Quentin Tarantino doesn’t have a foot fetish. I’m tired of people saying it’s “gross” to see extreme close-ups of Uma Therman’s juicy lil’ piggies every ten minutes. Take it from me, a certified cinephile: you just lack the media literacy to understand Tarantino’s genius. Some of you, especially those with feeble, feminal minds, may need me to explain why this actually supports the subtextual feminism behind his filmmaking.
Let’s start here: how many toes are on one standard foot? Five. And how many movies has Tarantino made? At least seventy. Divide that and you get fourteen. What name is fourteen letters long? That’s right, Hillary Clinton, the world’s most famous woman. Remove the N’s from Hillary’s last name, and you get “clito”, as in “clitorus”, the most empowered part of the woman. Should I have to explain something so obvious? No. But some of you are so set on your agenda to cancel a brilliant man, that you can’t even read between the toes.
Don’t get me started on how the sensual curves of the heel emblematize divine feminine sexuality and power. And the sole, its distended muscles serving as a fleshy memorial to silenced women of the past, bulging with ideas.
So you see, Tarantino does not objectify women, he’s actually more of a feminist than you or I could ever dream of becoming. To the trained eye, it’s clear that he’s actually sending subtly subversive critiques of the patriarchy with each close-up. Besides, tons of beloved filmmakers have bare feet in their movies, like Alfred Hitchcock, and everyone knows he was a super normal guy.