Beautyism: Intersectionality and Beauty Prejudice
Leah Knowles WMS 500 Fm. Th. & Pr. 13 December 2009
The myth of beauty tells us “...beauty objectively and universally exists. Women must want it in themselves and men must want it in women” (Erickson & Cogan 58). Not only must women strive to exhibit the highest potential of their personal beauty, but if they must also fit a prescribed set of rules dictating the precise image they should conjure. The story is already written for them without acknowledging or even observing their unique individuality which brings variety and intrigue to the world. “...The story line does not allow for more than one script; it cannot explain diverse looks, changes in looks, or pleasures outside of the dominant cultural script (Erickson & Cogan 58). In this paper I hope to take my knowledge of intersectional theory1 and apply it to the notion of standardized beauty norms as a means of discrimination. While human beings are oppressed based on other uncontrollable traits such as gender, race, class, age, ability, and sexual orientation, I would purport their level of normative physical attractiveness can be another front against which they are discriminated (an oppression I will refer to as “beautyism”). I believe beautyism is a basis for prejudice and its own branch of intersectional thought, but like other oppressive statuses, it also coincides with the rest. I plan to apply intersectional theory to specific cultural beauty norms in order to illuminate the ways in which oppressions intersect. Power is also implicated with intersectional work. Those who occupy places of hegemonic privilege are ultimately given the authority to decide what is beautiful and what is not. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as long as the one doing the holding is a white, heteropatriarchal society. Although the idea of beauty standards is universal, we will find those standards still vary widely across cultural and historical boundaries. This fact is important to realize because it demonstrates how beauty itself as a social construct. It is not innate or natural, but dictated by the culture in which one lives and is socialized. The defined spectrum of attractiveness can change at a moment's notice, and the 1 Intersectional theory was developed by Patricia Hill Collins and Kimberle Crenshaw in order to establish a sociological perspective which acknowledged how different forms of discrimination often occur simultaneously. For more information on Intersectionality, see Collins' Emerging Intersections: Race, Class, and Gender in Theory, Policy, and Practice and Crenshaw's Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color.
process of changing beauty standards is arbitrary at best. Therefore, if the norms are random and fickle, why are we punished and why do we punish ourselves for transgressing against them? The answer to that question is not simple. Beautyism, like most other discrimination, is powerful and it is difficult to prove its validity. The main area researchers have begun to concentrate in is the workplace with hiring and employment. As is discussed in the article on this subject by Stephen Crow, we already have laws which prohibit employers from firing or neglecting to consider job applicants who are disabled in some way. Even so, problems arise in proving the intention and attitude of the employers themselves, as they will generally deny discriminating based on a candidate's level of physical attractiveness. But what is clear in this instance is the fact that people of color, alternative gender identities, poor people, the elderly, the LGTBQ community, and disabled persons do face prejudice for their status as minorities. Identity qualifiers like Hispanic, handicapped, obese, senior citizen, butch, are all considered ugly in the normative sense. Individuals with these qualities do not fit the mold of standardized beauty and this is very much a party of their oppression. If we consider who decides these norms in our particular society, a good illustration is the realm of the super model. The reality show “America's Next Top Model” is an example of a field in which “ugly” people are not allowed. It is to critique shows like “America's Next Top Model” (ANTM) that I plan to focus my research on American and Western culture. I fully acknowledge that every other culture throughout the world and time must struggle with this same issue. Beautyism wears many masks and has manipulated human beings since the beginning of time. I also would like to point out other cultures and points in history may not put as much emphasis on fitting the standard of beauty. I believe Western culture faces a significantly intense battle with beautyism because of our capitalist greed and the rise of the visual image in modern technology. I will begin by examining the notion of beauty as a social construction in the collage I have included with this paper. The images create a kind of beauty juxtaposition in that they present various
