On body confidence

 By Anči

So I've been getting a lot of messages from friends and readers seeking advice about body image, and self-esteem... which I suspect has something to do with the dreaded advent of "Bikini Season" panic being shoved down our collective throats. (patriarchy loves coming up with new ways to shove shit down protesting feminine windpipes, eh?)

And because I'm neither famous nor unbearably in demand these days, or actually ever (though I've heard that's not something you're supposed to advertise? Oh well my wasp points were in the negatives  anyway..) I always take the time to answer each and every query...utilizing my exhaustive scope of registered empathy-for-hire, (which for a highly sensitive person like myself, tends toward the dramatic.)
Anyway... this compulsion naturally makes for an colorful communion of exchanges, with other women...which I fervently cherish, (as an introvert, inexplicably fitted with an extrovert's connective tissue. But we can analyze that anomaly some other time...)
But, because the letters I get are also very similar in theme,  I do end up repeating myself quite a bit... so I thought I'd tackle the crux of this body image issue in one sweeping, verbose motion. (with plenty of room for future follow ups in my inbox!)

So... I'm sure you've all heard the feminist saying by now, though it certainly bears worth repeating: "How do you get a bikini body? Put a bikini on your body." Succinct, and brilliant, eh?

Though yes I know, no punchy adage can undo decades of sexist conditioning, but it does make for a promising start, when the only alternative involves some degree of self-loathing.

Moreover how are self-described "bigger" women reasonably supposed to feel confident about themselves, when they're surrounded by representations of conventionally fit bodies?

First of all, take a breath, ladies. What I'm about to tell you, won't magically evaporate all your insecurities away-- but it should  give you the mindful skill-set necessary to debunk any abusive  self-talk.
So, whether or not you believe me, you.are.fucking.sexy. Yes you are. I am talking specifically to YOU right now, nobody else. (so don't over think this.) You are sexy, and it's your feminine birthright to own the crap out of that blessed certainty, with as much dissident daring as you can muster. 

I get it: it's a scary burden to shoulder-- after all, we're taught that beauty comes with a terrific responsibility to impress or 'deliver'-- but girl, you don't owe nobody shit. You don't owe anyone your time, your attention, or your respect-- just like you don't depend on anyone else's! Why? Because the miraculous fact remains that you deserve to take up space-- as much space as is required to comfortably accommodate each luxurious layer of flesh adorning your abundance.

And your abundance is damn sexy. From the alluring shimmer in your thigh which creases and crescendos every time you hop up and down, to the ripple that embraces your abdomen, with its notoriously demanding volume, every time you sit down or bend over. More than that, it's magnified by a  lover relishing in the generous expanse of your sinewy bounty, and then again by a child seeking comfort in your welcoming lap, (because nobody else's will do!) And girl, you radiate resplendence just by knowing  how freaking gorgeous you are--and not letting anyone-- anyone convince you otherwise. Because the second you give in to self-destructive habits, disordered eating, or similarly punishing behavior, your glory starts to shrink and diminish. And nobody is worth sacrificing that.

So ask me again how to reconcile the pressures of bikini season with the fickle immensity of self love. Or better yet, give yourself a giant fucking hug...
Remember, it's not for nothing you are somebody's source of comfort, and it's not for nothing that you're somebody's wild wellspring of unrestrained gropey passion. (that's the ardor your body inspires! And that's also the only narrative you should be internalizing... as long you never post any pictures. There is such a thing as too much luminosity see, and the corresponding cut-off wattage is generally heralded by the unscheduled appearance of its purveyor's pubes. ) Now.. ladies, carry that certainty with you-- store it in the softest corner of your gut-- until it unravels into a brilliant outpouring of warmth and self-acceptance.
Believe me, this will lessen the impact of the hoards of skinny bitches, paraded unceremoniously into your criminally violated consciousness... and will hopefully help ground you to a much more ancient fountain of feminine power. The first power. The one that you draw your esteem from.
Cause anything else is a manufactured mirage, cynically imbued into an elaborate reservoir of consumerist self doubt and guys? its foundation have begun to crumble.

The Problem with your Crush on Lupita Nyong'o

By Ana

I apologize for the deliberately misleading headline. There is nothing wrong with your crush on Lupita Nyong'o. In fact, i'd be pretty suspicious if you weren't captivated (or more likely, discreetly aroused) by the 31 year old Kenyan-Mexican* Oscar winner

 

Beautiful AND likeable? What sorcery doth this daughter of Eve possess?

