Ruth Bader Ginsburg Is Writing the #Girlboss Book You’ve Been Waiting For

Emily (Phoebe Dynevor) is seen getting busy with her fiancé Luke (Alden Ehrenreich) at a wedding. While that's not necessarily gag-worthy, there's one determining factor that could be — she's on her period. Not only that, but there's oral sex involved that Luke happily engages in. It's a highly erotic and graphic scene that has the potential to leave viewers reeling, but Emily and Luke aren't grossed out by what they're doing. They're too caught up in bliss to think there's something wrong about being pleasured during one's period.

I'll be honest — younger me would have immediately ran for the heels at this description because...ew. I'm not personally comfortable with the oral aspect of the scene, but I'm familiar with putting down a towel during period sex. It's all about preference, and no matter where you stand on the period sex issue, it's nice to have a partner that doesn't treat you like a walking science experiment during your period.

What did Phoebe Dynevor say about filming the sex scene in "Fair Play"?

She's actually happy the scene was filmed, and thinks director Chloe Domont did an excellent job showing that sex doesn't have to be skipped the week of someone's period. She told Ellethat male directors would've questioned the necessity of it. "We as women know these things happen all the time, but why are we not seeing it on our screens," she asked.

When does the period sex scene appear in "Fair Play"?

Trigger warning — this sex scene appears at the very beginning of Fair Play. Talk about starting off with a bang!

What is the plot of "Fair Play?"

Fair Play centers around the work culture of a hedge fund company that begins to take a toll on a couple. In a deeper plot analysis, Ellereports that Dynevor's character Emily has a secret engagement to her coworker, but "she gets a surprise promotion, which causes issues in their relationship outside of work." It takes a deep dive into the gender norms that can begin to stifle a relationship if both people have different views of how things are supposed to fall in place in and outside of the home.

What else has Dynevor said about "Fair Play"?

She pointed out that it's an excellent marker for how far society has to go in terms of respecting women. She also told Elle, "We have this idea that world is so progressive...but there's still so much progress to be made and so many things that haven't been done or still taboo." To drive this point further home, Dynevor said, "The thing that was really interesting to me is how modern feminism is clashing with traditional masculinity...Emily is really trying to make herself small to make him [Luke] feel masculine."

This is true because we're seeing the effects of attacks on reproductive and maternal health. Not only that, but there's still an expectation for how women are supposed to carry themselves whether they're mothers or not. As far as we've come, the work to fully recognize that women aren't monolithic and deserve to have our voices, time, and efforts respected is ongoing. That we shouldn't have to shrink so that men don't feel threatened or emasculated. That us asking to be appreciated and respected has nothing to do with attacking men's self esteem.

Until we get to that point, films like Fair Play will continue to exist to push the conversation forward.

When can you watch "Fair Play"?

Fair Play will premiere in theaters September 29, 2023 and will be available to stream on Netflix beginning October 13, 2023.

Watch The Trailer For "Fair Play"

“I love The Golden Girls and I love hanging out with you,” Lara Jean tells 11-year-old Kitty, who canceled her own plans so her sister wouldn’t be alone. But boyfriend or not, these sisters put themselves and each other first. They are more content with loving each other and themselves than finding love — or at least needing it for validation.

Before oldest sister Margot leaves for college in Scotland, she [SPOILER ALERT!] breaks up with her longtime boyfriend Josh. She doesn't want to be tied down to a relationship and she's unwavering in her decision. This decision goes some way in dismantling the pattern that we’ve seen so many times in pop culture where the girl often gets left in the dust for greener pastures. Don’t get me wrong: Every time I watch To All The Boys I've Loved Before, my heart still hurts for Josh and I want the boy next door to have his own happy ending. But Margot’s decision to be selfish about her college experience is not cold or harsh; it’s a power move, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

And while Margot jets off for a new adventure, Kitty deliberately sends out the love letters Lara Jean wrote to all her former crushes, including Josh. She gives Lara Jean the push she needs to get out of her shell and act on her feelings, thereby jumpstarting the premise of the movie. Not only does Lara Jean start a fake relationship with Peter to throw off Josh so Margot doesn’t get upset, but she unequivocally shuts down all conversations with him. She refuses to give even the tiniest thought to any lingering feelings she may have. It’s less of an adherence to an arbitrary girl code and more of a natural decision that her love for Margot trumps any adolescent feelings she’s had for Josh.

What the movie so powerfully captures here is Covey girls’ sense of camaraderie — the proverbial “sisters before misters”— that invites viewers to understand that this story, at its core, is a celebration of sisterhood. It’s a rom-com of sisterly love (and the extents the Coveys will go for one another) more than it is of romantic love with cute teen boys.

To All The Boys I've Loved Before doesn’t use gimmicky storylines of sibling rivalry or slut-shaming (Peter is quick to shut that down) to turn this into a caricature version of high school, nor does it perpetuate Lara Jean’s seemingly invisible persona to maintain the shy vs. popular girl dichotomy. In fact, she’s stronger and bolder than Genevieve and Peter — two of the most popular people in school — combined. Lara Jean might not be very experienced, but from the beginning, she’s sure of herself, comfortable in her own skin, and does not ever feel the need to conform to a high school status quo to make a place for herself. When Genevieve makes a snarky remark about her platform boots, Lara Jean is quick to remind her they're vintage. As Peter says, she doesn’t let Gen steamroll over her.

