon and some boutiques have allotted times for appointments only. You don’t have to be a celebrity for the privilege, the only requirement is being a valued and frequent customer who makes it worth their time to offer this service.
JL is not my favorite but if she planned to do major shopping she probably wanted to avoid people whipping out their cellphones and snapping pics or calling friends to come see JL in the flesh.
Yup, such a spoiled rich bitch who just donated 2 million to the Kosair Children’s Hospital in Kentucky.
She clearly has no interest in anyone but herself.
Interesting points all around.
I’m often hesitant to point to any one single person (or smaller group) as an excuse for why an entire movement is wrong (and I don’t believe you were suggesting that) mostly because it really does take a few apples to spoil a bunch, especially with something someone already has feelings of apprehension about (BLM for me and others).
Still overall, I do think you bring up a lot of good points and you’re right I do think something does need to change in feminism’s…current efforts. It’s still coming off as tone-deaf and uninclusive.
I really like the Naeem Khan ensemble. Not particularly on her but it’s something I would wear (if I had the money and was less afraid of being nude in public). Agreed on the post-feminist era comments.
I love it. I absolutely love the embellished top.
When I look at Jen’s Dior choices, I’m glad Marion Cotillard (another Dior model) does not have a movie in contention this award season. This outfit is a disaster! And it’s only one of many disasters for J-Law. The hair is another one – washes her out completely and it looks damaged at the ends. If she keeps coloring, she’ll be carrying it in a bag soon. The metallic top is a bit better but it shows too much, IMO. She needs a year off from the movies.
Why do we tell women that they need to take “a year off from the movies” when she’s literally in the prime years of her life (according to hollywood’s sexist standards) & she’s the top actress of her generation at the moment.
Would you tell a female CEO to step down and take a year off if she’s at the peak of her career? or would you tell a female athlete to “take some time off” when she’s at her best?
Jennifer Lawrence is an actress and her job is to act. I mean, god forbid she actually do her job and act in films
Well taking time off can do good, rethinking your choices, and it’s Jennifer Lawrence who says she’s tired all the time. I can only hope if it’s happen that she will stop working with David o Russel, she’s always miscast in his film and although I think she is a good actress he makes her mediocre.
tbf people say it about male actors as well. it’s weird though, i get the problem with being overexposed and people getting tired (i sure am tired of jlaw) of the endless promotion, interviews etc, but it’s also true that actors are often flavour of the moment so they have to try and do as much work as they can when it’s their moment.
I think it is more about overexposure and less about gender. Overexposure can kill a career and cause a huge backlash that is hard to recover from and can turn into active dislike. She is getting close to this line and knows it.
Yikes. She is really looking old.
She makes a salient point about feminism and your comment is “yikes she looks really old”? That was your major takeaway from this story?
yeah exactly. and if she did look old, is a woman looking older than her age really that offensive?
Oh, come on. It’s a gossip site. My first though after reading the article and looking at the pictures was that her hair color is awful.
Chill, ladies. Gossip site, remember? Multithreaded replies – this thread just happens to be superficial and pointed to the pics accompanying the story. We’re all multifaceted, can’t the responses to this story be as well?
you think she’s looking old? I would think that at her young age she’d be free of ageism at least till she’s 35.
Interesting that this is a post about her at the Dinner for Equality and discussing feminism and all the comments thus far are about her appearance. I know,I know -this is a gossip blog….but interesting reflection on how we view women.
WORD! I couldn’t believe the comments. I came to express my joy because of her comment on feminism. that really is the most dangerous thing. even women think they’re not being discriminated and even they say feminism is old news. that’s so sad. feminism is still needed and big time.
I care deeply about feminism and wage equality, but I DONT usually care what some starlet thinks about it. It’s rarely a good idea or productive to the cause to have Hollywood actors become the face of it. This is not “because she’s a girl”- I feel the same way about Clooney and Darfur, for example. It’s great that celebs bring attention to a cause- then they should pipe down and let the pros discuss the finer points. Celebs rarely have the education or experience necessary to really be the face of a political cause. Sure, they can have an opinion, but I don’t care what it is. It’s their job to act and entertain. As such, I will insert a totally gossipy and non-Feminism-relevant comment: Jennifer Lawrence will not age well.
