Recently in Beauty Category

A celebration of the sexiness of Doms, Studs and FTMs of color. Affirmation that the gender binary does not own the exclusive rights to 'sexy.'

The Tyra Show is looking for women who "refuse to get rid of that leg, arm, or facial hair." Really Tyra? Just read the request for sources/guests on the show, I almost threw up in my mouth:

"DO YOU REFUSE TO GET RID OF THAT LEG, ARM, OR FACIAL HAIR?

Do you pride yourself on being hairy? Are your friends always begging you to shave your
legs, armpits, or get rid of that mustache? Do you hate shaving and waxing
is too painful so you've embraced your hairiness? Is your boyfriend disgusted by the sight of your hairy legs or does he love that you keep it natural? If you or someone you know loves their hairy bodies then please, call or email me asap."

Alright, run with it.

(Crossposted on my blog )

Oh, eyebrow. When I was married, and for long years preceding, you were two. The great divide began in high school, as I admired my friend Rachel's brows. They were thin, arched, and ever-so-far apart. Mine were thick, straight, and gently grazed one another, right over the bridge of my nose. That I had an eyebrow problem had never occurred to me, but, upon the realization that other girls my age were not sporting a single brow, I was wracked with anxiety. How was I supposed to garner the all-important attention of boys with such an obvious beauty deficiency? So, I worked quickly to correct my newly-discovered facial quandary. With the help of a pair of tweezers, I achieved the coveted eyebrow segregation. Being clumsy and lazy in nature, I never did quite perfect the art of plucking, but, as the years went by, I slowly honed my skills. No one ever complimented me on my arches, but, if I made sure to maintain them consistently, nobody ever used my name and the dirty word "unibrow" in the same sentence, either.

My ex-husband was in the camp of those who think that a woman should have two distinct brows, even though he, himself, had only one (This was even true of him when he shaved the offending hairs, creating not two brows, as I can only assume was his goal, but merely one that was full and bushy on both sides and short and angry in the center.). Throughout the course of our marriage, I had dutifully plucked away, but, at about the time when we separated our bank accounts, the old beauty ritual had begun to wear on me. I had been mutilating my own forehead for years in order to find a mate, but now, my unpleasant marriage was causing me to ponder the conundrum of what the hell, exactly, a mate had ever done for me.

At the same time, in the world of academia, I had learned that a girl could have conjoined brows without being forced into solitary confinement by the rest of society. My revered exhibitor of this revolutionary notion was Frida Kahlo, whose eyebrow was a trademark aspect of her beauty and individuality. I decided that I was in a unique position to channel her free spirit by mimicking her iconic unspoiled brow - after all, what man had the right to tell me how to groom my facial hair? And so, it came to pass that I divorced my tweezers with my husband.

I just wanted to vent about these stupid Hydroxytone commercials where these men are all oooing and ahhhing about how they just can't believe how young their wives look since they started using Hydroxytone face cream. Why, it's like they have their hot old wives back!!!! Of course, the men still have gray hair and crows feet and pot bellies but that's okay.......as long as their wives keep themselves up to par he won't have to go out and cheat, right??

This shit just always unnerves me. It's the same with all the anti-aging stuff directed almost exclusively at women. Sadly, most women won't even stop to reflect on why THEY are the ones always targeted by these ads.....yes, they are the primary consumers, but why? Could it be because the media is always reinforcing the idea that it is OUR looks that matter most of all, that our looks matter more than anything else about us and certainly our looks matter more than the looks of men do.

I have kept my looks and my figure.....for me just as much as for my partner. He has done the same. It's just the outside pressure and constantly propping up of these hurtful double standards and the sense of obligation it instills among women and the entitlement it promotes in men that pisses me off.

And this is a good thing? Apparently, studies show that fat taken from other parts of your body, thighs, tummy, etc can be pumped into your breasts with few ill effects. I write about it here.

The term "effortless perfection" was first coined by a student at Duke University (whose name, interestingly, I have been unable to find despite scouring the internet for it). You've probably heard of it before. Or, if not, you've probably thought it. It refers to the expectation that women fit our society's unrealistic and arbitrarily-defined standard of beauty and desirability without seeming to expend any effort to achieve it. (The conversation at Duke also included the concept of achieving academic perfection without trying too hard. It's a great topic and worthy of discussion, but I'll omit it in this particular post because the subject matter is already broad enough as it is. Plus it's less personally vent-worthy for me. Eh well.)

Most heterosexual men are consistent in their description of the kind of women they look for.They want a woman who's "real." Someone who's willing to be herself. They don't like it when women diet or worry about their weight. It's a turn-on when women can actually eat . And they'll all decry the superficiality of makeup, and express a preference for "natural" women.

Since June 5, I have been making homemade shampoo from olive oil soap, water, and herbs.

My hair took to its natural state with great success after only about a week of experimentation with my foolproof potion. Now I'm convinced that the world as we know it would explode if all women started making their own shampoo. Think about it:

Making shampoo means not buying shampoo. Shampoo corporations go out of business and huge conglomerates end up foundering.

Realizing how beautiful and healthy hair is in its natural state without any synthetic additives means buying fewer, or no, other hair products. More foundering.

Healthy, natural, beautiful hair makes made-up faces look silly and using other synthetic beauty products feel silly. Commence the trashing of all synthetic beauty products in your living space and refusal to endorse such products again. Founder, founder, founder.

Discovering what hair, faces, skin, and lips look like, naturally, will be a shock. A good one. Leading to natural women everywhere getting really pissed that these foundering corporations have been controlling our appearances and emotions since puberty. Damnit!

Natural women will tell all their friends, and the ripple effect will make waves of change throughout the product-obsessed world. I started making my own because two of my best friends dropped some "Natty Knowledge" on me and took the anti-beauty routine plunge first. I watched their natty endeavors and decided I believed in them, too.

So here I am, to start a revolution... Read on!

1.Think about your hair and its personality . Ask if it's curly or straight, dry or oily, long or short, brittle or strong, frizzy or smooth? Just like synthetic, store-bought shampoos, your homemade brew can be crafted to suit the needs of your hair. Below is a list of herbs that will maintain the beauty of your hair. Don't be shy. You can mix and match. My hair is long, fine, wavy, and a bit on the oily side. Since my first batch, I've been sailing along with chamomile, nettle, sage, and rosemary.

Normal Hair: red clover, chamomile, horsetail, marigold, rosemary, and crushed lavender flowers.

Oily Hair: dried leaves of peppermint, rosemary, burdock, nettle, tea tree, orris roots, and lemongrass.

Dry Hair: red clover, elder flower, comfrey leaf or root, crushed lavender flower, crushed orange flower, chamomile flower, jojoba oil, and marigold.

Black Curly Hair: ,sage, nettle leaves, crushed lavender flowers, comfrey leaves, jojoba oil, indigo root and rosemary leaves.

I created this collage to illustrate how horribly far the photoshopping went on what is considered a beautiful woman in this culture. Well, maybe not in US culture? Perhaps her nose was too "ethnic" for the cover, so they whittled it away.

If you're as tired of such offenses as I am write a letter to the editor

This past weekend I saw "Good Hair", a new documentary narrated and produced in part by Chris Rock in which he interviews a lot of black celebrities, especially black women, including Maya Angelou, Al Sharpton, Eve, Salt N Pepa, Ice T, Melyssa Ford, Raven-Symone, and others... about their hair. Rock goes into the black hair industry to explain the ubiquity of hair care products for black women aimed at straightening out their hair and make it look more white or Asian, rather than the naturally curly. He starts in Atlanta with a black hair trade show and hairdresser talent competition, and explains to the ignorant the relaxer and the weave, and traces the hair that is used to make weaves all the way to India, where women give it away for free in religious ceremonies. He traces the chemicals from relaxer back to the plant where they are made. He looks at products, cuts, colors, weaves, perms, extensions. He looks at women who are teachers and grad students spending $1000 on one hairstyle.

I dragged along my friend to see this (who does not usually see 'arthouse' films), he thought a movie about hair would be boring. I had already decided to see it based on a glowing review Ann Hornaday of the Washington Post gave to WTOP. It was laugh out loud funny and both my friend, who is a male of South Asian descent and myself who is a male of East Asian descent both learned a lot and enjoyed it.

At the same time, I walked out of the theater feeling a bit disturbed because Chris Rock seems to be criticizing the societal pressures that black women face to conform to the cultural standard of beauty without actually offering a way out. In a larger sense I think it applies to all women regardless of race, even though it is more acute for black women in this case. For example, Chris Rock casts the weave industry as evil and catches at least one Asian hair merchant making an openly racist comment. He interviews black men who resent paying hundreds of dollars or $1,000 for their girlfriends' hairs. He shows how having a weave prevents black women from being fully intimate, or getting their hair wet. He shows how acidic the chemicals are and how they burn away aluminum coke cans. But what does Chris Rock propose? It's not clear. He says that he'll tell his daughters that 'what's in their head is more important than what's on their head'. That's so true, and a good sentiment. But how does that change the pressures his daughters will face when they get older?

There is one scene in the movie where a bunch of black high school girls are sitting around a table discussing job prospects. The girls pointed out that although they think the afro is beautiful, if they didn't 'relax' their hair, they were afraid that they wouldn't be taken seriously by executives (or by implication by society).