beauty norms throughout history and culture and directly oppose each other. The first image depicts a Venus carving, one of which was carbon-dated to over 35,000 years ago. The sculpture shows a female body with exaggerated and curvaceous protuberances. Although it possibly symbolized fertility for ancient civilizations, I suggest it may also have represented a standard of beauty since its only purpose was to exist and be looked at (France-Presse). The second photo is the bust of the Egyptian queen Nefertiti (King Tut's mother). It is apparent that the norm for her culture promoted slender forms, as is evidenced by her elongated, thin neck. In Europe around the 1630s, Peter Paul Rubens painted the fleshy and generous forms of the female body (Belkin 2). Next to that, we see the regal Queen Liliuokalani, the last monarch of Hawaii before the U.S. began to claim the islands (Hawaii 243). What our society calls obese was considered beautiful in Hawaiian culture, and the indigenous peoples there have not been fully Americanized in this regard. Marilyn Monroe is shown next, an American icon of beauty. Monroe fluctuated between a size 12 and 16 and was one of the last “plus-size” beauties of our culture (Roeper 89). Directly contrasted to her, we see British model “Twiggy,” who ushered in the emaciated look in the 1960s. The modern example of the waifish look is Kate Moss, another British model who is thin to the point of being unhealthy (her ribs are showing). This collage illustrates how what is considered healthy, normal, and beautiful is defined quite differently across the world and in certain historical contexts. If beauty is a social construct which changes across time and culture, it is imperative to examine how and why people are discriminated against for lacking an ideal form of beauty. In keeping with intersectional organization, I will analyze the main bases for oppression using beautyism as a lens. Beginning with one of the fundamental categories of our society (gender), I feel women are at the core of this problem of beauty. An important connection between women and beauty is the way our language describes gendered physical attractiveness. This stems partly from my personal experience, but I believe it is generally acceptable to call females “beautiful, cute, or pretty,” but males are described using “cute, handsome, or attractive.” One does not usually think of a man as beautiful. In
contrast, we have woman, who exists purely for the external beauty she possesses and portrays to society. If she makes no effort to enhance her looks by using products the market provides for her, she will be punished for her lack of true femininity. Worse yet, if she possesses very little “natural” beauty, which cosmetics and make-overs cannot excuse, her entire person becomes obsolete. She has very little worth in a culture that prizes material attractiveness over all other qualities in the female sex. The main reason beautyism affects females more than males is the problem of sexism. Part of sexist and patriarchal oppression is to limit women's ability to use all facets of their beings to gain power and equality. This reduces women's merit to their physical bodies, which limits the use of their talents and deeper abilities. By creating and sustaining a culture which glamorizes a standard of beauty very few women can achieve, hetero-patriarchy keeps them in their places as decorative objects, not agents of their own free will. Thus, if women are reduced to their material bodies, what can we say about men? Men's position of privilege is established in this respect by examining all the other ways they are valued in our society. Men have merit based on their attractiveness too, but also on their intelligence, strength (physical and otherwise), integrity, valor, their achievements, talents, character, personality, etc. The list could go on. While men are valued as complex and important citizens of our culture, women seem to exist only for the aesthetic pleasure they impart to their observers. So who are their observers? “The women thus become male-identified, in the sense that they dress and behave on the basis of male definitions and expectations of what it is to be a woman”(Undressing the Ad 88). While women are valued for their physical beauty (or oppressed for their lack of it), we can take this discussion a step further by analyzing the attitudes of their observers: men. For heterosexual men, a woman's body is not only visually appealing, but it is also sexually arousing. Women's reduction to sexual objects can be seen in the media's constant displays of cropped photos of the female figure. To decapitate or amputate parts of a woman's image is to hide her humanity and show her person as existing to fuel men's sexual fantasies. “...the image of being a woman was constructed almost entirely