Word
Thank you.
You call yourself a feminist yet make comments on how other women look saying that “they won’t age well”. You don’t need to write a paragraph to try and justify your catty and mean comments that are unwarranted.
God forbid someone make the same ugly comments about your daughter or mother or sister.
Problem is that she’s a cog in the machine, playing parts that should go to women 15 years her senior. She’s not the cause of the problem, but she’s complicit in perpetuating the same factors that will kill her career at 30.
I do respect, though, that she walked away from a republican family as a teenager and began challenging their expectations for a girl.
“Problem is that she’s a cog in the machine, playing parts that should go to women 15 years her senior. She’s not the cause of the problem, but she’s complicit in perpetuating the same factors that will kill her career at 30.”
this. i don’t blame her for it, but now that she has choices and she isn’t just some new actress, she should think and talk about this.
I think you nailed the problem I have with miss Lawrence I do thing she’s a good actress but always miscast except in the best performance she ever gave Winter Bone.
this. its not like she is a starving actress who needs to appear topless to pay her bills. she could easily turn down stuff and never work again if it was so important to her. she takes the roles of older women and also of women of color.
i wont listen to her when she complains in a couple of years.
Don’t be ridiculous. It’s not her fault that she gets certain roles, it’s the industry. And all the people who go to the cinema and buy tickets have an impact on the industry too, because ultimately the studios do what the masses want to earn money. She’s actually the last one you should blame.
I’d blame the fact that she is playing roles meant for women 15 years older than her mostly on the director/s and good old Hollywood boys club.
When was the last time you saw an older Hollywood actor with an age appropriate love interest? By age appropriate, I don’t mean “only” 10 years younger but around the same age.
She’s still very young. I know that when I was her age, I certainly wouldn’t have caught on as to how the world works.
Ann – She’s 25 with 10 years experience in her field.
Her characters in SLP and Hustle were changed so she could play them, but otherwise all her characters have been age appropriate. In the case of Hustle, Amy Adams character and JLaw’s basically switched ages, which meant the older actress got the much larger lead role, and I don’t see how that’s a bad thing.
Joy had her playing a character younger than she is and around her own age for the majority of the film. The real Joy was a young single mother who was already a big success at 35. Towards the end JLaw was playing roughly 7-10 years older than she is, which is nothing for a biopic. If they’d cast a 40yr old she would have been playing 15-25 years younger than she was for like 75% of the film, which would be unusual to say the least.
You also bring up a very valuable point.
There’s a big issue lately with women not necessarilly seeing the damage they contribute to an issue merely because they already feel victimized. Jennifer Lawrence does not get paid enough for her movies but she also gets every single major role that comes out lately.
It does feel like if she was more concerned about a general issue she’d take small steps to fix the problem she’s contributing to…but I don’t think she will and that gives off the essence of Meryl Streep. Feminism is not merely a banner for your own suffering. It truly is/was supposed to be about equality. If you are too busy gushing about how much you love men while contributing to an unfair world for someone else then you are also part of the problem.
It doesn’t help that unfortunately she seems to fit a very specific block of woman in all of her success. White. Blonde hair. Blue eyes. Prime age.
Her stylist and Dior must really hate her.
Nah…. Did you not know that Dior is creating dresses just for her?! As if a label like Dior needs Lawrence… Rolling my eyes now.
Well Dior must think they have some need for Jennifer Lawrence – they are paying her $15 million a year to wear their stuff and appear in their ads, after all.
Her and Charlize Theron are the most high profile of Dior’s brand ambassadors right now. I’m not sure if Rhianna has a long term contract with Dior or if it was a short term one, similar to what Chanel does with most of their celebrity faces with the exception of Keira Knightley. Rhianna has had pieces remade from their archives. I don’t know why Dior hasn’t done that for Lawrence. Some of the original pieces may be deemed too fragile to be worn again, but let the Dior atelier make a new piece based on the original and archival material. Anything from the 1950s and Galliano era would be better than what was in the last couture collection.
They don’t ‘need’ her, as in they’ll shut up shop without her, but she’s clearly worth a lot to them since they pay her a fortune. If they didn’t think she was a major asset they’d have found someone they could pay $1-2 million instead of $15 million.
Is she still working with Rachel Zoe? Because that would potentially explain a lot.
Re: Feminism & “perceptions” (for lack of a better word). Firstly, I hope there is an agreement that the work is not yet done, i.e. there is still pervasive discrepancy in pay, promotions etc.
Secondly, although I disagree with what Madeline Albright said,I get where she is coming from. In any organized movement, the group focuses on agreed upon goals. And, it’s true that one sets aside individual goals and choices for the good of the greater goal. I am sure that is what happened in the civil rights movement as well. The real issue here, is that IMO Hillary is not the best candidate; she has too much baggage (actually the Clintons both do) and it’s very probable that a lot of legal stuff will hit the fan if she is the Dem candidate, prior to the general election. Back to the Feminism issue, I consider myself a strong advocate for women’s rights and equality of the sexes, but I don’t support abortion. I have no problem identifying as a Feminist-save for the abortion issue.
Amelie, I’m not going to try to change your opinion on abortion, but please do recognize that abortion is merely a band-aid over much deeper societal issues. We live in a society where teenagers in many states are denied proper sex ed and access to birth control. Many women work in jobs with limited to no paid maternity leave, to say nothing of child care. And, of course, there’s still rape. Everyone from churches to politicians is so busy condemning abortion, they have no time left to condemn violence against women with the same fervor.
We remove the numerous societal problems that lead to unwanted pregnancies, abortion suddenly isn’t so much of an issue. But that’s not the point, is it? While voters can so easily be manipulated to ignore issues such as jobs and safe drinking water, let’s continue debating abortion.
So very well said Amelie.
I also have issues with the fact that abortion and the need for it so often is directly tied to economic class and education. That as much as we like to believe otherwise there is a whole set of women being forced to have no options because they are unlucky enough to be poor or need two jobs or struggle with a basic high schools education.
I just can’t bring myself to believe their personal care is less important than a small clump of cells or even a baby. If we focus on the problems we have now (the women) and not the hypothetical problems (the babies) we might actually see the need for abortions to stop.
Furthermore let us say we have this perfect world, because I always wonder how people conceptualize this – not necessarilly addressing you specifically Amelie. What exactly is happening with these babies? Have we invented some 100% effective form of birth control? Have we managed to create some need monumental demand in adoptions? Have we cured all the ills and abuses of the adoption and foster care system? How very many things will we suddenly need to perfect to make one unpalatable option extinct? Because it sounds like saying we shouldn’t have human aid and fix world hunger, if we’ve fixed world hunger in a million more years (something nearly every person agrees on) I’ll be astounded let alone abortion that is treated so contentiously.
Excuse me I meant to say so very well said BettyRose .
Nobody support abortions it’s about women who make a choice with there own bodies.
There are multiple euphemisms and indirect ways (“choice”) of talking about abortion. It is what it is. And, you know what the ultimate choice is? The choice of responsible sexuality.
You sound like judgmental person who had no idea what journey these women had undergone. And you last sentence in case of rape is just utterly disgusting. Abortions is choice who regards the woman a doctor and HER body.
@Amelie: tell that to rape victims or women who get pregnant despite using contraception or teenagers who think the girl can’t get pregnant if they have a coitus interrupus.
To what everybody else wrote I add: responsible or irresponsible sexuality – none of your business. That’s only between the partners.
Lambda –
Nicely said. Sexuality isn’t wrong or dirty. It can have unintended consequences, but let’s just put that out there and have open discussions about it. Unintended pregnancies and STDs will still occur, but well-informed people with good medical coverage have a lot more options for addressing these scenarios. Let give everyone those options.
@Lambda, exactly! People need to stop punishing women for being sexual beings. Why anybody gets an abortion is only that woman’s problem. If your objections to abortion come to being mad at what you perceive as “irresponsible sexuallity” then you need to take a sit because that is none of your business. But hey, at least people are being truthful about it and stop saying is because of fetuses and stuff.
