Can I complain about something? I’m actually all for industry media outlets like Variety and The Hollywood Reporter devoting special issues to “the Power of Women” and “the state of women in the industry,” that sort of thing. I think until women achieve pay equity and until women are more widely accepted in powerful roles (director, producer, director of photography, cinematographer, etc), we need to keep assessing and celebrating those women with a voice.
Variety’s current issue is one of those special editions devoted to The Power of Women. And one of their cover girls is… Blake Lively. Okay, so that was always going to be a problem. But then the profile isn’t even about her CAREER. It’s not “this actress made a small-budget movie, The Shallows, and it was so successful.” It’s not “Blake tried to launch an online lifestyle shop/site and failed and here’s what she learned.” The Power of Women, it seems, is not in their career achievements or what lessons they learned from failing. The Power of Women is in their charity and advocacy work. That’s the message, because Blake’s Variety profile is all about her work with the Child Rescue Coalition. It’s a good organization and I’m sure they were happy for the attention and the boost in fundraising. But is this representative of “the Power of Women”?
As for the profile… Blake is “working with the Child Rescue Coalition on promoting a groundbreaking technology that flags the IP addresses of people who share and download sexually explicit images of minors.” According to the CEO of the non-profit, Blake used her celebrity to get the organization a meeting at a technology summit at Facebook. For Blake, it’s about saving children, but it’s also about people being mean on the internet. She told Variety: “I have [Googled myself] before and it’s just ended in full depression. So I think it’s a good rule of thumb not to Google yourself because the Internet is not nice.” Yeah, internet criticism of celebrities =/= child p0rn.
Cover courtesy of Variety, additional photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.
Blake’s against child pornography and exploitation, but she worked with and publicly defended Allen. Consistent.
That said, happy that Child Rescue Coalition got attention.
Fighting child porn is a good thing. Without exceptions or doubts.
Just sometimes there are agendas masking with morally good causes.
For example in Germany there was this “Operation Himmel” (operation heaven).
There was a national investigation against 12.000 suspects which might have used child pornography. They got the IP adresses from a laptop.
In the end 80%-90% of all court cases were closed within weeks for lack of evidence because apparently some parents had shared merely pics of their children in summer clothes with their families via the internet and similar.
I don’t know how many cases actually ended in a conviction.
But what happened was this: a member of the German Federal Government demanded laws and institutions to censor the internet.
I am not saying that Lively has bad intentions here.
But looking at Lively’s career and connections you have to conclude she works and networks with the right people to get a career. I would say she is one of these “anything it takes to achieve my goals” persons which I dislike. Let me explain why I dislike this attitude: the german translation for “anything it takes to achieve my goals” would be: “go over dead corpses” and that means you are willing to kill a person to achieve your goals. “Anything it takes” means you don’t care for moral codes nor for laws nor for anything.
Lively’s lifestyle website failed. And I think that now she is trying a new approach.
I really think the onus of this debacle falls to the Child Rescue Coalition. They should have better vetted the celebrity face they wanted to attach to their organization’s name.
I’m sure Blake had only the purest of intentions when she stepped to up be an advocate for this particular group. Unfortunately, she—and the Coalition—forgot the expression: “If you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas.”
If Woody Allen had only forgotten to pay his taxes or burned down a vacant building or even failed to use his turn signal at a stop sign, we wouldn’t be talking about this.
But the fact that Lively is an open acquaintance with Allen is a game changer. We all know Allen’s story: the alleged accusations of impropriety with a minor(s) coupled with the disgusting facts that we already know to be true.
Does this mean Blake cosigns Allen’s behavior? I would think not. However, if I was a parent who had ties with the Child Rescue Coalition or was an actual sponsor, I sure as hell would be demanding answers as to why an “Allen Sympathizer” has become the face of what the Coalition stands for.
It’s not just criticism, is it though. My friend is a actress and she’s read comments saying that they wished She was raped and killed.
What possesses people to say #### like that. 😣 I will always believe there must be sthg wrong with a person’s emotional state if a celeb should ever send you deranged like that.
Are you familiar with Gamergate? That was BAD.
Wow. Was unaware of Gamergate. It’s pretty chilling how grave the misogynist backlash against feminism really is. I hate giving them more attention but women should really be aware of these things and the threats out there these days. It’s really chilling to read the red pill Reddit, this pickup artist, gamer stuff, it’s like they’re all related. Anyway I’m bummed the magazine relegated a woman’s influence to charity and care taking. Those are great things. But women are surpassing men in many fields academically and professionally right now and since knowledge is power, I would say those women deserve more focus. Seems a bit sexist to focus on charity.
She and Ryan have worked hard with several child hospices here for many years so I’ll give them that. But yeah, the interview doesn’t compute.😔
She is the not nice one. Her stupid character ruined the shallows and she never ever talked about that Shark during the entire promo. Not once. The shallows wasn’t successful because of your hair or your post baby body, you know? Of course you know.
People are usually mean to subpar ditz’ that glorify the Antebellum South and jump in to defend pedophiles like Woody Allen. Grow up. You’re a blond white woman in Hollywood. You’ll be fine.