through sexuality”(Undressing the Ad 89). Gender overlaps race particularly if we look at how advertisements portray African-American and Asian-American women. Not only are they reduced to physical and sexual objects, but they are also caricatured to fit men's fantasy of wild, animalistic (black women) or exotic lotuses (Asian women)(Kilbourne). If women continue to be oppressed and reduced to their material sides, we will never reach true equality. Hopefully their multi-faceted value and basic worth as human beings will develop more fully in Western culture. Another fundamental category of society and reason for discrimination is the issue of race or ethnicity. In our society, the most common example of this is the long and arduous battle of AfricanAmericans to gain freedom and equality. For too long they have been compared to animals and been treated as less-than-human and personal property. Other people of color have been altogether invisible to the history and ignorant eye of white, hetero-patriarchal America. The media and cultural recorders of our history do not include stories of the genocide, sterilization, and colonization of our indigenous peoples. The systemic rape and crimes against Hispanic and Latina immigrants on our Southern border is hardly common knowledge. White supremacy cannot be described as something of the past or a cultural phenomenon we were led to support when our people “didn't know any better.” In fact, the debate between black people and white people still lives today, but there is a greater insight to be seen in our issue with racism. Rather than pitting race against race, a problem that is often overlooked is the position of privilege. White is still right in our society. The only way a person may have brown skin is if that person deliberately baked his or her ivory, Euro-centric complexion into a tanning bed orange. If a person is born with a tan, dark eyes and hair, or has the word “native” in his or her ethnic description, she or he is not acceptable. The way Western culture generally solves the problem of people of color is to hide them away or ask them to change who they are to better fit a white ideal. White supremacy is especially significant when it comes to standardized beauty. As I discussed in the section on gender, women are the focus of discrimination based on physical attractiveness. For
my purposes, I will concentrate on black women and the hair battle. I researched how the media, advertisements, and capitalist consumerism influences the way black women groom their hair and the pressure society places on them to fit a very specific norm. “...advertising seems to advocate the emulation of whiteness and white beauty standards”(Undressing the Ad 88). Black women are given the option (and compelled by societal norms) to straighten or relax their natural hair texture to resemble the look and feel of white women's hair. The chemical processes used to accomplish this look is painful and dangerous. Weaves are also a painful way to hide the true essence of black women's hair in order to fit the white hair standard. This ideal is not simply aimed at black women, but black girls as well. “A young black girl would probably experience severe scalp burns, eye injury or even have all of her hair fall off if she used this chemical treatment unsupervised by an adult”(Undressing the Ad 100). This suggests that the process of white beautification begins very early for young black girls and is part of their socialization into womanhood. It is also dangerous to their health (not to mention their self-esteem and pride in their race). What does this tell us about the power behind the desire to achieve beauty? The following quotation presents an important argument for claiming white supremacy as the culprit: “There are no products marketed directly to little white girls that chemically alter their hair texture from its natural state” (Undressing the Ad 101). Black women are not simply “ugly” because of the natural texture of their hair, but their skin tone plays a significant part as well. “...a disproportionately large percentage of black models used in ads possess light skin and Caucasian features”(Undressing the Ad 86). In advertising especially, the image of the black woman is incredibly stereotypical and one-dimensional. “...the diversity of black beauty is rarely shown in advertising while diverse images of white woman abound” (Undressing the Ad 90). Interestingly, gender is important when examining skin color because “...the darker a black female is, the more masculine she will be perceived as being”(Undressing the Ad 91). Bitch magazine has an on-line blog which featured a discussion of race in the show American's Next Top Model. While Tyra Banks, the creator and host of the show, generally incorporates a equal number of black and white
models in the competition, white supremacy still reigns when it comes to statistics. “...white models have won slightly over 50% of the time over the life of the show” (Hao). One passionate reader commented on the blog saying, “I think if anything, Tyra is a self-loathing black woman who constantly goes out of her way to look more white and follows a caucasian standard of beauty. Tyra had a show celebrating black models on her talk show and not one of them looked anything darker than very tan, and all had weaves” (Hao). While this is an opinion, I believe discussions like these reflect a society and media which are racist and beautyist. ANTM is important in examining the subject of race because Banks is an internationally-known black supermodel and talk show host. As I mentioned, she always includes black women on ANTM, as well as examples of other minorities (like Asian, Latina, lesbian, transgendered, plus-size, and mentally impaired models), although their limited representation on the show suggests their assumed lack of importance to the rest of the models who are Caucasian and African-American. Also, few minority models go far in the competition. I feel these representatives of marginalized