I truly believe if there was a broader sex education implemented in schools, abortion would be more of a non-issue. In regards to rape victims, I always assumed that is where emergency contraception came in. It beats waiting 5 weeks for a first-trimester abortion (if you do indeed become pregnant).
Paula,
That’s a good point. It’s not 1973. We have so many more options now. Emergency contraceptive is far preferable to abortion (I mean, for the woman who has to make the decision). But it’s currently way too expensive and not easy enough to access for those who truly need it. Yes, a rape survivor who goes to the ER right away has that option, as do women with incomes who live near pharmacies, but what about teen girls without $30 or a ride to a pharmacy?
“Why anybody gets an abortion is only that woman’s problem.”
The unborn kid may take issue with that opinion.
“And, you know what the ultimate choice is? The choice of responsible sexuality.”
By that you must mean “don’t have sexual intercourse and don’t get raped”, because even with birth control and even with sex with just one person, pregnancy is always a risk of sex between people of the opposite sex, unless somebody is infertile or has already gone through menopause.
@Star: Why should the “rights” of a first-trimester fetus or fertilized egg trump the rights of an already living, sentient person?
I honestly have to ask this question, because this view is actually one of the most unsettling arguments I see from the pro-life side – are you seriously suggesting that a child’s life should be a “consequence” to irresponsible sexual behavior? Because that seems in direct contradiction to the idea that we should be respecting the sanctity of life. Forcing a woman to have a child she doesn’t want isn’t going to magically make her a good or responsible parent. It isn’t going to erase poverty or drug addiction or selfishness or any of the other ugly reasons why abortion sometimes occurs. It isn’t going to make her WANT to be a parent if she really doesn’t want to. That argument bothers me specifically because it sets up a situation where a child can be used as a punishment for perceived misbehavior – and how is that making a good situation for anyone involved in it?
I’m pretty conservative by most pro-choice standards – I support some limitations and I strongly dislike the dehumanizing context in which abortion is sometimes framed – but this is one argument I can’t get behind. For me, I support abortion for the sake of the child as much as the adult – no child should be brought into the world who can’t or won’t be loved, cared for, or wanted.
@bettyrose and Paula
Here in the UK, we have halfway decent (albeit with vast room for improvement) sex ed in schools, free contraception available to all, and abortion pretty much on demand (except Northern Ireland).
Latest UN abortion figures are roughly 21 per 100,000 women for the US and 17 per 100,000 for the UK.
So if you consider that sex ed, contraception and abortion access are much more restricted in the US, yet the UK abortion rates are lower, we can pretty much safely say that access to all these things is likely to reduce abortion rates, as you were suggesting.
(BTW: UK abortions: 51% medical under 9 weeks. 92% first trimester. Only 1% at 18 weeks or over – and that 1% are the down-and-dirty tragic cases that all but the most stringent pro-lifers would see as permissible exceptions).
THANK YOU VERONICA
Staunchly pro-life as it exists now seems to depend on the person not pregnant or involved in the situation in anyway plugging their ears and shutting their eyes.
Do you truly want children born merely to suffer because of what? Your own flawed morality? A desire for women to be punished? A concept of religion that extends to no one but yourself?
Meanwhile when those children grow up to have possible issues and enter the system under punitive circumstances I’m sure the sympathy for them has long since disappeared when it was in such prominence for their little cells.
But can we really condemn abortion without discussing the socio-political climate that factors into these unwanted pregnancies? Lack of access to birth control, lack of proper sex education, not to mention the connections between poverty, education, and family planning. We’re not punishing women for having unwanted pregnancites, we’re punishing them for being poor.
@Star oh seriously are we in the 50s
No, are we in the Dark Ages when killing babies was no big deal?
It’s the 21st century, perhaps it’s time we stop acting like murderous barbarians.
People get taken off of life support every year in this country. What murderous barbarians we are!
Nice logical fallacy you have there.
How so? Both are examples of the potential for life being cut off. The difference is that conservatives are fine with one, but feel that the other is immoral. What’s logical about the belief that potential people matter more than actual people. The same politicians who had no problem forcing an 11-year-old-girl to give birth wouldn’t dare force a hospital or a patient’s family to keep someone on life support out of fear of preventing a potential life. People have the potential to come out of comas, you know.