There is however,  something erm,  notably unique about the way the media has been treating America's latest sweetheart - particularly in comparison to the treatment of her predecessors. (Jennifer Lawrence comes to mind right now.) It's a kind of reverence that seems exclusively reserved for the (*lowers voice*) model minority.

Yes, I said it. And I think we all know what I mean now, when I refer to our collectively hushed tendency to view gifted people of color as rare exotic birds-- as opposed to the human beings they are.

"What are you saying Ana?" (I imagine some of you protesting) "That we shouldn't treat this exceptional woman with the awe and wonder she clearly deserves?" No, not quite, Eunice. I'm   saying Lupita's... not that exceptional.

aaaand cue the gasps of horror. 

I get where your white outrage is coming from. After all, it's not everyday you  (get to) see such a dignified,  beautiful, African goddess.

But this (clearly disturbing) fact is not due to Lupita's singularity, as much as it's a symptom of a white supremacist value system. Cause the funny thing about a racist power structure is that it seldom affords deserving women of color (like Lupita) with such a prominent platform to shine.

You see now? A sophisticated, talented black woman isn't such a rarity. And by treating Lupita as unusually extraordinary (for a dark skinned Kenyan) we're perpetuating the problematic** perception that qualities such as beauty, and grace are badges of whiteness to be selectively parsed out by powerful Caucasian overlords*** to their pigmented trophies of choice.

And for society to (however subconsciously) support that myth, is well, pretty blatantly racist--given that we live in a world that's virtually overflowing with black and brown talent. (at least at the same rate that it produces white talent.)

The real issue at hand is representation: Because if our culture was designed to accommodate a diverse body of  players; we wouldn't be so collectively taken by yet another beautiful actress.

So no, Lupita's not an exquisite gem. She wasn't forged by Hollywood from some colonized cultural void. More importantly, it's not her duty to successfully charm, and delight her many liberal "backers."

Nay, Lady Lupita is simply one of many gifted, beautiful, thoughtful artists of color. And while she merits respect and recognition, she doesn't deserve the kind of patronizing veneration we've all been showing her.


* She was born in Mexico, so... as far as I'm concern we  get to claim her too.
** I know I said i'd stop using the word "problematic." But it just flows so easily from my fingers.
*** The name of my all-female brass band.



click here to follow this blog on facebook 

Am I pretty?

by Anči

Most of you are probably aware of the disturbing new You Tube trend, summed up by the phrase "Am I pretty or ugly?"

Just your average after-school activity

If you haven't heard of it, you can probably imagine what it involves. Basically it's an exercise in public humiliation, among(st) adolescent girls who... regularly  1) stare into a camera, and 2) ask the notoriously Noble-Hearted-You-Tube-Commenters to tell them whether they're pretty or ugly.  (I'm suddenly much less of ashamed of spending so much of my pubescent free-time interviewing celebrity-me in front of a mirror. "Did I feel a lot of pressure after being named one of  People's Most Beautiful? No, not really. I don't really focus on those things. Although it's always nice to be included.")
 If you've ever been on Youtube, you can probably imagine what the majority of the responses are like: (To those of you who wrote down "Dick pics captioned with an angry, misspelled request for fellatio," I'd say... That's a really specific answer.  And where are you writing that down?)

As expected, Bust reported  that "70 percent of the comments came from men. Not only were they highly derogatory in nature, but "most of them were definitely over 18.""

It was also pointed out that "The comments from females... were almost exclusively provided by the under-18 crowd," which paints a really creepy picture if you ask me.

Just the fact fact that the two primary contributors to this "trend," are underage girls, and grown men should tell you exactly which group benefits from the sexualization of young girls. And more importantly, which group it hurts the most.


Thoughts?

Pantene manipulates feminism to sell more Pantene.

By Anči

 Yes it's all very magical: a giant corporation pointing out sexism, while attempting to sell beauty products to women.

Oh and, in case you can't tell, the TV spot was actually made to air in the Philippines. Yep, that's right: those luxurious locks don't belong to white women of distant Mexican ancestry. These are Filipina models we're apparently admiring.  (Looks like India isn't the only nation to glorify whiteness, eh?)