people are simply tokens meant to paint the program as politically correct and inclusive of diverse beauty. In addition, the models receive make-overs, during which nearly all their natural appearances are dramatically altered and most black women get weaves. Race, and in this instance the example of the black woman, is intersectional in several ways. First, if we look at how race and class overlap, we find the beauty standard of the highly emaciated (which will be discussed more in depth later in this paper). In black culture and in indigenous Hawaiian society, it is acceptable and even beautiful for a woman to have curves. In our cultural standard of thinness, these women would be considered overweight; some obese. As we will see later, fatness is often characterized by poverty, which is how social class and ethnicity intersect in this example. Another illustration of class and race combining is a person's skin-tone. Not all black women have the resources necessary to bleach or lighten their skin to more closely resemble a Euro-centric ideal. Consider the example of Michael Jackson, who used his fortune to alter his skin color in an attempt to
change the outward appearance of his ethnic identity. Let Jackson be an example of what this kind of pressure to fit a white standard can do to a person's stability of mind (although it may be argued that his emotional trouble was caused by a number of additional factors). As we know, racism is pervasive even today, and intersects with beauty discrimination in several ways. Of the essential strategies for organizing members of society, class is one of the oldest and most unjust in its ability to classify and rank humans. An individual's social class is often times determined by the family one's born into. The status a person's parents occupy is usually inherited by their children. Thanks to Benjamin Franklin and other supporters of a capitalist republic, Americans can change their position in the class hierarchy by “pulling themselves up by their bootstraps� and working diligently to climb to the top of society (unless you have a pesky glass ceiling you didn't see coming). Unfortunately, such cases tend to happen very rarely, as many other factors contribute to a person's social location. Not everyone gets to be rich. In fact, a society must have the poor in order to have the wealthy. Class tends to be defined by who has more and who has less than the next person, and it's not just friendly competition, especially in Western culture. Peoples' very lives are at stake. Class, much like other social categories, coincides with other influences which place people in either marginalized or privileged positions. Women are kept in poverty by the wage gap (under which they still earn less than men for performing the same tasks), a lack of affordable day-care, especially for single mothers, hiring discrimination, and lack of child support in a society where children are still the mother's responsibility and a significant expense. People of color and the elderly are kept in poverty because they are delegated to certain types of low-paying jobs or they're considered obsolete citizens. The main visible problem in American culture is the size of poor people. Obesity relates to class because in our society the poverty-stricken are fat. The reasons for this development (since it was not always the case) are manifold. Some focus on the food (healthy food is expensive, empty calories are cheap). More focus on the people (poor people are stupid, poor people are ignorant about
good nutrition, poor people are lazy, poor people are too busy working two jobs to get enough exercise, poor people are too tired after working two jobs to get enough exercise, poor people don't have access to fitness centers, poor people don't have access to kitchens, poor neighborhoods have lots of fast-food restaurants and few farmers markets (Brewer).
We have established that poor people in our society are fat, but how does this connect to beautyism? Beginning around the 1960s, our culture started to acknowledge very thin people as representatives of the utmost beauty. The connection, therefore, is simple: This is beautiful, fat is ugly, and poor is fat. “It is nearly impossible not to notice that women as represented in popular culture have gotten thinner and thinner” (Undressing the Ad 227). As I mentioned in the introduction to this paper, standards of beauty seem to change on a whim and are generally decided by the rich and powerful. “The rich, however, having despised fat when the poor were fat, would likely find, when the poor got thin, that fat was actually beautiful. It might happen almost overnight that the general perception of what is beautiful would all of a sudden change” (Bodies Out of Bounds 20). This speculation alerts us to the way in which all things good and beautiful must coincide with the way rich people choose to live their lives. “As Jackie Onassis reminds us, 'One can never be too thin or too rich'” (Undressing the Ad 227). Class also intersects clearly with gender. An example of this overlap can be found in comparing Victoria's Secret catalogs with Frederick's of Hollywood. The former represents the upper-middle class consumer population, whereas Frederick's is intended for a lower-class lingerie buyer. Those conducting the study noticed many differences between the two catalogs, one of which showed a variation between sexual arousal and the models' poses. “This speaks to different standards of sexual allure—that is, demureness is sexy in a middle-class setting and directness is sexy in a working-class setting” (Undressing the Ad 241). Another difference was found in the process of enhancing a woman's sexuality. Victoria's Secret models all appeared to have had breast implants and do not sell anything