Sorry I’m actually trying to reply to Star but having trouble as this is my first ever comment on here.
Star as a grown women who was almost aborted, I could tell you that as a fetus I wouldn’t have grudged her, had I even known. She gave up her life and dreams to give me mine. Had I been aborted, my mom (who became pregnant with me the same night she lost her virginity) may have not been tossed out of her house, may have gone on to be a lawyer like she dreamed of instead of working minimum wage jobs to support us, and may not have died at a young age from surgical complications leaving behind a daughter who not only misses her mom daily, but also spends her life without her only blood relative and wonders about the. “What if’s”
I always hear the what ifs in relation to the aborted fetus but what about the what ifs in relation to the womens life? You may not have to think about them but those are thoughts I have to live with-wondering if my mom would have had a better/longer life if I was aborted-every day.
@arwen- I hope you see this. I just wanted to tell you that your comment was profound and moving. I actually teared up a bit. Thanks so much for sharing your perspective.
ArWen
There are no words. Thank you for sharing. Sadly, your experience is also another realistic issue people shut themselves off from. I truly think those against abortion struggle with empathy and true consideration. We can not merely pretend we flip a switch and it’s all wonderful and fine. Merely being born guarantees you to nothing and many people have confessed the resentment their mothers felt at being denied an abortion for any number of reasons was passed down and directed at them.
The lack of abortion didn’t save them from anything, it merely offered them abuse and a parent who ultimately truly did not want them but was now ‘stuck’.
I’m not saying this about you Arwen, the opposite is also true. Many women come to terms with their choice and feel some happiness at the child they now love and care for. That’s why it IS a choice. Because a woman should be able to decide for herself and if she chooses to do so have her choice embraced by a society that will help her regardless.
If you look up the definition of feminism, I think most if not all of us would concur (you don’t want equal rights as men?). Disavowal comes from, perhaps, who uses the term and how they use it. Whatever term–other than “feminism”–that we might come up with that has to do with women, some would disagree with it–feelings about sexism, gender roles, etc are SO deeply ingrained in us individually (from decades of unconscious actions each of us encounters).
My only issue with the idea of creating a new term is that ultimately that’s not the problem.
When we say we ‘want’ to be equal we have to keep in mind…a lot of folks actually don’t want women to be equal. There’s an insidious nature to the way we set up this system with women and if you listen to how political candidates speak about women it’s clear there’s a detachment from truly wanting women to succeed and wanting some static version of women to be placeholders.
They want us smiling and ‘happy’ but not really equal. Equal pay, equal rights, bodies autonomous, no longer dependent. It actually quite terrifies many people so they work subtly to frame it as an issue with a term or the actions of a few so that we’re all spinning in circles not realizing they’re treating us like puppets except their hands are up our vaginas.
Take the time to appreciate all the things you can’t do state by state merely because you’re a woman and you realize it could be called anything and some would still fight against it.
Ugh, sometimes this is why I hate it when celebs talk about feminism. I’m pretty sure the term ‘post-feminism’ came from people who wanted to move away from talking about a strain of feminism (ie: second-wave). It’s not just about people saying that gender equality has been achieved now, it’s also about a strain of intellectual movements that try to talk about gender in a more nuanced way. some post-feminist work includes questioning the idea of how society has defined itself through very gendered ideas, and whether it helps things like, for instance, trans rights. Post-feminism can be very broad and undefined, and sometimes it is even a continuation of feminist work.
Some post-feminists do talk about the idea of feminism not being necessary anymore. But like any other term intellectuals have abused to death, it has a myriad of meanings, some of which is important work. For JLaw to come in and define it as particularly anti-feminist just infuriates me.
/end rant
She did not go to college. She finished high school 2 years early. I don’t know if she was home schooled. I do know that she is no one to be giving advice about feminism. Celebrity does not make you educated. Riches and entitlement do not make you clever or correct. She is no better equipped to spout off her feminist beliefs than a Kardashian, who is not equipped at all.
