Thirteenth Bit of Media—Anne Hath a Brain

Over winter break I saw this interview of Anne Hathaway, one of the stars of the new film Les Miserables and now one of my favorite people. I was reminded of this interview by the documentary we watched in class.

For his first question, the interviewer brings up an incident in which photographers took pictures that showed up Hathaway's dress when she was wearing no underwear.

Before we go any farther, WHAT? This interview is about the MOVIE, not Anne Hathaway's privates. They're called PRIVATE for a reason. Why is this guy talking about something so personal as this when he's supposed to be asking Hathaway about the goshdarn MOVIE?!

This incident was an unfortunately all-too-common one, what with the paparazzi trailing anyone remotely famous and trying as best they can to get pictures of those people as undressed physically and emotionally as possible. But what was uncommon and inspirational was Hathaway's response to this incident being brought up. Instead of simply acting embarrassed or trying to move on, Hathaway addressed the issue with one of the thematic ideas of the movie. She expressed her sadness that instead of deleting pictures of her in "a vulnerable moment," the reporters kept the pictures and even sold them to be published worldwide. And she said she was sad that her sexuality was unwillingly sold, just as in the movie. For this thoughtful, dignified response to such a crude and sexist question, I truly admire her.

But the interviewer, EURGH! His response to her answer: "That's one of the most creative turns of a question I have ever heard, and I'm gonna take it at that, that's fine." No "Yeah, you're right!" or "I never thought of it that way" or any sign that he was listening or understood. No respect. Just "Wow, you changed the subject in a really interesting way! I guess I won't press you on it, even though it's my G-d-given right to know everything about your embarrassment at having the world see under your skirt." Why is this interview eerily reminiscent of the documentary we were watching in our critical thinking class? Why was this guy so mean and creepy and sexist?

And the comments on the video. I was heartened to see much support for Hathaway, but then I got to comments like these:

Because victim-blaming is always the right way to approach a situation. Because Anne Hathaway, despite her lucrative and talented acting career, is actually a prostitute. Because being a prostitute makes one inherently dirty and shameful. Because everyone watching this wants to see Anne Hathaway's private parts.

Not.

How is it that these people blame Hathaway for observing a common Hollywood practice (underwear leaves noticeable lines when worn under most of the dresses these actresses wear)? How is it that they pretend they know her motives for wearing that outfit? And how is it that they assert these motives were to show her body to them? Why does she need attention from the likes of them? Hathaway is a talented, insightful young woman, and therefore can get attention from deeper thinkers and more respectful people than these.

But even though these comments were by far the minority, their stupidity, arrogance, and sexism shocked me. I was unprepared for so violent a response to so graceful a performance. When I saw that documentary in critical thinking, I got a taste of how sexist the world really is. I saw the numbers behind the problem, and some pretty moving stories as well. But seeing these comments made by people on my belovéd internet, YouTube no less, felt all the more scary. If this eloquent woman isn't safe from the vicious remarks of these people, how can I feel safe?

How can I feel safe in a world in which I must conform and wear the dress, but am then blamed for it?

This angered and scared me a lot. If even on the Today Show, a news anchor was willing to talk about a woman as if she was merely a body seen by millions and not an Academy Award and Golden Globe nominee, then the documentary we watched was right: we have a long way to go.