besides actual lingerie. Frederick's of Hollywood offered more. “Wigs and prosthetic breasts imply that, for whatever reasons, women need these devices yet cannot afford the more permanent solutions” (Undressing the Ad 246). Weight was also important to observe in the two catalogs and supports the idea that the poor are overweight. “The catalogs also differ in the variety of sizes offered. While most of the Victoria's Secret products run from XS to XL sizes, the Frederick's catalog has many styles available in plus sizes” (Undressing the Ad 243). Like other causes of oppression, class intersects with race, gender, age, hetero-normativity, and ableism, and it contributes to the hardship people face in escaping poverty in the Western world. The elderly are another demographic which face perpetual prejudice in our culture. While many other societies have respect and reverence for their elders and the wisdom they have gained from experiencing a full life, ours does not. Older people in our society are disrespected as the subjects of cruel jokes and stereotypes. They are considered obsolete in the work place and compelled to retire before they are ready. Like the rest of society, they need stimulation to occupy their minds and bodies, but instead they are forgotten as pointless citizens. Within the family unit, the elderly are often put in nursing homes and treated like helpless children. In other times and other cultures, the aged earn the right to be respected and cared for by the children they worked hard to raise and support. In today's world, both children and the elderly are often supervised by professional care workers on a daily basis, which shows how certain age groups (20-50 year olds) have more power and individual choice in the matters of their lives. Another way our society reflects an ageist attitude is in regard to beauty. In non-western societies the elderly are respected, and they are also allowed to age without becoming socially unattractive in the process. Our culture has a very serious and harmful obsession with youth. Some clear examples of this tendency are in commercial phrases such as “anti-aging technology” and “40 is the new 20,” which implies that 40-year old women will only be considered valuable and beautiful if they look and act like college students. Indeed, our culture's mantra promotes and anti-aging mentality.
Age intersects with gender (as women are more pressured to exhibit beauty) because while men are allowed to age gracefully and remain bachelors, women are infantilized and become spinsters or old maids if they do not procure a husband when they're young. Age also overlaps with class, as many elderly people don't have adequate aid from social security or are unemployed due to forced early retirement. Many older people are impoverished for this reason. Beautyism is important to consider when it comes to age and class because the aging population may attempt to avoid growing uglier as they grow older if they have the financial means necessary. The rich can afford plastic surgery, gym memberships/personal trainers, expensive make-up and beauty treatments, and spa visits. These things have two important connections: they are all used to stave off the effects of aging, and they are all very expensive and must be done regularly to ensure their positive effects. By not allowing our elderly population to age naturally and punishing them for doing so, our society is ageist. This kind of discrimination often goes unnoticed because our elderly citizens are thought to be obsolete and are relatively invisible to the younger generations who do not have to work hard to stay employed and beautiful in the eyes of Western culture. ANTM, arguably a major executive player in deciding beauty ideals, often tells their older models (those women over 25) that they will have to acquire a more youthful look if they want to be successful in the business. Even if they manage to accomplish that, they will hardly have a long career of modeling ahead of them. Old is ugly. Consumerism is another contributing factor because it thrives on our obsession with maintaining a youthful outward appearance. We are convinced that if we buy certain products, our youthful bloom will be forever preserved. What does it say about society if people (women especially) are willing to replace entire parts of their bodies with artificial, synthetic materials just to silence their anxiety of aging normally? It tells us we have an unhealthy infatuation with meeting and keeping impossible beauty standards. I offer the case of Joan Rivers, who has taken plastic surgery so far, it may be argued her appearance has become almost monstrous. I believe capitalism takes advantage of and exploits this fear by perpetuating the notion that old is ugly and worthless.