Lara Jean is scared of getting hurt, but she makes Peter work for her trust because she knows her worth. She’s insecure about his feelings for her, but not about whether or not she’s good enough for him. As far as she’s concerned, they’re on equal footing; she makes that quite clear when she suggests that if he’s only dated one girl, he’s not quite the expert he thinks he is. Though the fake romance is his idea, the ball has been in her court since the beginning. She’s delineated her boundaries and decided when to give him a chance and express her true feelings to him. Both scenes of her strutting through the lacrosse field to talk to Peter — when she’s good and ready, mind you, with her back ramrod straight and her head held high — are proof of how self-assured and in control she chooses to be; her popularity or lack thereof has no bearing on that.

Lara Jean’s character may have moments of peak embarrassment in this movie, but she carries herself with confidence and owns her actions, unapologetic about who she is. Much to our chagrin, this movie is fictional, but Lara Jean’s confidence is contagious and all-too-real. While there aren’t enough Peter Kavinskys in the world for all of us, To All The Boys I’ve Loved Before sets a wonderful standard of self-love and confidence that are not bound by social hierarchy. As much as we love falling in love, our love stories start with ourselves.

As a Power of Women honoree, Mariska was recognized in regards to her work as an advocate for sexual assault survivors. She took the stage and used her platform to discuss rape and assault conviction reversals, shining a light on the recent overturned ruling in Harvey Weinstein's landmark NYC case. Here's what she said:

Today I want to talk about reversing convictions, and more specifically I want to talk to you about how impossible it is to reverse mine. It’s impossible to reverse my conviction that survivors matter. It is impossible to reverse my conviction that what happens to us matters, and that our society must respond to survivors with a more a compassionate, holistically, deeper, and more nuanced understanding of what healing means.

It is impossible to reverse my conviction that after a trauma, survivors can reclaim lives of hope, of possibility, of audacious risk, beautiful intimacy, and glorious, glorious abundant joy. And I stand before you as evidence of that statement.

It is impossible to reverse my conviction that we must listen to survivors as experts on what justice means. It is extraordinary how little their voices are consulted, let alone incorporated, in the process of deciding how to repair harm. Justice is not a one-size-fits-all journey.

It is impossible to reverse my conviction that patriarchal impunity has to end. Patriarchal impunity is when a male-dominated system exempts perpetrators from punishment. Studies show that only 20% of all rape cases in the U.S. are reported to the police, and that between 5 and 0% of all rapes result in a guilty plea or a conviction. So why do 80% of victims not report? Because they're met with a system that grants impunity to perpetrators; a system that blames victims; a system that accepts only those victims who are experienced as "real" rape; a system that completely misunderstands the neurobiology of trauma, which causes behavior in women that doesn't fit the picture of how a "real victim" would act.

Is that change needed that victims should just pull themselves together? Just buck up and report anyway? No. No, it's the system that receives them that needs to change

It is impossible to reverse my conviction — and the conviction of my extraordinary team, The Joyful Heart — that the backlog of untested rape kits can be brought to zero; that the testing of all new kits must be mandated; that we need a statewide kit tracking system; and that survivors have the right to access the status of their kits.

It is impossible to reverse my conviction that grammar — yes, grammar — that we use when we speak about rape must change. In the sentence, "A woman is raped," there's a crime and there's a victim, but there's no perpetrator. Where's the perpetrator? Where is he? Statistically, as we know, most likely he's walking free. He's so free that he doesn't even appear in the language about the crime that he committed. Is that not extraordinary? It's extraordinary that in the very grammar, the perpetrator goes free. Reintroducing perpetrators in the language of rape will make some very unwieldy grammar, but that's the nature of change. It's unwieldy, it's messy, it's uncomfortable, but it's necessary.

Hargitay continued on in her prolific speech to describe that rape shouldn't be considered a "crime of passion" because it's "not simply the next step in the trajectory of his passion" when a man takes a consensual hookup too far and assaults a woman against her will. She stated that it's "an exercise of power," doubling down that the language we use is important.

The speech went on to address that rape is both about power and control, as a "construct" that was "built, and assembled, and reinforced over time." She noted that there are people with these positions of power — and she specifically called out those in the entertainment industry — that could make a difference and aligned themselves to victims and survivors.

After this and some other remarks, Hargitay specifically called out the Weinstein conviction reversal. She said:

I do want to say something about the Harvey Weinstein conviction, specifically about the reason that it was overturned: too many women's voices. Too many women's voices were allowed to speak. Hallelujah! Amen! I can't imagine anything more beautiful than that. The Daily podcast episode talked about how it was so risky for the prosecution to have that many women testify. Risky to let women speak? You're damn right it is!

Too many women speaking brings change. Too many women speaking shakes the establishment. Too many women means we get listened to more, and people might actually hear what we have to say. Look what happened when women started saying just two words, right? Me too — just as an example — a tidal wave of change. Me too.

And then of course, there was the response: the Me Too Movement. The backlash. The examination of whether the changes that have come are lasting, or are even positive. Of course there's a backlash! What did they expect? For women to speak repeatedly, loudly, together, with a purpose — for there to be no backlash? The backlash is evidence of how powerful those voices were, how powerful those voices ARE.

Watch Mariska Hargitay's Full Speech Here

Turns out that your TV heroes really can be your IRL heroes after all. Long live Olivia Benson! Long live Mariska Hargitay!