Dankprofessor’s Weblog

A weblog examining sexual politics in higher education and beyond.

On THE VIEW Emma Thompson silent on Polanski

The Emma Thompson scenario re Roman Polanski is getting more and more bizarre. As I   indicated in a previous post, a number of feminist blogs and then the media in general reported that Thompson was to withdraw her name from a petition in support of Roman Polanski.  Apparently Thompson indicated to a student at Exeter College where she was lecturing that her name would be withdrawn from the petition.

What the dankprofessor found to be strange was that there was no public statement by Thompson announcing said withdrawal.  And to add to this strangeness, yesterday Thompson appeared on THE VIEW with an audience of a couple of million and said absolutely nothing about Polanski.

Such must have been disheartening to those avowed feminists who were very excited about Emma’s apparent withdrawal.  But as the dankprofessor has previously stated such is contradictory with feminism since these people are looking up to a power figure for validation, and, in this particular case, looking up to a celebrity.

And what also disturbs the dankprofessor is not that Emma Thompson signed or not signed or changed her mind about signing a petition, but rather that she finds signing to be sufficent.   Is it too much to expect the Emma Thompson make a public statement indicating her reasons for signing or not signing?  Signing a petition is easy, explaining why one signed is not so easy.  Are the anit-Polanski crusaders going to give a pass to Thomspson because she is a celebrity?

About these ads

November 10, 2009 - Posted by | Emma Thompson, rape, Roman Polanski, sex, sexual politics, Uncategorized

2 Comments »

  1. “Such must have been disheartening to those avowed feminists who were very excited about Emma’s apparent withdrawal. But as the dankprofessor has previously stated such is contradictory with feminism since these people are looking up to a power figure for validation, and, in this particular case, looking up to a celebrity.”

    Feminists don’t consider her a “power figure.” They consider her a woman. They were disheartened that a woman would sign a petition defending a rapist.

    Comment by julie | November 14, 2009 | Reply

  2. Emma Thompson was chosen because she is a celebrity and in no way has organized feminism distanced “themsevles” from the celebrity cultism. We are all involved to some degree. But it is sad that feminism which holds equality in such high regard embraces the celebrity cult. I went from feminist blog to feminist blog and so many were so enthralled by Thompson, they wanted her so much to distance herself from Polanski. It was so important to them since she was no ordinary woman. Somehow her word was the sacred word. But even when Emma said nothing, was on THE VIEW and said nothing, they still believed in Emma. Celebrityhood is about false gods, the deification of mortal human beings. IMHO feminists should not embrace said deification. The fact is that Emma has said nothing about Polanski publicly. Just signing a petition does not represent independent thinking.

    Comment by dankprofessor | November 15, 2009 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 47 other followers

%d bloggers like this: