‘Self-partnered’ Emma Watson is right : we need more ways to be single | Brigid Delaney | Film | The Guardian
▻https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/nov/06/self-partnered-emma-watson-is-right-we-need-more-ways-to-be-single
▻https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/3d913711364a7515f23e80e39b000896a88c6f98/0_72_3070_1842/master/3070.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=85&auto=format&fit=crop&overlay-ali
When Emma Watson described herself as “self-partnered” in an interview with British Vogue this week, the term was met with a mixture of ridicule and praise. Predictable masturbation jokes were made.
Like Gwyneth Paltrow’s use of the phrase “conscious uncoupling” to describe her separation from her husband Chris Martin, or Mark Ronson’s recent (albeit accidental) announcement that he was “sapiosexual” (attracted to intelligence before appearance), any deviations from the limited language we have around relationships is met with mockery.
And then there is what Emma Watson described. “If you have not built a home, if you do not have a husband, if you do not have a baby, and you are turning 30, and you’re not in some incredibly secure, stable place in your career, or you’re still figuring things out ... There’s just this incredible amount of anxiety,” said the Ivy League-educated UN ambassador and Bafta winner, in what some have pointed out is a telling sign of the times. “It took me a long time, but I’m very happy [being single]. I call it being self-partnered.”
Je ne suis pas très fan de la survalorisation revendicative (j’édite, je ne sais pas comment dire) de modes de vie marginaux (anarchisme du mode de vie) mais pourquoi s’empêcher de nommer des attitudes qui existent ? Et surtout je découvre la position d’Emma Watson, cette manière féministe de revendiquer d’être une femme #célibataire, #seule, libre et ça lui va très bien ! @mona dans Sorcières a montré comment cette indépendance était perçue comme menaçante, ça expliquerait la haine et le sarcasmes déchaînés contre Watson sur les réseaux.
