>>598 So I read this tumblr. I am glad there is someone out there with a different perspective.
I don't agree with this perspective either, though. Whether or not he calls himself a feminist, he doesn't owe his fandom to go out with a feminist (still less someone that writers at Jezebel consider to be adequately feminist and intersectional or whatever this week's buzzword is).
I also really don't think she's an "awful fucking human being" because she is a poor excuse for a feminist (which she is). If you think that is the pinnacle of awfulness, you also have the mentality of a 15 year old, and/or you are not reading the newspapers.
My beef with this is that:
(1) TH is an apparently intelligent and cultured 35-year old man with a formerly respected career making himself look stupid. He is fully entitled to do this if he wants but I find it embarrassing.
(2) TH has said on many occasions that he values his privacy, it's all about the work, we don't need or want to know about the man behind the performances etc. He has also repeatedly said that insofar as we do see the real him in interviews, he strives to be authentic. Everything he has shown us over the last few weeks suggests that this persona was a construct. TH appears prepared to use his private life for publicity - and in a remarkably calculated way. He and TS purport to be spontaneously demonstrative and in love, and the victims of press intrusion. But there are numerous pointers to large elements of these "pap" revelations (not all) being wholly orchestrated by them. Many celebs do this to some degree and I don't mind that if they are honest, or at least if they keep their mouths shut about it. But there is a particular feeling of betrayal that comes with the realisation that a persona which had authenticity at its heart turns out to have been a carefully constructed and calculated fake.
Tom retweets!
What he retweets is an article about social media disrupting the truth: https://mobile.
twitter.
com/twhiddleston/status/753155188542742528?s=09
That's a bit meta.
PS it's from the guardian so my guess is he has seen every article it has published about him recently.
>>967 Do you remember the "please love me" Facebook post after Pursegate?
I fear that he is not above using social media to comment indirectly on his personal life, and that this is indeed intended as a comment on how social media has said his relationship is fake. Spare me the irony of (a) using a third party's Instagram to disseminate a manufactured image of your relationship; (b) refusing to speak to the media directly concerning your relationship, thereby perpetuating any disruption to the truth that may be going on; and (c) then using social media again to comment in the most passive-aggressive manner possible.
Even if he isn't, and the subject matter of this first tweet for nearly a month is a total coincidence and not intended as a comment on his relationship, it strikes me as a tad lacking in self-awareness to criticise social media when you are in bed with social media.
Seneca #2
What a colossal second-handed meta- whinge.
Playing the victimisation card like someone else we know...
>>969 Yes, you are quite right, let's say he was referring to how social media were complicit in swaying votes for Brexit, considering his personal/PR situation right now, he could have been more precise.
But I think we said in the previous thread that he would play the victim part because he has a tendency to be passive aggressive, we are just missing the puppy eyes.
It's like a loophole, the more he strives to indirectly insist that this is real, the more fake it is. Catch22.