Even people with college degrees can be (sometimes horrifically) problematic and blinded by privilege. I don’t think that should be what determines which women get to discuss their feminist beliefs and which ones don’t. That’s basically like saying that the guy with the degree gets to discuss his beliefs about equality but the woman who dropped out of high school doesn’t even though she has lived experience as a woman in a patriarchal society and came to learn and be interested in feminism through other women and feminists.
Exactly.
I think the idea that someone not truly educated on a subject should prob not be a spokesperson for anything. But again that can also have the effect of saying to the same poor and uneducated that their own opinions and thoughts are worthless.
It’s a struggle.
Nah I disagree. Inequality is something that affects many people and you do not need a formal education (that’s a very elitist opinion!) to be able to discuss it. Sure, it may not come out as polished as someone who has studied extensively but the opinions are valid and important nonetheless. Every woman’s experience is different – we don’t only need to hear about those of ‘intelligent’ women. I care to know about all women.
She also doesn’t need your permission to be outspoken about this issue which she is clearly interested in. When you start quantifying someone’s worthiness to discuss feminism, you start down a bad path.
Yet she makes no changes in the industry and contintues to work with David O Russell.
She needs to put her money where her mouth and start getting more female directors work, she has the power to do but she refuses to do anything.
No, she needs to put her money where her mouth is and give her co-lead Chris Pratt some of her Passengers payday. Equal pay, right?
And for anyone who says she “deserves” more money than Pratt because she’s more of a draw, Joy (which will likely lose money) proved her box office power is a complete mirage.
Joy’s already made money. It’s very close to $100 million worldwide, which is actually really great for a film of it’s type. It’s not JLaw’s fault some spectacular idiot gave DOR $60 million (his highest budget by far) to play with, if the film had been made for $20 million as it should have been, it would be hailed as a big success. DOR is the one who failed here, and the studio let him.
For comparisons sake, Carol has made around $35 million worldwide, The Danish Girl has made around $50 million worldwide, Room has made around $22 million worldwide. Similarly not so good recent biopics like J.Edgar (Leo Dicaprio) and The Soloist (RDJ and Jamie Foxx) made way less than Joy. Black Mass has made almost exactly the same as Joy on a very similar budget with very similar reviews, and it’s actually seen as a financial and critical highlight of Depp’s recent career history.
Joy did unusually well for what it was, especially considering it got very mixed reviews. That it didn’t tap out $50 million ago has a lot to do with JLaw.
Equal pay for equal work does not mean everybody gets the same slice of pie. That’s a strawman’s perception of what the intent of that argument really is. The point is that people should be awarded on the same merit system as everybody else, regardless of sex, gender, race, etc. If I am coworkers with a man working commission and he happens to be a more persuasive seller than I am, then he absolutely deserves to be paid more even if we’re doing the same amount of work. However, if we work in the same office and have the same credentials, education, and experience, and he gets promoted and paid over me despite equally proficient performances, that’s a problem.
Hollywood rewards celebrities based on their financial draw and star appeal. Jennifer Lawrence went into negotiations for the movie having two majorly successful franchises under her belt and an Oscar win. Chris Pratt is still in the stages of becoming established and his negotiated paycheck reflects that. There is nothing unequal about the pay scale there based on the industry’s perception of what both stars are capable, regardless of your personal opinion of J. Law’s audience draw.
While I agree it’s disingenuous to hold J. Law up as a pinnacle of feminist achievement, I will point out that she and Amy Schumer are currently working together on trying to get a script off the ground on a movie that would be female-character driven. If there’s more of an issue there to critique, it’s that white women are more likely to benefit from the narrative she’s presenting than anyone else.
There was a time I felt like so much had been achieved in equality and feminism, that we had covered the major battles and the next steps wouldn’t need as big a fight since the fundamentals had been won and universally understood.
And in that complacency watched as regression started. Hard won battles repealed or regressed and women started not to declare themselves as feminists as if it were a dirty word. And even contributed to debates by people and idjits who want to regress to a time before feminism.
As if the less progressive countries aren’t a beacon as far as modern examples of what life would be like in a society where women have no rights or are second class citizens.
There was a moment in time when we were living in a post-feminist era. Sadly we’ve regressed. And have to fight all over again.
