To many, it might seem like an odd decision. Keira Knightley, famously private, has posed topless for a fashion magazine.The black and white pictures, taken by Patrick Demarchelier forInterview, show the actress with wet hair, low cut trousers and elbow-length lace gloves. Oh, and her boobs out. [Didact: What boobs? You mean those mosquito bites in the picture at about chest level?]Yes – as her critics have rushed to point out – this is the same woman who publicly complained that her cleavage had been digitally enhanced in a poster for the 2004 film KingArthur. And whose chest was allegedly enlarged for a Chanel advert.“They always pencil in my boobs. I was only angry when they were really, really droopy,” she said of King Arthur. “I thought, ‘Well if you’re going to make me fantasy breasts, at least make me perky breasts”.And, yes, this is also the same woman who claims to be a feminist. [Didact: A married feminist, apparently- isn't that an oxymoron, by the way?]
Now where did I put that pitchfork?
But before we all rush to condemn Keira, let’s stop and think about what these pictures really mean. [Didact: Very little of anything, luv.]Because the first thought that entered my head was HUR-RAH. Finally, somebody not afraid to stand up and bare their small breasts. [Didact: What exactly is so interesting about them then?]
Of course, we do often see flat chests represented in magazines. Fashion loves a small pair. Their pages often contain more nipples than actual words. But that’s different somehow.
I mean, look at Keira Knightley. She's nothing more than an ironing board with a face. And she works.