I got the sense that the relaxer and weave is what gave a lot of black women confidence- not just the wearers but the many barbers. There is a lot of ambiguity in this film. Sometimes it felt like Chris Rock was glorifying the very thing he was criticizing, in the style of Devil Wears Prada.

Yet at the end of the day it seems Chris Rock is criticizing black women who modify their hair to look straight yet he hardly even dents the larger issue of beauty standards shaped by society that constrict black women and contribute to their "need" to do this in the first place. This movie can be used as a reason to criticize black women who wear a weave but it doesn't really answer the question that if black women wore their hair more naturally, would they be accepted? It seems like 'Good Hair' offers sparse hope. And it really is no good without hope that things could change for the better.

i had this conversation with a couple of friends over dinner, about this woman who came in a massage parlor with extremely hairy legs. And my male friend said, "that's disgusting, did you have to wear gloves?" first of all, i was appalled with this reply. Did she have to wear gloves??? Why?! for what reason?? because she has hairy legs? And is it that disgusting to the point where you have to make sure that the physical contact that will take place has to be totally secured?!

And people tell me feminism is dead. If it is, then why do these comments still come around? The social stigma of women having hairy legs is so over rated i know, but why do people still think this way? and this friend of mine also said that "hairy arms/legs define a man" yeah. right. talk about equality right?

This is still an underlying issue that a lot of women refuse to talk about, they feel ashamed to tell others about their hairy body and that totally sucks. WE should ALL be happy with what we have. And always keep in mind that MEN and WOMEN are created the same. yes, WITH HAIR FOLLICLES. so get that straight. if a woman ever decides not to shave, its on her decision. and don't make her feel bad about it. Abolish this stigma on hairy women. I am hairy too, and so does a lot of women i know.

Let's wear our skin proudly, hairy or not. WEAR YOUR SKIN WITH PRIDE!

If there's one thing I've noticed about women in general, it's that we all have some type of issue with our bodies. Outside influences like magazines, movies, and TV can have such a powerful affect on the way women see themselves, and this is unnerving to me because it seems out of my control.

You start getting this pressure to look a certain way really early on. There are magazines out there like teen vogue, seventeen, and J-14. Instead of emphasizing internal beauty, they focus on things like makeup, fitness, celebrities, and fashion. They put girls on the covers of these magazines with a very particular aesthetic in mind. These magazines start girls out with unrealistic ideas of what it means to be an attractive person.

Because of these magazines, and the way women are portrayed in the media in general, women have-in a way-lost their sense of self worth. Not everybody can look like the blond haired, blue eyed, size 2 model you see on the covers of some of these popular magazines. If more people could just realize this-and be willing to embrace their own individual beauty and character-the world would be a much better place. I hope that this eventually happens.

 In order for this to happen, I think that women need to start being portrayed differently in the media. Girls need to be asked to steer clear of the mainstream magazines, and be pushed towards magazines with a focus on individuality. I was thinking of something similar to Bust or Bitch, but maybe geared toward a younger audience.

I understand that magazines without the 'fashion tips' and 'beauty trends' will most likely not be mainstream any time soon, but even if just a few young girls were to read positive magazines similar to Bust, it will be a huge step forward. I really do think that magazines like this can eventually change society, and if there is something similar geared towards young girls, it will really have a positive impact on the world we live in.

With all this in mind, I'm wondering: Are there any magazines out there right now geared towards younger girls that promote a positive self image? If so, I would love to know about them.

That's the announcement on the opening page of the site of Brigitte, Germany's best selling women's magazine. The editor announced recently that, from now on, the publication would only feature normal sized women. This came after complains from readers that there were too many models with "protruding bones" portrayed in their pages.

I say this is good news! Not that everyone agrees, the owner of a modelling agency in Munich, claimed: "The fact is that women want to see clothes on beautiful, aesthetically pleasing people," she said.

Right, that's what they want the most, right after wanting to develop low self esteem and impossible body standards to hunt them their whole lives...

I think it's remarkable that this was an initiative from the magazine... given that the fashion industry is both one of the most influential in determining body standards, and one of the most resistant to change and easily dismissed as "silly women's stuff" when one starts thinking of public initiatives to shape these trends. Still, some instances exist, such as the Spanish government banning too-thin models from appearing in catwalks, and--indirectly--the EU regulation of sexist advertisement. What do you think?

The Guardian article.

Suedeutsche article (in German).

That is the conclusion that journalist Roni Caryn Rabin extracts from a study that found that 60% of women wear or wore in the past shoes that put them at increased risk of chronic foot pain (you guessed it: "high heels, pumps, sandals and slippers").

The whole tone of the article and the verbal quotes from one of the female researchers border on the paternalistic/ridiculous: "It's important to pay attention to size and width, and not just buy it because it's cute."

One would wish that someone writing in the NYTimes or doing research on the health sciences would be aware of the role of societal expectations and fashion in shaping agency and choice (as well as the pervasive differential impact of practices that shape and mark bodies in men and women) and would at least hint at offering a broader (societal) perspective... but, hey, that may actually put in question the existence of freedom of choice in our beloved Western societies!

Have a cute day you gals!

Full article.

Full Disclosure: I am a dark skinned Black woman whose (dread) locs turned 2 years old last month. So articles like these strike a chord with me. So glad Tami's response over at WhatTamiSaid set the record straight about some of the key things to keep in mind as the discussion on natural hair ensues on the heels of Chris Rock’s Good Hair flick: 1. Black hair issues are about white supremacy not an ahistorical hang-up of some black women. 2. It is not reasonable to compare Black hair issues to hair dyeing in the white community. Black hairstyles have been sanctioned in a number of ways along race and economic lines that white women’s hair have not been. 3. The natural hair movement is about freedom.

Perhaps the last point has the most resonance with me.  Tami goes on to explain what she means here:

It is about black women coming to accept their natural selves as beautiful. It is about removing the imperative that black women must straighten to be acceptable. It is about erasing the fear that an employer or a lover or the general public might see us with our nappy roots showing. It is about exercising and making love with abandon — hair be damned. It is about knowing how to care for our natural textured hair, even if we choose to wear it straight. It is about not buying in to negative and erroneous stereotypes about black hair — that it is hard to care for, that it is inconvenient, that it is costly.

While I think relaxer ads have done a great deal of hawking their products on the basis of erroneous stereotypes on black hair, I think it’s important to give visibility to the difficulties that can be involved when making the transition from relaxed to natural. I think these difficulties can sometimes be greater than they seem. And it begs the question: Who has access to the freedom of going natural?  I would wager that not a lot of black women have  nurturing natural hair stylists and/or access to affordable natural hair care salons and “natural” products. I haven’t done an empirical study on this. But since I have been natural, I have had hair appointments in Pittsburgh, PA; Philadelphia, PA; Washington, DC; Fort Washington, MD; Oakland, CA; Atlanta, GA and Detroit, MI.

I found THIS lovely article where research has shown the women are able to make men stupid simply by pretty.

The research shows men who spend even a few minutes in the company of an attractive woman perform less well in tests designed to measure brain function than those who chat to someone they do not find attractive

(originally posted here )

One of my most humiliating memories is during seventh grade. Near the end of the year, we had a sizzling heat wave, something not too common in Berkeley. I was a chubby kid and always had been, never wearing shorts or tank tops and always afraid of my body being judged. My mom had bought me a long skirt, black with big yellow sunflowers (de rigeur for 1998), and in the heat, I decided to throw fear to the wind and wear the skirt to school.

There are two ways people guess that this story ends. One has me realizing how freeing the skirt is, feeling beautiful, and discovering something resembling self worth. The other has me shamed in front of my peers, made to feel fat and even more worthless.

Neither of those happened.

No one called me fat. There were no snicker comments or sidelong leers. I was, in fact, rather well liked and recall a number of friends complementing the outfit. But inside, I was profoundly uncomfortable and embarrassed because I could feel my thighs chafing. Walking home, I remember wanting to cry because I couldn't swish the way skinny girls did and instead felt like a plodding, bedazzled plow horse. I just simply hated myself for being who I was.

It took me a long time to learn the lesson of that day. The truth is, as cruel as children can be to each other, they are infinitely worse to themselves. I was my own biggest bully, my own harshest critic. I was the one rubbing my face in the mud and daring myself to do something about it.

Fifteen years later, I have done something about it. I am still a chubby woman and I always will be. I use that word, with all it's negative inferences and blubbery sounds, because it is true and I refuse to feel it is some sort of stigma or disability. I am soft, round, and strong, and, though I don't always hold on to it (especially in the face of a Vogue, Elle, or W haute couture spread), I have pretty damn good self confidence.

Granted, misogynist branding is not really anything new, but I clicked on an ad for "T.I.T.S. Brand Clothing" while indulging in one of my favorite online guilty pleasures. 

While the name alone is probably worthy of its own post, I clicked through out of sheer curiosity and was (not surprisingly) appalled at what I found. It's essentially a clothing company that features hyper-sexualized images of women with a focus on their breasts. Shirts for men include topless women in various poses and environments including one with a woman posing seductively with a large diamond strategically placed over her vagina.

My favorite image, however, is their "wifey" section which the featured item is a woman standing at an ironing board/grill/etc wearing only high heels and an apron while taking a slug from a big ol' bottle o' booze.   

Here is one version of that style complete with side cleavage:

So--what does this mean? I'm sure that one speaking in defense of such attire might suggest that it somehow exhibits a sense of irony or is funny. However, it is a pretty overt reinforcement of the unreasonable image of a woman and her role. She is supposed to be responsible for domestic responsibilities, exhibit conventional beauty/beauty practices, be sexual but still demure, and she should be a good time gal ready to get her drink on.