It might seem like there was a time when feminism was winning and had established, as you said, certain “fundamentals” for everyone (sexual harassment = bad, equal pay = good, etc.), but actually whatever may have been a tipping point was accompanied by serious regression. Susan Faludi’s Backlash was published in 1991 (I just checked the date), so that means that even in the late 1980s, the backlash had already begun. Really, I don’t think it was “backlash” per se, I think every time feminism — equal rights for women — took two steps forward, there were lots and lots of corners of society, culture, politics, and just plain old domestic/family conventions pushing that movement four steps back. It’s always been a struggle, in other words. Yes we’ve gained a lot of ground but there are still corners of this country that resist, resist, resist the idea that women are, and should be considered, humans of equal value as men in every way.
I have the feeling that new generations forgot to fight for equality. My mother and my grandmother had to fight for their rights, but my generation hadn’t had the urgent need to fight for it, because at first sight we had almost everything we wanted. So it slowed down and regressed.
LAK, aren’t you black? I was wondering about your thoughts on intersectionality
Well said, LAK.
You really hit the nail on the head.
I do think there needs to be an effort in consolidating the fight of feminism (which is of course impossible because of all the diverging schools, opinions, and groups) because right now it does feel like the fight was slowly lost due to complacency and comfort with those ‘wins’.
i dont expect J-Law to be up to date in feminist theory. But the actual term ‘Post-Feminism’ is a legitimate term, it describes the type of feminism that permeates Western capitalist media outlets and discourse. It’s been described as the playground of the ‘white, middle class/upper class, heterosexual cis gendered woman.’ where progress and equality are defined in achieving these identities. The common belief within this perspective is this claim that ‘if i have the choice to bang whoever i want, to work and take a break to be a mom – I have all the choice I want. Why do i need a collective political movement like Feminism?’. It’s a perspective that is really tied up in individualism, consumerism and neoliberalism. White Western Capitalist society is very much in a Post-Feminist era.
But its the current movement of ‘Intersectional’ Feminism thats really challenging and fighting for women. There is a lot more nuance to these arguments that never really get schooled on unless you want to educate yourself.
Bam! Great post, pepsicola!
Not to derail, but I remember reading something similar about the demise of labor movements in the US. Among other things, it involved the (false) sense of reaching goalposts, plus one’s identity changing from producer to consumer, hence individuals are easier to atomize.
Absolutely.
I am reading a lot of current sociological research on intersectionality. Also, in a UK context, how the financial crash and subsequent austerity has rolled back the progress towards equality that feminism had hitherto achieved. All tied to neoliberalism. All tied to the age-old arguments rooted in women’s biology and unpaid caring labour.
Exactly!
The term isn’t wrong by itself and in fact I think addresses someone as specifically as Jennifer Lawrence. Intersectional feminism is what’s needed!
Not gonna lie… the comments here are pretty frightening. Yes the word feminism comes with baggage but still encourages equality. The point that as a actor you don’t get the right to speak for or on behalf of feminism. Says who? You. Also, had Jen said something really ridiculous then I get the issue – but she didn’t. And equating equality to her 2 role choices is a big leap.. Lame argument to say 2 roles with questionable age variations bars you from speaking on pay and gender equality? Really. Well working in HW actually makes you a large part of any workforce discussion on the topic. Instead of asking more people to be quiet who can actually accurately articulate the need for more action, you’re fighting for sitting on your hands until you like the person doing the talking. Do better women.
I’m sorry but it’s not a “lame” argument if she accepts those role she’s a part of the problem. Wait five years when she’ll complain that there isn’t enough part for women over 30 in Hollywood. What your doing is also a part of the problem, dismiss the responsibility of the actors it’s the same thing for Whitewashing blaming everyone but not the actors who accept the part.
Ages have been changed for her twice, in SLP and Hustle. With Hustle that meant the character Amy Adams played was made older, thus allowing the older actress to get the bigger and juicier role. So it was actually a positive thing.