+100000
+ 100000000000000000
She wants to stop child pornography but works with Allen who took explicit pictures of his step daughter who he later had an inappropriate relationship and married? That’s not even getting into the fact he raped his other daughter. But she wants to advocate for abused kids? But I guess like Heard, who has a record for abusing her ex but still is the face for anti-DV, Blake too will get a pass because it’s not about the messenger but the message right? Well at least when the messenger is a conventionally attractive white woman anyway.
And to be able to devote much of your time to volunteerism and philanthropy you need to be independently wealthy, or have a husband who is successful.
So the only way to be a powerful woman is to snag a wealthy husband, or to be so yourself. Got it.
Good for her on the charity work. No shade there.
But does that belong on the cover of “the power of women” edition? I don’t think so, especially when someone like Reese Witherspoon is becoming a legit power player, or Ava DuVarney who is hustling and creating not only opportunities for herself but also opportunities for other women directors.
I see what you are saying but she’s beautiful and that sells magazines.
Not really, her Vogue cover was one of the magazine’s worst-selling issues that year. She’s more suited to mid-range titles like Allure or Cosmo.
@African Sun-
Love your avi and agree with you.
Yeah, Lively consistently gives mags including Elle and Allure their highest sellers.
Alex Shulman was desperate to get her on Vogue UK while she was editor.
But celebs on mags are a ___shoot. And even a huge star like Rihanna remains one of Vogues worst sellers but there’s no question about her getting covers there.
How is she relevant enough for a magazine cover? SO many more deserving women.
It’s nice she’s involved with causes, sure. But all I see is a passable actress who got a nose job, boob job, veneers. Others have, too, I know. For some reason that’s all I see when I look at her–not much else.
Child pornography is bad, so is taking nude pictures of your partner’s underage daughter.
Sounds like a great charity. I wish more resources were spend on this issue by the government. She is just barely pulling off the cover look because the tank top looks almost like spanx. Her hair is gorgeous though.
Preserve was SO terrible
I think charity work is more important than acting in regards to the power for women. But to highlight that they should use a founder of the charity, not a celeb liaison. Charity will tackle rape culture faster than any acting jobs, in my humble opinion
Allen gets a pass because he’s an ARH-teeeeest. (Eff you, Allen).
Being anonymous and behind a keyboard people do say cruel things they’d never say to your face. They dont see the hurt they inflict so I agree with her. She’s doing her bit for charity so good on her.
Why is a woman’s power only associated with her career? I am a working woman with a great career but I don’t consider that to be my only defining “power” as a woman. If I had the time to devote to charities and do other important work like that I would consider it more important than the job I do, regardless of my success.
Personally I think this criticism takes away from feminism and casts women as not powerful unless they have a career. It does not support the cause.
Variety is a trade publication, for one thing.
But another, why can’t we have the expectation that women can be powerful in their careers? Why must we settle for “she does this too”? I’m sure Blake’s work is very worthy and worthwhile, but powerful? How many of us actually knew about Blake’s charity work? If this were Melinda Gates we were talking about, I’d agree – there’s no denying the incredible influence she wields.
Dry white toast with a bad “look at my ring” pose
She looks gorgeous in that dress and the blue editor’s cape. Gorgeous woman!
Blake Lively seriously had the most obvious nose job in the world and it’s super super great. That being said, isn’t it insane how so little is actually mentioned about her very obvious plastic surgery??!!!
Anyway, I can’t with this white privilege/white feminism BS that she spews. I bet you she can’t even spell intersectional feminism.
She speaks of feminism and today at the Variety event she told off a female journalist who ‘dared’ ask her about her outfit. Blake’s IG is full of pics of her clothes and jewelry, she is known to love fashion and she got mad at this simple question.
The internet might not be nice but there are rumours what you did to have the career you have.
Weinstein.
And no, those rumours aren’t nice 😉
Oh and I bet that so little is mentioned about her obvious plastic surgery because she knows the right people in the right way and that is why the press won’t report.
Remember when the DailyMail tried to sell Meghan Fox as an all-natural-beauty? Fox is a very beautiful woman and a talented actress.
I am not even ONE IOTA SORRY FOR SAYING THIS but the shallows was AWESOME – the end
LOL. Come on out.
But it did good business, so people clearly agree with you.
I don’t necessarily think being powerful *has* to do with making money. Yes, she has a rich husband and is probably pretty well off on her own. My argument is that she could choose to stay home and do nothing. Instead, she’s apparently chosen to get very involved in a great cause and she can afford to. That shows strength and, depending on her position in the organization possibly power as well. I was surprised at the choice because I haven’t heard of her in quite a while and didn’t know she was doing this, but I don’t see why she wouldn’t qualify as a powerful woman.
I see she’s trying to stay relevant – it’s for a good cause and I don’t doubt that she’s sincere in wanting to eradicate images of child abuse.
But as a survivor and in light of the Woody Allen defending, I can safely say she’s either very stupid or actively trying to brush under the carpet her own defence of a child molester.