Umm...I've seen you in mini-skirts...and I've seen under them (ala Paris Hilton), so...when was this quote made? Must have been during the first movie or something LOL.
Coming from the girl who has an upskirt picture....I don't care though. I really really love Emma Watson and this quote only makes my love stronger. I think she might be a dementor though, cuz she just took my breath away...
pay no attention to the fact that this is coming from a woman who has several photographs (albeit paparazzo) of her genitals showing due to her lack of proper clothing....just sayin'
Yeah, I agree with her. I'm liking Emma more and more! If you're into quality relationships, then this is a great, wonderful quote. If you're looking for something quick and all-out for one night, then maybe giving nothing to imagine is a fun thing. Personally, and I think Emma would agree, that the latter isn't at all great. And for those who think someone who reveals little at first means she'll never reveal anything, she'll reveal things for the right guy at the right time, which, I must say, is a hundred times better than giving it all up at the table. Both parties benefit, you have no idea. Hooray for those who don't sell out, or sell themselves to the world!
I love her class but why is her hair so short when her hair longer and curly was beautiful. Really short hair on girls just doesn't do it for me, no offense.
She said this when she had just become 18.
She is now 22. If 4 years is not enough to grant someone a change of heart. Everyone on Earth is a hypocrite.
No, a change of heart occurs in things trivial enough to allow for a retention of who she was in the span of four years, for her not to have changed as a person. If, however, they have their pitiful "change of heart" in things major enough to suffice to change who it is she was to someone else in these four years, granted she is a hypocrite. If I order milk at a restaurant after ranting two days ago that it is horrible, this is not hypocritical but rather your "change of heart." If I speak out against murder then murder a man in even 7 years, this is hypocritical.
Actually it is pretty normal for people to change once they've actually become adults. As I said, she had JUST become 18 when she released those statements. Murdering a man affects people around you, her deciding to take naked pictures of herself is not.
Also, she has released many statements claiming the picture to be fake. Unless proven otherwise your point is moot.
Knowledge being an illusion, we can be certain of nothing. All points are thus rendered moot by such a view. She can deny it until the day denial ceases to exist, but one places logic over words of bias from likely hypocritical celebrities. It is clear whether an object is fabricated or real. We need not the words of those blamed to justify it for they will always choose to say they are the former. We don't need proof to understand that human beings are sadly shallow and easily corruptible. Also hypocrisy has nothing to do with the effect your action has on people in the vicinity or halfway across the world.
Not really, if she admitted to it then this point wouldn't be moot. Also, let's say they are real, she didn't take the photos herself, paparazzi did, something she cannot control.
She is an adult now, not a naive 18 year old as she was when she made those comments. One way or another, there is no proof of hypocrisy. Making this a case of "guilty until proven innocent" is just plain wrong. Oh wait, countless news websites have proven her innocence.
Next.
I don't know who agreed with you, but a reality check would be necessary. Of course to you the paparazzi are deities of perversion, capable of catching her naked uncountable times and whenever they can. She offered herself to such a decision. You do not take pictures with poses unwillingly; a rape victim does not radiate a glow of beaming smiles while being abused and neither does a person who is not modeling. You cannot follow a "guilty until proven innocent" for such matters that have truth discernible through logical thinking. It doesn't take the cerebrum four times as large as Newton's to understand from the pictures that she's modeling. You must be in denial, that functioning of the brain that prohibits your use of logic from predominating your school of thought. You like her so you shun logic but stick to belief; and I thought you must represent an atheist? Or rather a pseudo.