In Joy she played younger than she was and around her own age for the majority of the film. At no point was she playing a 40yr old, at most she was playing 10 years older than she is for a handful of scenes. Considering it’s a biopic, that’s not much. Actors are frequently aged up to play 20, 30, 40 years older than they are in biopics. Unless you think they should have brought in a teenager to play some of the role, then JLaw, then an actress in her mid-thirties for the end, I don’t get how people can have a problem with this. The real Joy was a young single mom who found success in her mid-thirties. The story was primarily about how she reached that success, so obviously an actress in her twenties was going to play her.
I disagree with your assessment of the above actually.
One thing I’ve noticed? People are afraid of discussion. Discussion is not a perfect polished conclusion to be presented to the masses. It is the meeting of minds and opinions in the hopes of achieving some higher level of thought. Not a single post above yours offended me because all of the people speaking we’re bringing their own thoughts and experiences to this very important issue and the only way we actually will make progress in making any kind of positive ground on this issue is if we start taking our philosophies and thoughts and applying them to real world situations.
No one will always perfectly agree. Especially under the umbrella of a group that argues to bring together ALL women, be they disabled, POC, transgender or what have you. But ALL those opinions are important. I think a lot of good points were brought up about how a victimized person can also contribute to the harm of someone else. Take any topic and a minority group can also have a hand in furthering a system that hurts itself and others and how do we take responsibility for that?
I’m fine with her usage of “post-feminism” if she’s referring to colloquial usage and the problematic implications that come with using the prefix post- to describe any social movement. It’s easy to lose sight of the need of social movements to be consistently evolving with the society around it. I would hope getting involved here would eventually motivate her to do more research on her own time. The problem with major celebrities getting involved in these kind of movements is that they are generally uneducated and, frankly, their wealth buffers them from much of the significant impact of these issues down the line.
I dont want to distract from the issue at hand but … whats with her face? She is young talented and gorgeous there isn’t any meed for her to do that to herself!! Very sad to see.
Firstly I want to say that I am glad she is highlighting how badly staunchly conservative families affect a child. it is very important for people to realise families can be toxic too.
Secondly, I am ready for her to start talking about intersectionality, of how worse women in unorganised sectors have it. I know she acknowledges that she is privilaged but that works once. You have to start sharing your privilage.
The dress is horrid. Hope she is saving the best for the Oscars.
Yeah that would be nice. Seems like the only women bringing intersectionality to the forefront of the conversation are young WoC. It’s nice to see, but I agree that white feminists need to get on-board and step it up.
Yes. Specially when POC do not have as much reach as she does.
Ugh, I had a whole comment and it got deleted. I just want to say I agree with you. Some days I can’t help but feel like feminism is doing everything in its power NOT to address the needs of WOC.
Even among the young proud feminists. I often see them fighting over the crumbs of the privilege cake (“Why can’t I wear a crop top or sports bra to class?”) rather than addressing the issues WOC face. It’s unfortunate because I think as time goes forward that is one of the things truly damaging feminism from the inside out.
I do not believe in forst world feminism. I believe there is space to fight for women wearing crop tops and staying out late at night as there is space for how women from non western countries are discriminated against. Where i am from it is illegal to know the sex of a child before birth due to female infanticide. there is child marriage, child rape, prostitution, acid attacks and all. But women here do speak about it very strongly as they speak about their independence to dress. I feel a lot of white feminists simply do not care.
Some of her family thought the biggest movie star in the world’s career would be over because she spoke up for equal pay for women? Ugh. I can’t imagine thinking that way.
I can’t imagine being related to people like that.
It’s such a shame how people raise their children to focus more on appeasing people or making them like you rather than making the world be a better place for them. Like men who tell young women to act like ladies or defend mistreatment to women by saying ‘their’ daughters would never act that way.
Honestly lucy2 and LAK, I hate it but that is very common. Not just among conservatives, there is def a concern about “rocking the boat,” and that women should smile and be grateful and shut up. It freaks me out but I see and hear of it all the time. Much like the ” aggressive businessman is impressive” but the “aggressive businesswoman is bossy or or b$&@h.”
Sorry, I meant eternal side eye not LAK. Apologies!
Enough talking ladies. Put your money where your mouth is and start producing films written, directed, produced by women, with crew members that are at least half women, with stories about women. Give incentives to minority writers, director and producers because that’s where everything starts, awards are just the end of the game.