The question I have is for the woman who would wear a shirt like this as the "wifey" section of the site comes only in women's sizes: is this image of a woman something to strive for? I am sure that this is meant to be edgy and innovative--maybe even funny or silly. However, it just comes across as a revisitation of tired old misogynistic "values" with a modern twist.

It just kind of grosses me out. No more clicking through on banner ads like this--even if it's just for curiosity's sake. 

As I near the official end of my teens (to the immense chagrin of my older sister, who claims she's not old enough for me to be twenty), the prospect of becoming a bonafide adult keeps encroaching on my consciousness.

But what does it mean to become a female grown-up in 2009? I've always assumed that 'growing up' mean settling in to who you are. For women, though, it seems that 'growing up' means finding more and more things to worry you when you look in the mirror.

A few days ago, I looked in the mirror and noticed for the first time in my life that my face was, gasp, shiny! Now, not too long ago, I don't think I would have noticed if my face glowed in the dark; the shiny-to-not shiny scale of beauty was not one by which I measured myself. Hell, as a ten year old, I *pursued* shininess, with the aid of massive quantities of $2 body glitter. Yet here I was, seriously considering spending money I don't have to defeat the (completely natural) presence of oil on my face. I guess this is part of being an 'adult.'

It's not that this is all that sudden; I think I just started noticing it. Through the years, I've constantly been told that 'it's time' to start adding this or that to my morning beauty routine, as though each addition were some important ritual of aging. "It's time" to start shaving my legs, using concealer, styling my hair, wearing fashionable shoes, etc. I've successfully ignored most of these warnings until recently, when the specter of adulthood has taken over my brain. I look in the mirror and I can't see an adult. Somehow, I've subconsciously accepted that while natural (read: frizzy) hair and shiny skin are acceptable for kids, grown-ups use expensive glossing and skin-"care" products (key word: expensive. Ah, capitalism).

I consider myself a feminist, but damn if it doesn't bug me every time I walk into a meeting, or even go out with friends, and realize I'm the only female not wearing make-up or heels. Did I miss that class during sex-ed? Did puberty forget me? Why am I such a kid?

There's nothing particularly profound in this post, but this has been on my mind a lot recently. Thus, I leave with my Women's Studies Professor's favorite quote: "It's hard to fight an enemy who has outposts in your head."

Why are my fashion decisions the first thing that people attack when I say I am a feminist? Let me explain why. I have always hated wearing pants. I find them uncomfortable and I just plain flat out don't like having thick denim next to my vulva, plus I have an hour glass shape and it makes it very hard to find pants that will fit right off the rack. I find nothing wrong with choosing to wear the clothing that makes me most comfortable and while most women find skirts confining, I feel exactly the opposite. Now I am not telling anyone else that they need to wear skirts instead of pants, its just a personal choice that I have made and am happy with. But apparently its not okay for a feminist to wear skirts EVER. When someone finds out that I am a feminist one of the first things that comes out of their mouths is but you are in a skirt, feminists can't wear skirts. I didn't know that feminism dictated that I wasn't allowed to wear certain clothing (I get a lot of looks when I pair them with t-shirts that have feminist messages on them) nor did I know that feminism came with some sort of uniform that we were all supposed to wear. What pisses me off most about the whole thing is that it seems like people can't take my opinions seriously just because I choose to wear certain items of clothing. Today was the last straw though. I was wearing a t-shirt that one of my friends who runs a very small screening business made for me for my b-day a couple of years ago with my favorite quote of all time on the front and the feminist rant on the back. Now I always get a lot of stares from people when I wear this shirt whether I have pants on or not ( I resign myself to wearing pants in the winter because it is plain flat out too cold to wear skirts) but a stranger came up to me while I was grocery shopping and informed me that it was not appropriate for me to wear tshirts with messages like that on it if I was going to put myself in such gender confining clothes. She was very rude about her comments and proceeded to loudly berate me for almost five minutes over how feminists fought for too long for the right to not wear skirts ect. for someone to provide such a contradiction is just "appalling". That got to me, mostly because the skirt I was wearing happens to be one of my favorites and because I don't think that its antifeminist to wear skirts, on the contrary I think that eliminating an entire portion of your wardrobe just on the basis of is it feminist to wear it is absurd. I wear what I like and what I am comfortable in above all else. In my mind that is all I should have to think about when deciding m wardrobe choices. So the question that I pose is are we as feminist instituting this awful propoganda or is it another attempt to make women hate feminism?

Wow!  The lengths we go to for beauty.

This is my very first post on Feministing, and I'm very excited. I've been reading Feministing for about a year now, and it's one of the few websites I check every single day.

Anyways, I am 17 years old and going to college in the fall. My aunt who lives in another state from me wanted me to come visit her, so I'm here. I've been here for about two weeks now, andmy flight home is in a couple of days.

This aunt of mine has always been known as the "fashion-forward" one of the family. She's a hairstylist, so she apparently always knows what's in style or whatever. Pretty much all she thinks about is clothes and shoes and hair and make-up. I literally do not think she has any other worries in the world.

Now, I've never been much of a make-up person. I've worn make-up maybe four times in my entire life. It just feels foreign on my face, and I prefer to go without it. It used to be a matter of principle. Make-up is fake, and I'm generally against fake things, but now, it's the make-up itself. It feels annoying and weird on my face.

Last week, I went to a wedding with my aunt, and she decided to do my make-up. I decided to just bear with her, but she put tons of make-up on my face. I couldn't even recognize myself. It was absolutely terrible. And since then, she's constantly been telling me that I need to learn how to do my make-up because it's necessary, etc. I also wear glasses, and she's been telling me to get contacts this entire time too. I don't want to get contacts. I like my glasses. They're not a nuisance for me. In fact, they're quite convenient. And people with glasses can look attractive too. And even if I don't look attractive at all with my glasses, why does it matter? I don't want people to focus on whether or not I look attractive, I want them to focus on what I have to say or my personality or whatever. It's become so annoying being around my aunt when she says stuff like that because it's all the wrong ideals. She keeps telling me she's only saying it for my benefit, but is it really my benefit? Telling me make-up is necessary, and I need to change myself? That's for my benefit?

I really don't think so, and I'm so glad my own mother is not like this in the least bit.

Also, since she is a hairstylist, she has a magazine for all of these shampoos, etc. One of the shampoo brands, BedHead, has some weird names for shampoos. Three of their shampoos are called Control Freak, Dumb Blonde, and Self-Absorbed. I really think their advertising strategy is annoying. Making people feel bad about themselves? My aunt has the Dumb Blonde shampoo, and the first time I saw it in the bathroom, I wasn't sure what to think. Why would you own a shampoo that makes you feel bad about yourself or insults you?

Anyways, I just needed to get all of this out, and I also finally figured I should post something on Feministing. I'd definitely like to hear what you all think.

When is having "inadequate or not enough eyelashes" a medical condition that should be treated with prescription drugs? When it's labeled hypotrichosis, a condition in which hair does not grow at all in places where it's supposed to. Eyelashes function as little brooms for our eyeballs that sweep away dust and dead skin cells. They also grant wishes*. That's why people with hypotrichosis need Latisse, a prescription liquid that people with this terrible affliction dab on their eyelids to make eyelashes grow where there were no eyelashes before.

Cue Brooke Shields. I bet you didn't even know that Brooke Shields never had eyelashes until about 16 weeks before the above commercial was filmed. That's because she uses Latisse, and also because she's always had eyelashes.

Now, there are diseases that cause people to not grow, (hypotrichosis), lose (alopecia), and pull out (trichotillomania) their hair, including their eyelashes. Hair loss is also a side effect of chemotherapy. This product could probably help people in those situations. But Latisse is not marketed that way. It's advertised as a cosmetic drug for women who are, apparently, supposed to feel insecure about their eyelashes. The company uses the term "hypotrichosis" and defines it so narrowly to only pertain to eyelashes that aren't long and thick enough (whatever that means), making eyelashes that don't conform to our society's beauty standards a disease. On top of all the other parts of our bodies we're supposed to hate (i.e., all of it), now we have to make a doctor's appointment to check the adequacy of our eyelashes. What the hell?

* Seriously, the company is donating $1 million to the Make a Wish Foundation.

I read this post.

Why is it so intriguing and ok to condone the objectification of women in these more "urban" magazines? Although the magazine had women of other races, the predominately black magazine (along with others) believes it's ok to host these women because it provides an alternative beauty standard as opposed to the white, blonde, and blue eyed standard. It's not ok though. Latinas and Black women have constantly been viewed as nothing more but sexy, curvy, and an alternative to other men's magazines (as if all white women look the same, this is another problem). I appreciate all kinds of beauty, but just because this magazine targets another demographic does not make it ok or acceptable just because some view it as an alternative.

Vida Guerra, Melyssa Ford, Buffie the Body, Gloria Velez, K.D. Aubert are beautiful women and perfect examples of this constant exploitation, but there is something awfully wrong with featuring these ladies just because they have more curves. It would be different if they could model, without always having to be in thongs, bikinis, and lingerie.

What are your thoughts? Is this another form of objectification or does it provide us (both men and women) with another form of beauty standards?