Plus, i'm not super moved by any 'social' campaign aimed at high powered women with fancy jobs.  
 I mean sure, executive ladies in business suits are negatively viewed as pushy, and that sucks. But their upper class struggles are already overrepresented in the media. (see: every sitcom, romcom, and ad campaign.)
The majority of women however, face a much more serious set of injustices,  which unfortunately don't look as glamorous on camera. (lack of access to health care, child care, birth control, employment, and oh yeah, the looming threat of sexual assault..)

I guess what I'm trying to say is I don't really give a shit whether some high-earning babe achieves "empowerment" through wealth, (or shiny hair) and neither should you.

(That reminds me: Remember that 'inspiring' moment in the Sex and the City movie, when Samantha "finds herself" after failing to land some diamond ring she was bidding on..only to discover that  her controlling boyfriend was the one that had purchased the rock... to give to her himself? Then do you  remember thinking: "Someone needs to sit these writers down and explain to them what actual problems look like?"

Girl, we've all been there.

So no, the "liberation" of rich  women doesn't move me. And neither does this Pantene commercial. Try again.

On Kate Middleton

By Anči
 

Since bringing up Kate Middleton in my post on weddings I’ve wanted to further unpack the duchess's role as Global ambassador to upper class white women:

Because let’s face is: Kate Middleton is more than just a princess or a celebrity--  she’s also the living manifestation of flawless womanhood. (A position only recently dominated by Santa Angelina Jolie.)  

Look at her. The woman literally has no bad angles.

Like Jolie, Kate has bravely accepted the mantle of envied, unattainable perfection;  and in doing so, has invoked an age-old contract with the people : Essentially this covenant grants Her Highness unchallenged status and admiration, in exchange for her unwavering commitment to maintaining a glamorous facade, fit for public consumption. 

True to her pact, our Kate has managed to do this in a number of ways--Most notably, by never ever appearing in public without her trademark, professionally blown-out hair.  (an unrealistic and impractical demand for us common folk, who regularly go to sleep with a wet ponytail, and a nasal strip.) She also projects the consistently classy,  confident image required of any inaugurated Alpha Female.  And just like her flawless foremothers  Kate is a star, of the rare variety, able to  effortlessly produce a credible (and winsome!) smile on demand.  And  In a typically mystical fashion, she has never been seen with a frown on her face, or other such unacceptably humanizing expression. Add to that a sexy royal pregnancy, and you've got superwoman.

I was too lazy to spend time looking for a brunette version.

Speaking of her pregnancy, you might recall that during that gestating time, Kate's image was  frequently  positioned next to her equally-knocked-up celeb-peer,  Kim Kardashian. (Unlike perfect Kate, Kim proved woefully incapable of cultivating a concave baby bump-- a defect for which the reality star was thoroughly shamed.)

Kate on the other hand, only reinforced her place as the mythical shepherd of unattainably slender motherhood—by consistently "outperforming" her supposed "celeb-rivals" in the media-manufactured baby-weight battle of the ages: Check it out:

 Since entering the spotlight, Kate Middleton has been primarily lauded for her looks :  the ideal girl with  shiny hair, a tight body, and glamorous wardrobe. More importantly, She's  the woman who captured the heart of the future King of England--  a supposedly impressive feat (?) reserved only for the most Angelina-like of dames. Surely then, it was acceptable to expect unmatched perfection from her. Anything less would be insulting, right?

No one can look this cute all the time!

Wait no. Apparently they can.

I want to hate her but,...she's just too adorable!

Despite fairing so well initially,  as  ambassador of white womanhood, and Chief Guardian of the Eternal Feminine Mystery. (Which, I hear is preserved inside a golden tampon, inserted by Queen Elizabeth herself,) some cracks have started to appear, on Kate's royal semblance.
The most recent glitches in her cylon veneer, literally sprouted out of her head, (in the form of unsightly grey hairs)  rendering the princess, alarmingly and visibly human. Check it out:

the face of decay

As expected, the people did not take kindly to the Royal acquisition of silvere: with  criticism escalating to widespread outrage. (I'm not exaggerating. Google it.)


 The chief objection from the hair-police,  seemed to lie in Middleton's refusal to acquiesce to the terms of the aforementioned Unattainable-Perfection-Pact. With the the majority of commentators expressing some of version of "Isn't it her job to impress us all the time? How she dare step out in public looking like that, bollocks wanker Dumbledore?" (I failed British 101)
Along with complaints about her hair, there were also a surge of ageist potshots directed at her "sagging" "baggy" skin, and under-eye circles.

It was the  familiar, brutal  takedown of a famous beauty's appearance, and it wasn't surprising.
 Any woman who teases perfection, is eventually punished, when she fails to follow through. And no one ever "follows through" because even beauties are people, and nobody's perfect.

 This is not to suggest that Kate has fallen from grace-- she still commands the attention and envy of billions of people,  but like any woman in power, she'll also continue experiencing a backlash of body shaming, and contempt rarely directed at men in similar positions.

Thoughts?


To follow this blog on facebook, go here

On plus-size models

By Anči

 I've always been a bit ambivalent about Plus-size models. And after years of going back and forth on the issue, I still can't decide whether or not they represent positive change in the fashion industry, or just more of the same. 

For a comparison check out the following images side-by-side. The first is of plus size model Ashley Graham, the second is of runway sensation Adriana Lima.

Are you as overwhelmed as I am?

To be clear, I am absolutely in favor of a more diverse, and realistic representation of women in the media. I love seeing thick bodies, and curvy bodies being celebrated. But i'm not convinced that's the primary function of plus-size marketing.
To be fair, it does create a space for "bigger" women to be appreciated-- but only if they happen to line up with classically feminine proportions --which still favor a conventional body type.  Not to mention, most of the "bigger" models aren't actually big at all.

According to Huffington Post, Elle Spain recently featured its first plus size cover girl, which is something we've all wanted to see for a long time. But looking at the impossibly beautiful model they selected, (a young woman named Tara Lynn)  I'm baffled that the magazine would publicly pat itself on the back for their obvious centerfold selection. The only thing Elle Spain actually did was plug another gorgeous woman on their cover. Big deal. In that context, the model's size felt completely incidental. Almost like an afterthought.
Don't agree size can be incidental?  That's because you've been conditioned to evaluate beauty through a very narrow template. (get it?)

Check out Tara's cover:

and  another picture of her:

Admit it:  if you saw this woman walking down the street, in real life, you wouldn't think "she's good looking for a big girl."  Instead you'd probably think "holy shit, is that woman stunning. She needs to be on the cover of something NOW."

I mean, People don't usually look like that. Sure, some may have full pouty lips, or a high cheekbone. And among the extra blessed you might come across shiny voluminous hair, or smooth silky skin, set off with a pair of piercing eyes. But certainly not all things at once!  The fact is, Tara Lynn is objectively, and conventionally beautiful, so why exactly has her much-deserved presence on the cover of Elle, been reduced to a manifesto about her "plus size" figure?

really pushing barriers here.

I'm not unaware of the need for plus size role models, and frankly I would rather see women like Tara splashed across Billboards, than any of her 'mainstream' counterparts. But lets keep in mind that for the majority of women-- Tara Lynn still represents a look that is unattainable.
For one thing, I doubt too many overweight women of color looked at this spread and thought "Finally! Someone I can relate to." And that's the point.

 As important as it is to promote diversity, we shouldn't pretend  that a conventionally curvy white lady with classically feminine features, and long flowing hair  is somehow "subversive." Elle hasn't thrown this woman a bone: if anything, they were lucky to land her, given the enthusiastic response to her stunning cover. 

So until the plus size industry starts practicing some actual inclusivity, forgive me if i'm not too impressed by their efforts.

What's your take?

Selfies: self love or weepy distress call?

By Anči

The following post is dedicated to those of you (like me) who are self-hating enough to log on to Jezebel for everyday passive comment scrolling,  and mandatory late-night snark consumption.  (You know Jezebel? The "feminist" blog for bored white women?)
If you do read this particular blog, you may recall a recent post sanctimoniously entitled "Selfies Aren't Empowering. They're a Cry for Help." (You might also recall feeling a conflicting combination of emotions-- like "annoyance" and "sexual guilt"-- towards the offending poster: A professional white woman named Erin Ryan.)

Guys. this is what my pain looks like.

I could be really mean for a second, (because I'm good at it.)  and speculate that only a deeply resentful lady, with a toilet-hole-shaped self-esteem, (see? MEAN!) would deign to insult those of us who enjoy uploading our fresh-faced visages to facebook. But I would also be correct.

Why else, would  this Jeze-Bish liken the electronic distribution of duckfaces to "walking up to a stranger, tilting your head downward at a 45-degree angle... pushing your tits together, and screaming "DO YOU THINK I'M PRETTY!" (Although that's  kinda funny. Erin Ryan should go write for Tosh.0 )

More importantly is anyone here actually convinced  Miss Ryan believes that selfie-snappers are a bunch of nip-slipping creepers? Or is she simply acting out because.. i don't know,  she doesn't feel pretty enough to  inundate the internet with  her own photoshopped likeness? (Newsflash: None of us are pretty enough, brah. That's why we use things like "makeup," "flattering angles" and the occasional handful of stolen diuretics to drain the water-weight from our least vital organs. Bye-bye lungs!   Because not even Heidi Klum can pull off a bloated respiratory system.)

To be fair, Miss Ryan does have a point: Uploading hawt pictures of myself is kind of like assaulting strangers with my boobs. (In that angry, unsatisfied wives like to do both.)
And I would know, because one time in preschool I took my shirt off in the middle of recess, and pranced around the swing-set topless...before being apprehended by my very alarmed nursery caretaker. (Don't worry, I managed to show Miss Stephanie who was boss.  When I successfully pooped my snowpants. )

The point is, culturally confused kiddies may be shitty,  but Jeze-blah Erin Ryan is an asshole. And she's also wrong:
 As someone who likes to pose for her own macbook, I know for a fact that selfies are NOT about navigating desperation. And they are certainly not a cry for help. (If anything, they're a cry of " I feel sexy!" )

Turns out I was feeling kinda sexy this morning..

I mean sure, anyone can turn anything into a vehicle for unhealthy behavior... including eating, or sex or.. yes,  picture time.  But let's not pretend that's a necessary or exclusive side effect of selfie culture per se-- Or any other feminine behavior, for that matter.

 And feminine behavior seems to be at the core of this prejudice.  Just consider society's compulsion to label "girly" activities inferior, and laughable. (while traditional masculinity remains at the undisputed center of human dignity.  Hmmm wonder who decided that, Obama?) 

So fuck that. I don't need to butch myself up,  downplay my femininity or even display total self-confidence (which I lack,) in order to assure Erin Ryan that women like me are not desperate and pathetic. Not to mention, there is something seriously phobic about denying feminine performing individuals access to humanizing traits like dignity.

Get it?

Dark is beautiful: How Indian women are redefining beauty

By Anči

You may remember the controversial Miss USA pageant from September-- featuring our first lady of homegrown babedom, Nina Davuluri. You may also remember that she looks like this:

"Kneel before your queen!"

And sometimes, like this:

"Traditional American values"

As you might recall, the Miss USA fanbase  (which granted, is comprised of a "select" class of people,) all reacted by losing their minds. There were slurs  tweeted,  followed by totally reasonable accusations of terrorism, and of course digs at her "formerly fat body."
But I'm not here to go into that because A) it's boring B) we already knew that anyone who follows this televised celebration of misogyny must be pretty stupid.

What really fascinates me then, isn't America's reaction, but India's. As Mallika Rao of the Huffington post put it, the "unfortunate irony" is that "Davuluri is dark-skinned. In India, where skin color is a national obsession, you likely wouldn't see someone of her complexion in a pageant, much less winning one."

She's right about skin color being a national obsession in India, where "fairness creams" and skin bleach are hawked like candy. According to the BBC, "One market research firm even reported that more skin lightening creams are sold in India than Coca Cola"

Well why wouldn't they be, judging by these ads?

With our product, anyone can Photoshop half their face

Fairness cream: as painless and natural as it looks

"Look how far I can rotate my head!"

I want to make it clear that my intention is not to make fun of India, here. For one thing many of these skin-whitening products are owned by American Corporations, (including companies like Dove, Garnier, and Vaseline,)  all eager to exploit a social injustice. And let's not pretend it's not in America's interest to reinforce a white standard of beauty wherever it's least attainable. (By the way,  how brazen is it to promote a concept of beauty that favors you? I can almost picture a creepy executive saying"Guys, from now on the official standard beauty is what I look like." Insecure much, white people?)
But I do want to hold Indian society accountable, for their complicity in the system, which unfairly targets young women. According to actress and activist Nandita Das, the woman behind the  burgeoning "Dark is Beautiful" campaign, India's whiteness obsession is "a prejudice [which] has driven some young women to the brink of suicide." This is primarily due to the central role "fairness" plays in landing women a husband; an inequality routinely exploited by capitalists. This is evidenced by the slew of products intended for "prospective brides, which now includes a bleach for vaginal purity. (We all know what scented soap does to lady bits. Now try and picture bleach down there.)

You can view that particularly delightful TV commercial right here: And once you have,  note how heavily it leans on the wifely pressures Indian women experience. That's right:  in this perfectly healthy on-screen representation of wedded bliss, the husband acts cold and distant towards his wife until she applies the "fairness formula" to her junk, at which point he deems her worthy enough of affection. (Nice.)
Like all campaigns aimed at female consumers, the primary tactic involves systematically undermining our confidence. (I can tell you right now confident women don't bleach their vaginas.)

In fact, self-esteem is so linked to fairness, that the "dusky-skinned" Nandita Das, (a success by any standards) often gets asked "How can you be so confident despite being so dark?"

"Oh I don't know. Maybe it's because I'm a freaking movie star?"

This brings me back to Miss USA winner Nina Davuluri, who as a Hindu newspaper recently speculated: "would have been... a person with low self-esteem and few friends," adding that "had she been in India, far from entering a beauty contest, it is more likely that Ms Davuluri would have grown up hearing mostly disparaging remarks about the colour of her skin."

Let that sink in for a minute.  Nina Davuluri, who was literally just hailed America's Popular Girl, would have been condemned to a life of rejection and loneliness, in India. It might also be  reasonable to assume that  this "alternate-universe Davuluri" would invest considerable resources in fairness creams--  with potentially flesh-melting consequences. According to Indian blogger Sarah Malik, those consequences could include "burns, rashes and permanent skin damage." Malik goes on to  recall an eerie memory of "a young woman who came from a summer holiday.... bleached at least ten shades lighter, her skin, a strange chalky pallor." I'm sure it was worth it though?
 But luckily for women like Davuluri and Malik, the "Dark is beautiful" campaign has gained significant traction since its launch in 2009.  In fact, the project has been credited with renewing interest in a more inclusive culture of Indian beauty--particularly among young women. Malik warrmly echoes their newly-acquired outlook, writing: "I hope the 'Dark is beautiful' or 'Brown is beautiful' call-out becomes just as celebratory for the young   men and women struggling to see the beauty in being brown."

Thoughts?

No-Photoshop Policy a Win for Women?

By Anči

Maybe she's born with it. (But probably not.)

Like some of you, I was hopeful when I saw the Huffingtonpost piece on Verily Magazine's revolutionary "no photoshop" policy. If anything this was a step in the right direction,  after a generation of insidious image tampering. (Guys, did you seriously think we wouldn't notice that you severed away half of Kim Kardashian's butt? It is kind of her thing.)

So while I'm always cautious of publicity plays like this,  it was encouraging to encounter a company committed to promoting a more accurate depiction of women. According to the article, Verily's particular departure from protocol was a reflection of its co-founders'  belief that:  "the unique features of women... should be celebrated -- not shamed, changed or removed."

Look at all the unique features being represented!

And in a show of transparency,  the magazine deigned to incorporated this belief into their company mission statement, vowing:  "Verily never alters the body or face structure of the Verily models."

Pretty compelling stuff.  Pretty sneaky too.

To be clear, I have no doubt the company's telling the truth-- because the beauty industry never lies. But more importantly,  because it's a winning strategy, at no cost to them.

Confused? Then consider this photo I 'borrowed' from their website: (don't sue me, I have no money.)

"i'm a monster"

That's right. If you're anything like me, you just adjusted your seven-year-old bra-strap before mouthing some version of 'Wait, that's what they were going on about?'

Besides lacking the robotic flawlessness of your average Covergirl, the image doesn't really challenge anything. In fact, its a  pretty accurate representation of western beauty norms, no? : thin, white, young, pretty.  Check, check, check, check.

And if you scroll through the magazine's website, you'll note that even with their token samples of alternate pigmentation ( That's right,  I found a black model!) the company archive of babes remains spectacularly in line with beauty-myth regulations.  Thin, young, pretty.  Rinse, wash and repeat.

 Check it out:

Just another example of how different we are.

So much for the excitement.

Introducing "thigh gap"

 By Ana CL

As if our beauty standards weren't arbitrary enough, there's been a new regulation introduced to its ever-shrinking confines.

Introducing thigh gap:  the creepy, and inexplicable obsession of sexy people all over the  Western Hemisphere!

It used to be that a person's hotness could be determined through such straightforward means as: establishing facial symmetry, or  calibrating stomach flatness. (it doesn't count if you're sucking in!) Gone are the days, when the markers of beauty were limited to a sufficiently adorable nose, or a  sufficiently white mother. It seems we have now reached the age of the Mandatory Thigh Gap.

Thigh gap, or that gap between a skinny woman's thighs, was covertly inducted into the Official Hall of  Beauty standards, sometime in 2013. (Apparently, while I was in the shower.)
And like all healthy people,  I am still coming to terms with this development. Over a second lunch.

Unworthy, and unbeautiful: How I navigate feminism and femininity

 By Anči

As a feminist well versed in the oppressive lies of ‘the beauty myth,’ it’s a challenge to reconcile my hostility toward this particularly damaging social construct, with my enthusiastic participation in its many rituals. Yes it’s true:  I’m a feminist  who performs beauty.

And that’s what beauty is: a performance.  More than that, though it’s an investment… which in my case, means shelling out big bucks on skin products, laser hair removal treatments, (my nickname in 8^th grade was “unibrow,”) and of course makeup!

For the most part, I enjoy the process—  It feels gratifying and even luxurious to spend time painting and  adorning myself . I like the way mascara makes my eyes pop; and for special events, I might also bring out the eyeliner,  or some  blush. (Because how else would everyone know how seriously I take their Office Christmas Party? )

Putting myself together always brings on that familiar, satisfied relief that accompanies any patriarchy-approved transformation.  Every woman is familiar with the affirmation that ensues the moment we snap our makeup mirrors shut.  It says ‘Now I am presentable. Now I am deserving of respect.’

This is obviously a deeply problematic assessment to make—one that equates worth and humanity with looks. It’s also an attitude we’ve been taught since childhood. I recall being told many times as girl, that putting effort into my appearance is what  tells the world that I respect myself.  (Up until then, I hadn’t realized that my sacred self-respect boiled down to whether or not I had plucked my eyebrows that day.)

Of course, attempting to gauge the opinion a person has of herself, based on how polished she looks, is ridiculous. (And petty. And judgemental. ) After all, I am at my most confident when  I’m  writing , and believe me when I tell you I am neither plucked, nor matching right now.

So how can I keep  participating  in the global deception that is “beauty,” when I am so painfully aware of its effects on women?

The answer is complicated.

 For  many women, complying with beauty standards is a question of social survival.  In a world where being ‘unattractive ‘ translates into being invisible, beauty performance  can serve as a weapon against the isolation, dismissal and contempt reserved for the unbeautiful. If you don’t believe me, consider this: In July, when I got a flat tire, and emerged from my car in heels and a dress, I was instantly surrounded by concerned, helpful men, eager to change my tire, and give me rides. Then consider the number of times you’ve walked past a homeless person, in even graver need of assistance.  The difference is simple: In the first case, my appearance conveyed enough status to warrant care, and  attention, while in  the homeless man’s case, his appearance undermined him, rendering him invisible, and undeserving of empathy.

Beauty  performance is more often an act of survival,  than it is an indicator of selfishness. Often times, it is simply a gesture of appeasement--  a way to placate the male gaze, and reassure a male dominated society of peaceful compliance.  ‘See? We’re playing along. Your precious power structure is still intact.’

Of course, nobody applies makeup with the conscious intent of exhibiting status, or placating patriarchy.  Most of the time makeup feels like girly fun— for me it’s a tool for self expression,  a way to be creative!  I’m certainly not  trying to imply that women who perform beauty are weak, pitiful creatures.  We are complex, human beings, reacting to, and evolving with our environment.

I want to make it clear that the intent of this post was never to shame feminine women , but rather to deconstruct the significance of their actions.  If feminism has taught us anything, it’s that the personal is political, and that whether or not we mean to be sending a message, every single one of our actions reflects and establishes our norms and values.

What does beauty mean to you?