Disabled persons, like the elderly, are also individuals society discards as non-contributing members. But unlike senior citizens, many disabled people do not wait most of their lives to be abandoned by our culture. If they are born with a disability, they are denied access to privilege their entire lives. People with disabilities are asked to adapt to the rest of society or they should simply withdraw from the public realm, which many do. Only recently has our society begun to acknowledge disabled people's humanity and change law, education, and architecture to include them in every day activities. This does not mean, however, they have stopped facing discrimination. Many people are not educated or equipped to properly care for a family member with a disability, and as a result, many disabled people are homeless. Personally, most of the homeless people I have met are disabled in some way or were injured and then abandoned by their employers, insurance companies, and even families. Our society tells us if one is impaired, he or she is not a valued member of society, and therefore must be hidden away because “normal” people feel uncomfortable interacting with disabled individuals. In essence, disabled people are invisible. This cultural trend is not new. We can see unfair treatment of the maimed, crippled, or simpletons in classic children's fairy tales. “Images from the Grimms' fairy tales permeate our thinking, providing us with archetypes that augment and explain our experience” (Embodied Rhetorics 244). These archetypes present disability in a very negative, adverse light. “...disabled people are characterized as pathetic, sinister, laughable, nonsexual, and incapable of full participation” (Embodied Rhetorics 245). This reflects the way our culture treats disabled persons and what's worse, an individual's disability comes to symbolize all things bad (just as beauty represents all things good and pure) in story and in life. “Such descriptions are subtle comments on character, based upon the underlying assumption that a flawed physical appearance indicates a flawed morality” (Embodied Rhetorics). As if treating impaired characters as non-participating, immoral people wasn't enough, fairy tales and society take the ill-treatment a step further. “People with disabilities are rendered negatively visible (and invisible) by the very stigma that have already marginalized them” (Embodied Rhetorics
254). Another aspect of ableist oppression in fairy tales is the lack of beauty disabled characters possess. A common character structure found in children's stories is that of the princess or damsel in distress, whose beauty knows no bounds (and who is innocent and pure). “The world of the fairy tale prizes women as part of the reward (the princess—the crown—the kingdom). ...addition of a disability would detract from the princess's value...” (Embodied Rhetorics 248). If we examine literature besides fairy tales, the same theme can be found. “The heroine of fiction and drama is nearly always slender, graceful, and unblemished, meeting all the traditional criteria of physical attractiveness”(Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images 47). The author asks an important question about these impaired women: “Is she automatically judged unattractive due to her impairment, or can she, like other heroines, be a prize for men to pursue?” (Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images 48). It seems to be a rare occurrence. “...many nondisabled men in these works feel pity and revulsion at their initial meeting with the disabled woman” (Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images 53). Here are two literary examples of characters being repulsed by disability: •
From Marylin French's The Bleeding Heart: Edith's paraplegia is symbolic of the dependency which, according to French, most men secretly want from their wives and lovers (Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images 55).
•
In reference to James Joyce's character, Gerdie McDowell: Gertie has a pretty face, lovely hair, and a slender figure; she has cultivated all the charms of the day. Yet she is a travesty of womanhood. Because of her disability, her efforts to lure a man are cruelly doomed (Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images 52).
Not only does the value of these characters diminish because of their impairments, but their identities as sexual beings is denied as well. I would argue that thinking of disabled people as asexual is another way society denies them their humanity and visibility. “In a sexually supercharged culture that places almost obsessive emphasis on attractiveness, people with various disabilities are often perceived
as sexually deviant and even dangerous, asexual, or sexually incapacitated either physically or emotionally” (Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images 72). In reality, many disabled people are every bit as desirous of sexual pleasure and companionship as the rest of society, but they are not allowed that privilege which adds to their oppressed existence. Unfortunately, sometimes this oppression becomes internalized for the impaired. “Disabled characters may be quite capable of physical love making, but spurn opportunities for romance because of lack of self-acceptance, disbelief that anyone could love him or her with their 'imperfections'” (Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images 72). The theory of intersectionality makes us ponder how a female's beauty and sexual attractiveness becomes a “travesty” when the female is disabled, and also how disability relates to gender and sexuality. If beauty is more important for women