I was recently flipping through a GQ magazine from a few months ago, and there was an article about how to attract a cougar,which is a women above the age of 35 who appeals to men in their early to mid 20s. The cover of the magazine stated "A field guide to the American Cougar: She's not getting older, she's getting hornier." GQ is clearly not the first to celebrate the virtues of the "cougar," I remember first hearing it in the movie American Pie, which popularized the term M.I.L.F. Now this may not seem different from a Mrs. Robinson type character, which has been part of American culture for decades. However, with a reality T.V. show called The Cougar it seems that the Mrs. Robinson character type has emerged from a fantasy to the mainstream.

With all the new found enthusiasm for the cougar we have to wonder whether or not this is a good thing? On the surface this seems like the rejection traditional beauty which values youth, and the sexualized teens, while embracing a more realistic type women as sexy. But if we look deeper we can get past the Mrs. Robinson mystic and see Cougar culture for what it really is, a hindrance to the progress of women.

Cougars reproduce many of the beauty standards of their younger counterparts: they are usually thin, blond, and have large breast. Also, the sexualization of older women now asserts that it is fine to objectify women of all ages, I wonder if this mainstream sexualization of older women will have a negative impact on women in the workplace. Now I understand that it is important to say that women can still be sexy and are not dead after 30, but something about the new Cougar culture misses that point and replaces it with this fetishization of middle age women instead of celebrating their sexuality. It seems to me that the new Cougar culture is part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

So, I recently went to a Mary Kay party and talked to the beauty consultant afterwards. She thought that I would be interested in becoming a beauty consultant for MK and it is starting to sound like a good idea based on the flexibility, independence and nice bit of side money I could make. My only qualm, besides paying $100 for the starter kit just as my student loan payments are due, is that I have trouble imagining being comfortable being a feminist and trying to convince women to buy beauty products. Any thoughts??

I have always struggled with beauty standards. A recovering anorexic and a zillion other identifiable eating disorders have consumed my life since I was 13. I am now 21...

Upon entering college, my eyes were opened wide with various Gender and Sociology classes which have not only changed my life (hence logging onto this blog, reading it daily, and now- writing in it..) but given me this newfound perspective on what I think beauty is and why.

I can remember as far back as four looking through magazines with my older sister and picking out which girl we thought was the prettiest- I cannot help but look back and wonder why we cared so much... I can remember in middle school, the beginning of my seven year battle with food- getting ready with friends for football games. We would doll ourselves up in the mirror, curl our hair; pick out an outfit that showed a nice hint of the little cleavage we had. Why did we care so much?

Looking back on my youth has made me understand how influential society, peers, the media, EVERYONE contains a very ingrained idea of what beauty is.

SO- here I am asking- what is beauty? I don't need the whole- "beauty is in the eye of the beholder bullshit" -it's not (in the very very physical sense that I am speaking of anyways). I asked a coworker this question- and she told me that "biologically men were attracted to blonde hair and blue eyes because they represented youth..." SO do men in China or India (if technology and transportation were not possible) despite that majority of women in these areas do not have the ideal blonde hair and blue eyes look- are they still attracted to women with blonde hair and blue eyes? Or is it (ah ha- light bulb moment!!!) this crazed youth obsessed culture, with mastermind white males (not all males now i know, but think back-- when media outlets were founded) running the advertising, entertainment, and all other media outlets industry!?

We have implants. We have lipo. We have treatments for "thin" lips or injections to cure wrinkles. But ... really? I just saw a commercial for Latisse, an ... eyelash growth enhancer. Eyelash growth ... REALLY? It's not just mascara anymore, we now have some chemicals you can brush on your eye to grow more hair. Sigh. Even down to the last little detail, women's bodies need fixing. I can't wait for earlobe shaming to begin (and please, don't tell me it already has).

I am not a big fan of fiction, so when I was recently at a store with "a million books" I went straight to the cultural studies sections, particularly the women and gender studies section. In the women and gender studies section was a collection of photographs from the website of the Suicide Girls. For those unfamiliar with Suicide Girls it is a punk version of Playboy, where women with tattoos and Mohawks pose nude.

My problem with this is that the book claims to be "redefining beauty." The collection of photographs asserts that these women are rebelling against the "blonde" norm that Playboy puts forth. These claims are infuriating because they are overtly false. Yes these women differ because they have tattoos, piercings, and multi-colored hairstyles. However, all of these women are large breasted and very skinny, most with their ribs showing. So while maybe these women do not conform to mainstream beauty standards at first glance, they are nothing more than edgier clones of Playboy models. Suicide Girls does not redefine or transcend beauty standards, it only repackages the same expectations and pressures they are claiming to defy. Also, they are placing mainstream beauty standards on a group that is supposed to be in opposition to the mainstream.

Perhaps lost in hypocrisy and the commodification of punk culture is that the book is in the women and gender studies section next to a book marketing feminism to young women (the first time I went the book was wrapped in plastic, but every time I have returned since the book is unwrapped for anyone to see). This is not about exposing children to soft-core pornography, but the one section that women should be free from mainstream beauty standards they are again bombarded by them, even if it is in a different form!

"I've always thought Marilyn Monroe looked fabulous, but I'd kill myself if I was that fat."--Elizabeth Hurley

Dear Fashion Industry--

Fuck. You.

It wasn't enough that you had to set a completely unattainable beauty ideal--seriously, how is having the body of a ten-year-old-boy sexy?!--but now that you think you've got to spend a little extra money you're going to stop making "plus sized " clothing altogether? You've got to be kidding me. So what're we supposed to do? Walk around wearing potato sacks? 

Listen, I get that there's a recession going on and things are expensive but take a minute to think about what you're saying when you've got the nerve to imply larger sized clothes cost more money because it takes more "yardage". Big girls aren't that big. Even those of us that are morbidly obese don't have to actually wear a circus tent. So things cost more money, why not add a few extra dollars to the price tag? Trust me when I tell you, we buy clothes. We have to. Public nudity's a crime. Especially for us apparently.

Over the past little while I started researching .....well porn. I took a strong interest to porn considering the worlds obsession but most importantly because of man's obsession. Yes, I know woman love it too and play just as big of a role. The reason why I was attracted with it was because growing up it was associated with men, not boys men and I liked men!
Saying that I bought several books, including Jenna Jamison's biography, watched a few flicks and cornered people for their opinions. Wahoo!

I have always loved the glamor of porn. The big hair, red lips, high heels and sexy outfits. Hells Yeah! I often pictured porn stars and other bare all celebrities as the pincal of beauty! They were in short what men wanted and what I wanted to be! They appeared to be powerful women in command of their sexuality. The real life Xena. And the fact that men loved them - did not hurt at all! Me being a young women, developed early and clearly understood her power over the opposite sex. I loved it! I love flaunting my chest knowing they can see but can not touch. Walking on to dance floor and taking a mans beer as he watches me dance! Even seeing my boyfriends eyes light up as I wear that barely there dress.

However, as I grew up the simple games were no longer appealing. I wanted a different type of attention.

Hey everyone! I've been reading posts for an awful long time so I thought I might create a post myself.

I found this video on Youtube and just wanted to know what other feminists thought about it... I'm kinda new to all this feminist stuff... so... don't throw rotten tomatoes at me.

Look no further.

This fucking floors me. I don't get how anyone could come to even think of this. Seriously? First off, I am getting sick of beauty myths spreading all over my vagina. My vag is fuckin' gorgeous, and I don't need a camel-toe-fixing hunk of plastic, waxing, or hymen replacement to feel that way.

Second off, the total ignorance about female (and male) anatomy is, well, astounding.

"Camel Toe might be hot... if you are a guy!!" ... how exactly does, never mind.

"As we have evolved, hair down there is a thing of the past." Um, my vagina begs to differ. And since when does waxing have to do with evolution?

"because you don't want everyone to see your damn uterus from the outside" Thankfully, we don't have to worry about that, because the uterus is an internal reproductive organ. *groan*

And really, how many words to say 'vagina' do we need?? Fuck, they don't even actually use the word 'vagina' except when talking about 'organic vagina lips.' Organic? How about biological? Apparently, cooze and pussy are far preferable and the vagina is some crazy, organic new-age hippie crap.

cross-posted at Politicoholic

A friend of mine just tweeted: “Susan Boyle gets a makeover. At last.” And then linked to this article . It’s a piece of crap, for many reasons. But I want this to be a short post with one main point, so I’m only going to highlight the most important thing. The article talks about how Susan Boyle has now died her hair, and got new, supposedly more fashionable, clothes.

“Susan Boyle, the frumpy “Britain’s Got Talent” sensation, has had a makeover. Boyle, 47, dyed her tangled gray hair a rich brown, and ditched her “drab dresses” for more fashionable attire. It’s heartwarming to see that having the opportunity to share her “beautiful voice” with millions has given Boyle new enthusiasm for life.” [emphasis mine]

When exactly did changing your looks to conform more to society’s standards of beauty become the same as a “new enthusiasm for life”? I’m not faulting Susan Boyle if she felt pressure to change her looks. Lord knows no one can talk about her WITHOUT talking about her looks. But I am faulting society for basing a woman’s worth, or at least part of it, on her looks. It doesn’t matter, apparently, how talented you are, unless you at least somewhat fit the description of what society thinks a woman should look like. No one is talking about Susan Boyle’s voice without simultaneously  talking about her looks and how “frumpy” or “drab” she is. It’s sending the message that her talent isn’t worth anything unless she were better looking.

I know I’m going to get at least a couple comments saying, but it’s not bad to be more attractive if she wanted to update her look. No, it’s not. But it is bad that everyone is judging Susan Boyle - and her worth - based in part on her looks, rather than JUST on her talent. Her looks shouldn’t matter, people.

Holy Cheez-Its!!

So I was randomly flipping through my suitemate's issue of Vogue when I noticed that I was actually looking at an abnormally continuous flow of advertisements. I had gone a good ways into the magazine before even reaching the table of contents on page 110 . Ya...that was a fifth of the magazine - there were 510 pages total!! This is probably not shocking to you guys, but for someone who made the conscious decision to stop reading fashion/beauty magazines at the age of thirteen, I couldn't believe my eyes. After that, I had to go through ten, fifteen pages of make-up and clothing advertisements before encountering a single page of text. They had crammed a few pages of article continuations at the back of the magazine, and that was about it.

Dahlia Lithwick on the XX-Factor points out that, even though Susan Boyle has established herself as a legitimate talent, people still patronize her:

"Maggie Rodriguez’s patronizing 'you look lovely, Susan' starts the interview—the way you might talk to a small child in clown shoes."

XX Factor

I think Susan Boyle presents a fantastic opportunity for our culture to be honest with itself about how heavily prejudices about appearance affect expecatations, and how incorrect those expecatations can be.

However, it seems whenever someone wants to discuss this moment in time, they just keep repeating "wow, we didn't think you could do ANYTHING, because you're NOT PRETTY, but we where wrong! Isn't that great! You can do amazing things! Even though you're still NOT PRETTY!" I'm excited for Susan Boyle, I'm so happy that she's earned this well-deserved success. I also really hope Susan Boyle the PERSON isn't degraded into a "Teachable Moment" for the rest of us.

*Cross posted at my new blog Tea Time With Jay *

My roommate is Asian and while we were looking at pictures of this guy she hooked up with (who is white I think) we noticed that he happened to hang out with a lot of Asian girls. My other friend then said, "Ewww don't date him, he just wants you because he has an Asian fetish." This got me thinking: why is it only considered a fetish when the trait you like about the person is not acceptable to society. If you happen to like fat people, for example, you are considered a "chubby chaser." But if you like skinny girls with big breasts and blonde hair, that's just considered "normal." If someone's physical trait deviates from society, it is deemed unacceptable to be attracted to such a trait. So if you do happen to be attracted to, say Asian women, it just gets written off as a fetish because there could not be any possible logical explanation for why you would be attracted to Asian women. Maybe I am misunderstanding the meaning of the word, but I think we really need to start broadening our standards for what can be considered attrative in our society WITHOUT using words like "fetish."

We all know that there's a tendency for women to be seen and not heard, and one way to perpetuate this is the existence of cosmetic surgery. To make ourselves visually pleasing, we take part in liposuction, skin smoothing, and boob jobs. But when happens when you add race as a factor?

In Medicalization of Racial Features: Asian American Women and Cosmetic Surgeries, Eugenia Kaw discusses the notion of racialized surgery. She argues that along with the pressure to look good, Asian American women are faced with the need to 'Westernize' their appearance. Since Americans are predominately Caucasian, we rarely see women of color in the media. As a consequence, the desire to assimilate to such White culture becomes internalized. Asian American women come to associate their own body parts with negativities - they see their single eyelids as too droopy and dull, their noses too flat and round. Worse yet, the high demand for double eyelid and nose bridge surgeries is further normalized by cosmetic surgeons who use their medical expertise to validate Asian American women's desire to modify their bodies. "It's normal for Asian to have excess fat on their eyelids," they say; "we can fix that problem for you."

In our consumer-driven society, it's not surprising that people will say what they can to earn that extra dollar. Moreover, cosmetic surgeons are just doing their job - they have no obligation to be fighting societal pressures and telling clients not to get surgery. However, I find it super frustrating that women of color are constantly subjected to messages of an ideal, White beauty in the media. It's hard enough to always look your best and even harder looking like someone else's best.

I don't know if anyone has seen the TLC show "Toddlers & Tiaras," but it's seriously creepy. "Toddlers & Tiaras" showcases children as young as a few months old and their pageant moms (and dads, occasionally) as they prepare for and compete in child beauty pageants. Here is the ad for the show:

I've seen 5-year-olds with spray tans, seven-year-olds with shaved legs, four-year-olds with fake teeth, and three-year-olds with fake toenails on this show. I've even seen a two-year-old with a velcro rip-away outfit basically stripping on stage (and this was no wardrobe malfunction).

I feel like these kids are being taught that you are (quite literally) judged on their looks and have to conform to ridiculous ultra-feminine stereotypes to succeed in life. Not only are these kids dealing with criticism from the judges, they're getting it from their parents and coaches as well. I have heard a mother on this show tell her five-year-old girl that she has a receding hairline and "looks like a grandpa." And this isn't even mentioning how much these children hear the adults around them unfairly criticize the other kids in the pageants. This whole system is just breeding children (both girls and boys) who harshly judge others and whose self-worth only depends on their physical stereotypical "beauty."

I've heard people who compete in beauty pageants say that the competitions are confidence-building and fun. My feelings on this argument is that there are plenty of confidence-building, fun activities for children that don't involve ingraining horribly outdated stereotypes in our kids. What do you think?

Heyo lovers,

I'm not quite sure how I feel about Perez Hilton, he seems sometimes very pro-women , sometimes very anti-women and I am not informed on how he feels about reproductive rights ... BUT I want to take this opportunity to express my frustration on this post.

One could say he is just playing the role as a celebrity reporter but I really don't think this is acceptable .. actually , I'm pissed about this. I think Sienna Miller looks NORMAL and BEAUTIFUL in this picture and for the thousands of women who read perez's blog everyday, he is sending a horrible message.

Thoughts ?!

Wow.. just, wow.. I feel SO bad for her. She used to be gorgeous when she had curves. And she's quite talented, in my opinion, She was great in Mean Girls. Now she looks like a malnourished child with breast implants. She also looks like she's going to collapse any second.

This is what Hollywood does to women.. and just imagine the millions of other women who envy them. Ugh, I don't know what to do about it anymore.

Is this what the status quo is telling women to be? 'Cause it happens way too often. And if women aren't already tiny in size, they often become desirous of being tiny in size. What does this say?

Shrink.. shrink until you're nearly nonexistent.

I've had this kicking around in my head for a while, and realized that the Feministing community is pretty damn good at dissecting societal expectations of how we look. My question is, what in the world is up with the obsession with teeth whitening?

It seems like a while ago, the only place you'd have your teeth whitened was at the dentist's office for a hefty sum. Over the last handful of years, suddenly I feel like I can't get away from teeth whitening products - whitening toothpastes, trays, sticky strips.

I find myself falling prey to it - I stare at my teeth in the mirror and wonder if they're gross and yellow, despite the fact that I brush twice a day and always floss in the mornings and visit the dentist regularly. Why am I feeling this way? Would it even cross my mind if it weren't for the fact that the products now exist at the drugstore? Did this market exist prior to these products, or did the products create the market?

And I've been trying to keep an eye out - has anyone seen commercials or ads for these products that feature men? Since I started keeping tally, they've all featured women.

Several times, I've researched the prices and customer feedback of all the whitening strips, but I can never bring myself to actually spend the money since in the end, it seems so frivolous and unnecessary. Any thoughts?

I'll be blunt: I hate Valentine's Day. I didn't like making cards for everyone in my elementary school class and I don't like seeing the incessant commercials that begin right after New Year's for diamonds and other shiny things. 

But I think that this might take the cake. 

As I was getting ready for school this morning, I heard this ad on the radio for a place called StudioSmooth. They do waxing, only they do something called "sugaring"--apparently it's less painful. It's also "how ancient Egyptian girls went bare!" Their ads usually consist of a very enthusiastic woman referring to women who choose to keep their pubic hair as "cave girls" and basically implying that any woman who has hair that is not on her head is a disgusting person who needs to do something about that.  

This morning's ad was offering something extra special. 

Here's a link to an article in the Globe called "Looks first, knowledge later." I'm actually surprised the Globe published anything like this. They're usually further to the right.

According to a new Canadian study, women's magazines routinely  use men’s opinions to justify undergoing cosmetic surgery:  

"Most often, this impact is debated with regard to procedures aimed to enhance sexualized body parts... Article titles such as 'How Men Really Feel About Breast Implants' and  ‘Would You Get a Boob Job for your Boyfriend’’ emphasize the perceived importance that men place on the sexual attractiveness of their female partners and use men’s opinions to justify a woman opting (or not opting) to undergo cosmetic surgery. "

"When it comes to de?ning what makes a woman beautiful, articles regarding cosmetic surgery routinely call upon men for their ‘expert opinions.’ A Cosmopolitan article regarding the growing demand for buttock implants that asks ordinary men to defne what constitutes the perfect female buttocks... The article quotes the vague ‘expert’ opinions of ‘Dean,’ who loves ‘‘a booty that’s softer and more girlie,’’ and ‘Jay,’ who really likes ‘a butt with a little oomph’. To support these lay opinions, the article cites ‘anthropological and psychological evidence’ that has confrmed that ‘‘the sight of attractive buttocks elicits a behavioural response in males: arousal’ and that in prehistoric times ‘the sexiest females . . . were the ones with the biggest buttocks’ . By supporting men’s subjective opinions with purportedly objective scienti?c (and in this case, evolutionary) research, cosmetic surgery is legitimated as a means of attracting men. In doing so, these articles (and, consequently, the magazines in which they appear) emphasize the notion that women’s bodies are for men’s viewing pleasure, while suggesting that cosmetic surgery is a logical choice for women who want to increase their chances of attracting a male partner."

This is probably not surprising, but given the physical and psychological risks associated with cosmetic surgery, however, I find these findings rather disturbing.   I must ask the question: "Would you get a boob job for your boyfriend?"  Or would you get butt implants to attract a man, (that is, assuming you WANT to attract a man)?  Of course YOU wouldn't go this far - you belong to the Feministing community.  But I would be interested to find out how many women in the general public would answer yes.  Or, how many (presumably heterosexual) men would have a risky procedure done to attract a partner?  Yet another reason why I'm glad I don't read "women's" magazines.

I struggle with the same shaving internal debate. For now, I go as long as I can without shaving. Especially in winter - no one sees my legs.

I shave more often under my arms and I use a really great deodorant (Clinique's) always.

I wish it were socially acceptable for men to shave under their arms - I can't stand body odor!

I focus my beauty decisions on what is healthy for my skin. Exfoliating (which shaving does) is healthy, but anything in extreme has to be unhealthy, so I limit it. Also, bathing everyday is really drying to my hair and skin. If I don't shower, I don't shave. The best advice I ever got from a dermatologist was don't bath everyday (I have really dry and sensitive skin). I save so much money on shampoo and soap. I save on usage of clean water. When I shave my legs, I make an event of it, soak in a hot bath, light a few candles, use the time to relax, and then end with the shaving. This has to be healthy for me - de-stressing bath + exfoliating . . .

Glad to read others have the internal debate.

This started out as a response to "The Facts: Dangerous High Heels", but became so lengthy that I decided to post it as a separate topic. Here goes:

I really try to reject all beauty practices that I find harmful and unnecessary. For example, I have no piercings. I think the notion of putting holes in one's body for aesthetic purposes is really... off-putting. No, I think it's absurd- to injure oneself and make sure the wounds don't heal properly, all for the sake of hanging shiny things from said wounds. I find it especially absurd as someone who has been addicted to self-injury; why would I want to cut myself like that for positive reasons? I don't judge people who do it (if it makes you happy, then whatever), but I refuse to do it myself.

I really believe that I am such a feminist through and through, and such a rational, thoughtful person. However, I struggle constantly with trying to understand that identity in relation to my inability to stop conforming to certain beauty standards, ones that I just cannot reject. Namely, hair removal. It isn't harmful exactly, though the notion of taking pointy tweezers and sharp razors to scrape natural, healthy things off of your body is definitely disturbing. No, my hatred of hair removal is mostly rooted (heh) in the issue of time/ convenience. I spend so. much. time. removing hair from my body, and I wish I could stop. I hate getting up earlier than I otherwise would have to; I hate being the bathroom hog; I hate just spending my time doing such an inane, repetitive, and sometimes painful task.

But I can't stop; I am SO anal about it. Here's a great example of how this hair-hang-up affects my daily life:

Just a few days ago, while messing around with my boyfriend in bed, I stopped the action to let him know that I could not take off my pants because my legs were not shaved. He said he doesn't care. I'm sure he really believes this, but neither of us will ever know if it's true because he will never see my hairy legs. As I explained to him (and as I have explained many times), it's not about him. It's not about him not finding me attractive. It's about me not feeling attractive.

I shave my legs and armpits most days (less in the winter.) I shave my arms every day. I shave my bikini line around three times a week (I would do it more but it's so painful, and usually no one is seeing it). I pluck my eyebrows and the hair above my lip every other day, every day if I can. I bleach the hair on my torso every few weeks.

At this point, I definitely sound insane, and possibly like a trichotillomaniac (I'm not. Believe me, I've looked into it.) And I am kind of insane, if by 'insane' you mean mentally ill in the boring, non-psychotic way: I have depression and OCD. I've had OCD for (at least) 10 years- since I was 9- and I've had Depression for 6 years- since I was 13. I have been obsessing about hair since the age of 11, well before the depression, but only after the incessant bullying. You see- and maybe this is something I should have said earlier- I'm really, really (naturally) hairy. I'm not a fair-haired girl; if I were, I doubt I'd have these hang-ups about seen un-shaven. No, my friends, I am, like, Frida Kahlo hairy. Like, forests of arm hair and a mustache and a unibrow. I was teased for this A LOT in my tween years, which led me to the humble opinion that being hairy is about the worst aesthetic problem you can be teased for. For example, it's a heckuva lot worse than having acne, because, while both classify you as ugly, only hirsuteness is a sign that you are decidedly un-female. This not only fucks with your self-esteem, but really makes you question your femininity/gender expression/ sexuality.

I don't know where I'm going with this. I can't go into my whole long history-of my bullying throughout middle school; of how, once I conformed to these fascist beauty standards, I then received the inappropriate attentions of a teacher at the age of 13; of how that flung me down the way-fucked-up path of lolita-dom. I can't fully explain how all of these affected my self-esteem, my self-image, my self-worth. That's for therapy, and, frankly, I'm not even sure how much of it has to do with my extreme hair-self-consciousness.

All I know is that I still really question my decisions about hair removal. I resist getting it all permanently removed, partly out of not wanting to ask my parents for the money. Mostly, however, it's because I have this vision of moving somewhere more accepting of my natural beauty. I probably should have also mentioned earlier that I am beautiful- even conventionally so once I do all my deforesting. I have no delusions about my body, and I want to embrace it. I want to be Friday Kahlo- smart, talented, sexy, and beautiful... and hairy, goddamnit. I want to embrace being a mammal, and get away from the magnifying mirror and tweezers.

I know, though, that such a fantasy isn't realistic, at least not now, not in NYC, USA. What I would like for the present is to be able to reconcile my extreme self-consciousness of being hairy with my struggle to be a better feminist, and a better person, including improving my self-esteem and mental health.

Does anyone have any advice? I'm not looking for a shrink, just- maybe- someone who is in a similar situation.

Sometimes the facts of women's history provoke searing debate. Did you know that wearing high heels can be dangerous to your health? According to a team of Harvard researchers, wearing high heels is linked to "knee osteoarthritis, a painful, degenerative joint disease characterized by the breakdown of the cartilage surrounding the knee." Wide high heels are no better: "The researchers decided to look at the chunkier heels now in fashion to determine if they too are harmful to women's knees. The latest study, which appears in the April 7, 2001, issue of The Lancet, demonstrates that wide heels increase the risk of developing osteoarthritis in the knee as much as, or more than, spindly-heeled stilettos."

The recent vogue for incredibly high heels worn by the likes of Victoria Beckman makes us wish that she would read the radical feminist Shelia Jeffreys incredibly hard-hitting, sobering critique of dangerous trends in the beauty industry, Beauty and Misogyny Harmful Cultural Practices in the West. Jeffreys argues against the notion that Western cultural practices should be exempt from the United Nations' condemnation of "harmful traditional practices" outside of Western Europe, America, Australia, and other so called "developed" nations. Jeffreys says that "[..] Western beauty practices from makeup to labiaplasty (and much, much more...her book is exhaustive) do fit the criteria [for harmful practices against women's health] and should be included in UN understandings." How can contemporary feminists who revel in practices of adornment, or who view make-up, high heels, and other practices as empowering or erotic reconcile their tastes with the studies that note how dangerous to women's health such effects as high heels are?

Sometimes the facts of women's history are subject to great debate and soul-searching.

Hi all, long time reader, first post.

I have been considering getting a breast reduction since I was about 13, when I went from an A to a B in about two months.  Now I am 17, nearly 18, and after a year of believing that I might be able to get the surgery when I was 20 to be sure I wasn't going to grow any more, I have suddenly grown another cup size from an E to an F.  I'm not a light framed girl, luckily, with broad shoulders and height to back it up unlike the other women in my family, but it still causes me all sorts of problems.  I raise horses, and as anyone who has been around them knows, a lot of running after them is involved.  When I ride with any speed, I bounce so bad that it's painful.  Sitting at a desk is difficult because I have to hunch forward often so they sit in the desk to keep my back from hurting.  I see a chiropractor twice a week to work on the lack of curve in my neck, I have not slept on my back since I was 14, and my posture has gotten increasingly worse over the last 6 months.  I want four things out of life right now.  World peace, to end poverty, equality for all, and to be a C.

Since I hit the lovely thing that is puberty, I have dealt with the stares and the comments from both strangers and friends alike.  I can't ride horses in front of anyone, walk fast, or sometimes be out in public at all.  Living in a small Georgia town, telling most people to go screw themselves doesn't do much good.

Now, it's been pretty well known for many years now that I am a feminist.  Today, I met a girl who I have not seen in 4 years or so and who knew me when I made the two month size jump in 7th grade.  At the time, she went from friend to instant enemy simply because I had an added few pounds to the front of my body.  I had on a t-shirt that said "Women belong in the house... and the Senate." when we spoke.  The major first thing I noticed was that she had had serious augmentation done to everything she had, from breasts to lips to ass implants (totally don't get those).  She kept telling me how much work she had done, so I mentioned that I wanted to get a reduction.  She quickly said "You just want one because you're feminist.  You don't want to look like a girl."

I realize that I probably should have expected something like this, but never before have I had someone tie my want of a healthy body to my social positions.  It frankly floored me.  I'm used to people accusing me of being a lesbian, man hater, infant murderer, etc, but this was somehow different.  I can't recall my response to her, but knowing me it was deeply sarcastic.  I spoke about this to my semi-supportive mom, who actually agreed with her.

Am I the only one who's head is about to explode over this?  Even as I have talked to other people I know about it, men and women, and I have been incredibly surprised how little support there is out there for the procedure.

Any thoughts on why exactly this is?  Any books on the subject?

Ever wanted to know how models actually look?

This website is a huge reality slap about the unfair standards of women's beauty. Not to mention this guy's slogan is " Nature gives us beauty - Artists enhance it". What a creeper; I think he's actually proud of his so-call 'art.'

I'm a gigantic fan of the Dresden Dolls, and when its lead singer, Amanda Palmer, released her solo album in September, I was floored. It's beyond fantastic, and the videos she's made from it so far, including her ironically dedicated-to-Sarah-Palin video for "Oasis" , have been  beyond fantastic.

Today, she put up her new video for "Leeds United". Her and her team spent long hours working on the Leeds video, as she describes on her blog , only to have her label ask to remove some shots of the video that her bare belly, because, they said, she looks fat.

Seriously?? Amanda Palmer, fat?? She is a totally normal and healthy weight. This is just more evidence of how b.s. the music industry is in its treatment of women and how society expects any woman who wants to be successful to also be a size zero. Not to mention that fact that Amanda Palmer is one of the few women artists signed by Roadrunner Records, and I'm willing to bet none of the men on the label have ever been criticized for their bellies.

Thankfully though, she refused. The video stayed as is, and some of her sweet fans started putting pictures of their bellies on her fan forum . Awesome deal.

Ok, I have a confession to make, one that seems very inconsequential, but for some reason has gotten me some very strong responses from people - feminist and non-feminist alike. Allow me to state some background before I begin...

During high school and college, I got a few select piercings - I have 5 my left ear, 6 in my right, and had my nose, navel, and upper lip (Monroe) pierced. When I began law school, I removed the nose and Monroe piercings out of a sense of "professionalism," I suppose. I kept the ears and navel in. Now, I often wear long jewelry in the navel piercing, so on some days, it's pretty clear that I DO have my belly button pierced. And sometimes, this leads to some very interesting interactions.

At approximately 4:55 of this clip Bob Lutz makes a reference to women I found extremely insulting.

I applaud Steven Colbert for throwing out all of the negative and demeaning stereotypes to which Bob Lutz was referring. Through Steven Colbert's satire my eyes opened to a few things that I found shocking. 

Mr. Lutz's remarks insinuate that women who are environmentally conscious are less attractive.  That these women are not the type of woman that a man would typically want to attract.  That by purchasing his electric car you will be attaracting a less beautiful subgroup of women. I find that women are becoming more and more attracted to men who are economically, financially, and environmentally responsible.  But instead of focusing on that, an approach that paints women in a resposible and concientious light,  Mr. Lutz decides to propagate a negative image of  women who do not subscribe to typical standards of beauty. 

It's remarks like this that are so pervasive in media. Remarks like this that tell the public that it's okay to look down on women who don't look like someone you'd find in Cosmo.  Mr. Lutz's are evidence that his sexist attitudes; attitudes that play into unrealistic, unattanable and often dangerous standards of beauty; are widely  accepted.  I find that appaling.

I wish more people would see remarks such as these for the misogyny that it is.

 This is absolutely charming. All over my my gyno's office, there are ads for Botox, Juvederm, special mineral make up, facial skin treatments... While getting my well-woman exam, I can see over my knee an expressionless man advertising Botox. 

Shouldn't the gynecologist's office be the one place you can get away from all this BS? I'm going to make sure I'm healthy, not to get a good dose of self-hate! How long have people not been allowed to age gracefully? I'm 20 and I'm scared of what'll happen as this trend continues. Health should take precedence over beauty standards! 

Since May, I had been thinking about getting my bottom lip pierced. On my face. Not my bottom, bottom lip. Anyway, I finally got it done about two weeks ago by this awesome piercer and I really love it a lot and so do my family and friends…you know, the people whose opinions actually matter.

I live in Vermont, a fairly liberal place; especially in Burlington where I reside. I would even go as far as to say it has a distinct hippie vibe. So, I was not really expecting anyone to comment negatively on this new look because well;   let’s face it, wait five minutes and you will see something much weirder come along. (Case in point, I walked past a dude today eating liverwurst out of the wrapper in one hand and he had a half gallon of apple cider in the other hand.) Sadly though, I have gotten exactly three disparaging comments in two short weeks. Interestingly enough however, only from older men.

One from my SO’s uncle, which was to effect of, ‘why did you ruin your beautiful face?’ Excuse me? You are like 55 years old and married. I am 19. And while I appreciate the attempt at flattery, I like my face (and so does your nephew btdubs) so I would consider that NOT ruined. Perhaps ruined because now I don’t fit an ideal beauty standard of yours? Sorry bucko.

One from a store clerk (WTF right? Not even worth the stupid details) and one final comment from my boss (even bigger WTF.) My boss actually referred to it as “a mutilation.” Uh no. It was actually pretty fucking liberating to do something unexpected like this. (PS I am very indecisive so this was a big move for me just in case it sounds tame to others) And considering I checked the employee handbook for any indication that this might cause repercussions for me, I really do not think it concerns you, Mr. Boss Man! Granted, it’s a work-study job and I probably should just let it go but… why the hell do people gotta get up in my shit like this?? Would the reaction be the same if I got breast implants? Would I be “ruining” my figure (that I happen to like!)? No. It absolutely would not.

What do you guys think? Anyone else had experiences like this? Is The Man keeping you down with his fascist beauty standards?

I have a confession to make: I fucking love American Apparel.

There's been a lot of outrage in the feminist community over American Apparel. The ads are offensive and Dov Charney may just be the creepiest person alive. The models all look like they're on coke.

So here's my defense.

There's no way to defend Dov Charney. He's creepy and disrespectful of everyone around him. I've always kind of suspected he might have some mental disorder that makes him think that this kind of behavior is okay, but maybe I'm just looking for an excuse to let him off the hook. He's a creeper. No argument here.

Wow. I'm starting this defense off really well, aren't I?

Let's start with the ads. They're sexy. They're over the top, and they invariably  show way more nudity than is strictly necessary. I could argue that some of the shots are really artistic and gorgeous, but that would spark all sorts of controversy and lots of arguing. But the one thing no one can argue is that it's incredibly awesome that the ads aren't airbrushed. If you see an AA ad while flipping through Cosmo, chances are it's the only un-photoshopped image in the entire magazine. The flaws are out in the open, not hidden away. AA models may be uniformly gorgeous and skinny, but they're real people, and you have to give the company props for that.

In the end, I think that it's worth giving money to a creepster like Dov if it helps me avoid supporting sweatshops, which are awful. Dov may harass women, but let's not forget that women are disproportionately affected by sweatshop labor. And while I can't excuse his grossness (unless it really is a mental disorder, in which case someone needs to get him the proper medicine, and fast) I can justify my decision to shop at American Apparel.

(Also, some of the clothing is really, really cute.)

When does it end? 

The very first line of this article: "The anticipation over Sen. Hillary Clinton's speech Tuesday night was as high as her pantsuit was orange."

thank you yahoo for your insight. *eye roll*

From Yahoo news:

"The first beauty pageant for nuns debuts next month with the advent of "Miss Sister Italy," aimed at erasing a stereotype of nuns as being old and sad, a newspaper reported Sunday.

(Advertisement)
"Nuns are above all women and beauty is a gift from God," priest Antonio Rungi of the southern Italian diocese of Modragone told the daily Corriere della Sera.

"This contest will be a way to show there isn't just the beauty we see on television but also a more discrete charm," he added.

Nuns wishing to participate in the contest should send their picture to Rungi, who will publish it on his blog. Internet surfers can then vote for their favorite nun online.

"You really think all nuns are old, stunted and sad? This isn't the case any more, thanks to the arrival in our country of young and vital nuns," notably from Africa and Latin America, Father Rungi added." ------------

Thoughts?

Ever since I neglected to get my high-school grad photos retouched, my parents have been on a crusade to take a decent portrait of me. This month, the "Mission Accomplished" banner went up: I had my picture taken for when I was interviewed about current perspectives on sexual liberation. I e-mailed a PDF copy to my dad, who was staying with my mom and my little brother at the lake while I was working in the city. They unanimously agreed that the picture was beautiful. Which it was, I must say.

One problem, though. They forgot to give their feedback on what the picture was for.

So I have a this problem: I like to wear dresses.

It doesn't sound like a problem but aside from the fact that it's nearly impossible to find dresses that don't look like the 1980s thrift store reject colors barfed up on them the problem with dresses is that I HATE shaving my legs. Part of the reason for that is my shower. My shower likes to adjust the water pressure and water temperature all by itself so I always have goosebumps and goosebumps do not get along with razors.

I can't just NOT shave because of another, small, little-known fact: according to the Marine Corps grooming regulations, female Marines may not have "unsightly" leg hair. So if I show up for PT (physical training) one morning without having shaved my legs in the two weeks prior, I'm in the same boat as any male Marine who dares show up with two weeks' worth of stubble on his chin. (Or knowing some guys, it would be a full beard)

Katherine Heigl's been receiving a big of press lately -- press that makes me like her quite a bit, so I checked her out on IMDB.  Apparently, she made an unexpected appearance in the movie 100 Girls . The review on Internet Movie Database sounded like the movie could be interesting, so I suggested to Seth that we watch it on Friday night.

Big mistake.

The movie's about a guy at college who gets stuck in an elevator during a power outage with a mystery girl. He falls in love with her, they have sex, and he wakes up in the morning with just a memory and a pair of her underwear (she had her laundry basket with her. I'm sure she dropped them). Understandably, he wants to find her because he didn't get her name or even see her face (the laundry basket was huge and overflowing, and it blocked her face from view). I mean, the kid thinks he's in love, right? So he sets out to find the mystery chick by breaking into the women-only dorm and sneaking into each woman's room to try and find the matching bra to the underwear in his possession.

Setting aside the fact that not every woman buys matching bras and underwear, and the completely inane personality caricatures assigned to each of the 100 women in the dorm, and the Victoria-era moralities foisted upon the women (moral guardians, gatekeepers of sex... oooo), and the unrealistic portrayal of a women's studies course and lesbians and dorm life and sexual assault victims, and hundreds of other qualms I had about this movie, let's talk about hair.

Seth and I were betting on who the mystery woman would be. He pointed to Larisa Oleynik and said, "I bet it's her."

"No way," I said, "it can't be her. She has short hair. Women with short hair are never the romantic leads."

By Consistent Transition

So I'm talking to this pseudo-suitor today and he tells me about people who interdate (AKA “Internet Date”). Apparently, some guys freak out about "angle shots" where women ("fat" women) post photos of themselves that make them look “thin” so when they go on their actual date the guy is devastated because the female made no mention of an extra 100 lbs. This made me think really hard about body image and the way that we are supposed to look, how we are expected to be sexy, what “sexy” means and how we see ourselves as sexual and attractive beings.

Really, you can't fault individuals for who/what they do or do not find attractive. It may hurt sometimes, and yes, some folks are seriously shallow and that's the truth but there's a combination of factors that drive our desires. I think some of it could be that biological mess that tells the human race to procreate (choose the healthiest mate, etc etc.). I also think it has to do with how each of us was raised, culturally, and what we find "normal" or "exotic." These ideas are also rooted in institutional oppression so it's important to acknowledge that sexual desire for an individual is more than just biological and more than just cultural--it's a combination of the two.

But really, I think thick folks need to wear it like they own it. Be healthy, find that balance of being happy AND healthy but also bring it like you feel sexy, desirable, wanted and all those other things that people mind you on. I'm having this totally nonchalant conversation about body image and I think back to being in middle school when so many people tried so hard to be white- lightening their skin, wearing Abercrombie, straightening their hair- all trying to be this image of white when inside it was hurting them. And yes, it hurts someone's spirit to be told day after day that "YOU ARE NOT BEAUTIFUL." I've seen the most gorgeous people turn cold because someone told them that they were too fat or too skinny or too dark or too pale or their hair was too kinky…"oh you've got a pretty face, though." Wow... if someone said the same thing about race or religion, the statement would sound as harsh as it is. (I really think about this story and say, "why do you have to call someone names anyway- it's not like they don't already have their own internal thing happening every day. All it takes is one look in a magazine and one look in the mirror- we all have that ). It makes me beyond sad and disappointed that this "fat" dialogue means so much to folks, and can lead to so much hurt.

I once did a workshop where people were asked, "What do you think people notice first about you?" There were tons of words on the wall- race, sex, gender, religion, neighborhood, class, ability, etc. But I chose body type. I chose this category for several reasons. I think that body type is a combination of people's assumptions. People can look at me, and they may try to guess my race, but all they'll see is a woman of color- maybe Native, maybe Latino, maybe Middle-Eastern, who knows? But most likely, not Black, not Asian and certainly, not Japanese- no matter my actual heritage. I think it's because of the body and demeanor that we, as the American public, typically associate with Asians/Asian Americans, and I don't fit within that category- both in terms of height and width. And let's be honest, when talking about race and assumptions based on race, we really can't distinguish those from gender. In other words, there is a certain text that is written on the Asian Male body and an entirely different text for Asian Females. This text is further skewed depending on my choice of clothing- can we tell from a no name brand what someone's class is or if they are queer?

I'm 25 and I still haven't learned to voice my opinion about this topic. It just seems so difficult to talk about it without offense. My family has been riddled with body issues. My siblings and I watched our mother battle a constant hate of her body. And throughout the quest of accepting and loving ourselves there is a steep learning curve for all of us. I want to be sensitive to folks' needs and supposed desires, but truth be told- I also don't find unhealthily overweight partners attractive. Am I doing bodilyharm to these folks by not giving them a chance?

I was in Wal-Mart the other day and was walking through the women's clothes and I realized that it was split in half: one section was for "regular" sized clothing and the other was for plus sized clothing. I began thinking about it and realized how wrong that seems. They create an entirely separate section for "plus-sized" women to shop in. Why can't all of the sizes be in one section? Why don't they just put all of the clothes that are predominantly wore by African Americans and stick them in one section, or put all of the clearance items in another section and label it "low-income families?" It's all the same concept and it make me really angry. I have to wonder: is it embarrassing for women who need bigger clothes to shop in a separate section? Does it make them feel badly about themselves? Where is the "plus sized" section for men? The absence of one really shows something about beauty standards in our society.

I would love to hear people's thoughts on this.

Because of Samhita's earlier post , I got to thinking.

I absolutely, with all my heart, adore old-fashioned whale-bone binding corsets. I love the way they look, etc. Unfortunately for me, I don't own an old fashioned one. I do own a couple more modern type ones though.

I'm a big girl (size 18-22). I am also into the BDSM scene, which may be where my love for corsets come in. BUT, I wear them because I like them. They make me feel sexy and seductive. Yes, my boyfriend loves it when I wear them, but I introduced them to the bedroom/him. He isn't pressuring me in the slightest.

Basically, I just want to know what you all think about corsets.

"The impact of a bullet can push the metal and plastic bits of the bra into an officer's body, causing serious injury," said Carmen Kibat, an adviser on equal opportunities for the Hamburg-based Bundespolizei - Germany's federal police force.

"I always thought normal bras posed a safety risk and I wanted to change that," she said.

"These new bras are very important and they will help all our women officers."

Read the story!

OK so I wasn't actually going to post this here because I thought maybe where my thought process came out of would come off as confrontational?  But then Rachel went and posted about conventional beauty and the would blow up around that and I just couldn't resist...

Apparently I have one bone left to pick over one of Jessica Valenti's choices in Full Frontal Feminism (and to be fair she was hardly the first to employ this tactic).  That is, her numerous reassurances that "not all feminists are fat, ugly, hairy, lesbians." Yah ok, that's true, but how about those of us who ARE? Or those of us who maybe aren't all of those things, but maybe, say, one of them? I've been picking at this sore for a while and Feminist Gal's post on beauty privilege over at Oh, You're a FEMINIST?! finally tipped me over the edge to post about it.

Now first of all, you should totally read that post, because it's good. But what it brought up for me was consciousness of my own beauty privilege, which I have more or less recognized myself to have before those words were put on it. Being in possession of beauty privilege has certainly worked in my favor in life, and I've a lot of advantage of it, to be honest.  It makes my explorations of topics such as the hair on my body more easily accessible than it must be for others. I can afford to buck the system, because I can, if I choose to, assimilate very easily into it. And I have had an uneasy relationship with that fact, at turns choosing to conform and not to conform.

I did some research for a Women's Studies Symposium I was involved in on race, class, and perceptions of beauty and this is what I wrote up for my presentation. The subject is very intriguing-

Whiteness has been a status symbol around the globe for centuries. European women in the 1700's would eat arsenic wafers and layer their faces with powders containing arsenic and lead in order to make themselves appear as white as possible. In China and Japan, women would go to extreme measures to stay out of the sun in order to acquire pale and translucent faces. Dark and tan skin was a sign of manual labor and poverty. To have lighter skin meant that a person did not have to work for their money; it meant that they were wealthy and thus powerful.

Unfortunately what many people do not realize is that globally, we have not progressed much in this aspect. Although in some countries the reasoning has changed, perceptions of beauty still have much to do with what, culturally, people believes APPEARS superior.

In the United States, based on history, white is the dominant race, and thus light skin and Caucasian features are viewed as the "norm" in terms of beauty, leaving people of other races feeling inferior and less attractive. These feelings of inferiority and consequently a need to assimilate into white, American culture causes the desire to lighten skin, by the use of bleaching treatments and plastic surgery.

It is important to remember that this is a global issue. In 2002, women were hospitalized in Hong Kong for mercury poisoning caused by three brands of whitening cream.

Perceptions of beauty worldwide are embedded into society based on superiority and very often race and class determines that superiority. The Mass Media helps to fuel these ideals by plastering images of what is "beautiful" in magazines, on billboards, and on TV.

Beauty really isn't only skin deep.

Let me know what everyone thinks about this subject and if anyone has personal experiences or stories!

Maureen

I saw a link to this site on Pajiba and it couldn't be more true.  As much as I may laugh at Seth Rogan and  Jonah Hill I never quite will get over the fact that if these were women they would not be playing leading man to Paul Rudd but would in fact be the side kick with a quick comeback.

I love finding little feminist articles on websites that are not feminist because it gives me hope out there that the more these things are pointed out the more things will change.