than men to possess and if disability is seen as unattractive, mentally or physically impaired women suffer the double-bind of gender and ableist oppressions. If we intersect the aspect of sexuality, what can be said about homosexuality in the disabled community? Individuals with impairments are already limited by their assumed asexuality. I cannot imagine the stigma they must endure by transgressing against hetero-normativity. This group of people is affected by all other social organizational tools, and beautyism renders disabled persons invisible. Much as disabled people defy beauty norms, there is yet another demographic which has been the object of prejudice for their threat against hetero-normativity, and that is the LGTBQ community. Although homosexuality is a sexual identity people have been claiming and practicing throughout history, our society has only recently begun to change attitudes to be more inclusive and accepting of homosexuals. Considered unnatural by many, homosexuality (as well as lesbianism, bisexuality, and transgendered identities) has been seen as a genetic disease or a behavioral disorder. In my personal experience, I was raised using homosexual stereotypes as cruel jokes, and, to use a common Christian evangelical justification, I was taught to “hate the sin, not the sinner.” Still, I didn't really love homosexuals. They made me nervous and grossed me out because of how “unnatural” I
thought it was. For me, and for many, homosexuality can be equated with other social taboos like incest and bestiality. These feelings of fear and distrust come from the threat the LGTBQ community poses for an utterly patriarchal system. As the structural functionalists (as well as political conservatives) would say, the system works because biological sex characteristics determine gender roles and sexual desires for the opposite sex. Homosexuality upsets that social order, and because this is the case, the LGTBQ community has continually been ostracized, oppressed, and marginalized. Specifically, the masculine-identified lesbian (slang term: butch) presents a serious threat to the way we define femininity and female beauty. Generally speaking, butch lesbians do not fit the model of feminine beauty in the way they dress, act, and groom themselves. Because they tend to identify with a masculine identity, they demonstrate that masculinity has very little to do with being male. Thus, from a man's perspective, butch lesbians show how masculinity does not come as naturally as many might think, and males must make a conscious effort to portray the masculine gender. Butch lesbians are dangerous because they are taking that persona (which belongs to men, the more highly valued sex) and allowing women to express a new form of femininity. Masculine lesbians also pose a threat to hetero-normativity with their engagement in the competition over normative beautiful females. In the heterosexual man's mind, they are “stealing” from a population they have no business pursuing. Butch lesbians also have trouble fitting beauty standards even if they consider themselves to be beautiful. “The dominant beauty discourse conflates fashion with beauty, so that the most beautiful is also the most fashionable... thin, white elegant, young, heterosexual. These qualities become standards against which all women are measured” (Erickson & Cogan 61). In addition to being oppressed by greater society, masculine lesbians have been targeted even within the LGTBQ community. “Lesbians have long been accused, by straights, gay men, and lesbians alike, of knowing neither how to dress nor how to participate appropriately in the realms of beauty and aesthetics... In this context, lesbian beauty is in danger of being perceived as an oxymoron” (Beaucar Vlahos).
The transgendered population also faces beautyism in particular ways. For example, ANTM actually uses the word “trannie” as a criticism for models when they look to hard or masculine in their photographs. They will say things like “you look kind of trannie. You need to soften it up a bit—make it more feminine.” To me, this reflects the widely-held opinion that to be transgendered is to be the opposite of beautiful. It is also offensive to use such language without thinking how it might emotionally affect those who feel their gender identity and biological sex don't coincide. “Trannie is a word much like fag or nigger” (News and Sexuality 129). Transgendered, lesbian, bisexual and homosexual individuals bend gender norms and in the process, are discriminated against for bending standardized beauty ideals. I have covered how beautyism affects and intersects with other forms of oppression (gender, race, class, age, ableism, and hetero-normativity) and will now concentrate on a specific example of beautyist oppression as it applies to intersectionality; that is, the 2008 presidential election. I maintain that during this past campaigns (and in many others) the visual image was just as important a part of the candidates' success or failure as anything else that contributed to it. I feel technology has hindered our ability to judge candidates on their experience, integrity, and political issues because photographic depictions create a shallow, superficial perspective on who the candidates really are. I also call attention to the importance of the visual image and physical attractiveness in determining whether or not a person succeeds in achieving one's goals. Beauty is very much a part of the privileged status. While all of the candidates are privileged on some level, they also possess qualities for which countless humans have been discriminated against. Particularly examining the persons of Barack Obama, John McCain, and Sarah Palin, we can see an evident intersection of race, age, and gender. While Obama's multiracial status does not generally connect with beautyism, McCain's age and Palin's gender are clearly factors. McCain is old for a traditional politician to run for president. As we have learned, old age can generally be equated with antiquity and becoming an obsolete member of society. McCain's physical image and actual age
were called into question with legitimate (albeit ageist) concerns for his mortality, and whether his image reflected hard-earned respect and experience, or just an old man hoping for one last try. “Nixon just looked older," said Jeff Berkowitz, Chicago-based political reporter and host of the local "Public Affairs" cable talk show. "JFK had that youthful look” (Beaucar Vlahos). Physical attractiveness was also mentioned in regards to Jonathan Edwards image as a potential leader of a nation. “'I think his issue is not so much his age, but another shallow issue, which is the prettiness factor...'” (Beaucar Vlahos). While age (and inexperience) were also factors for Alaskan governor Sarah Palin, her candidacy was more heavily influenced by her identity as a woman. Females are constantly objectified and sexualized in the media, and that goes for government officials as well. In her case, however, good looks were not always on her side. “What the study actually found was that the more attention paid to a subject’s appearance, the less competent she was judged. In other words, ugliness could be just as diverting.” (Galloway). In most situations characterized by presenting an attractive visual image, it is accepted to reduce a woman down to the entertainment and sexual arousal she invokes in the male population. In Palin's case, however, her deeper, more pertinent qualities were sometimes overlooked because of her sparkly, smiling picture. As the photo from the cover of Newsweek demonstrates, Sarah Palin remains a symbol for the politician turned pin-up girl, even after the election is long over. I would also speculate that the image the candidates of the most recent presidential election presented was strategic. Obama, a young, inexperienced, attractive male chose Joe Biden, an older (and therefore “uglier”), more experienced male as his running mate. McCain, upon seeing how neat and tidy Obama's team looked, chose Palin, a young, attractive, inexperienced female as his running mate. I believe he chose her at least in part because she balanced out the experience front, but she also represented a fresh, youthful look (the opposite of McCain's image). I would argue that looks had more to do with shaping the potential administration than most would care to admit. What does this tell us about the importance of the visual image to succeed in our culture? You have to be hot to be president.
It is my hope that this example will spark the reader's imagination to think of other ways our world commits acts of beautyism against its members (especially those who are oppressed because of their age, class, ability, gender, sexuality, or race). I have examined how women as a group are more pressured to be beautiful and how black women in particular are compelled to conform to a standard of white beauty. I also looked at class and the issue of obesity in our society and our obsession with youth and how it classifies the elderly as culturally ugly and obsolete. Finally, I analyzed the invisibility and assumed asexuality of disabled persons and used the example of the masculine lesbian to demonstrate the beautyist oppression of the LGTBQ community. In addition, I critiqued specific social institutions like the media (America's Next Top Model), government (the 2008 presidential election) and standardized beauty as a social construct. We need to make a conscious effort to stop supporting stories and social interactions which paint physical beauty as synonymous with all things good and pure, and physical ugliness with evil and darkness. There are plenty of immoral beauties and just as many good people who are considered ugly. In conclusion, I hope this paper has shed light on the serious problem of beautyism and its relation to intersectional thought.
Arie, India. I Am Not My Hair. Motown, 2006. Print.
Beaucar Vlahos, Kelley. Energy, Experience Trump Age in 2008 Presidential Contest. 2007. Web.
Beigel, Hugo G. “Sex and Human Beauty.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 12.1 (1953): 83-92. Print.
Belkin, Kristin Lohse. Rubens. Phaidon, 1998. Print.
Bodies Out of Bounds: Fatness and Transgression. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. Print.
Brewer, Philip. “The New Face of Poverty is Fat.” WiseBread: Living Large on a Small Budget 21 Dec 2007. Web.
Brown, Jeffrey A. “Class and Feminine Excess: The Strange Case of Anna Nicole Smith.” Feminist Review 81 (2005): 74-94. Print.
Crenshaw, Kimberle. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43.6 (1991): 1241-1299. Print.
Critser, Greg. Fat Land: How Americans Became the Fattest People in Theworld. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co, 2003. Print.
Crow, Stephen M., and Dinah Payne. “Affirmative Action for a Face Only a Mother Could Love?.”
Journal of Business Ethics 11.11 (1992): 869-875. Print.
Embodied Rhetorics: Disability in Language and Culture. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2001. Print.
Emerging Intersections: Race, Class, and Gender in Theory, Policy, and Practice. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press, 2009. Print.
Erickson, Joanie, and Jeanine Cogan. Lesbians, Levis and Lipstick: The Meaning of Beauty in Our Lives. 1st ed. Routledge, 1999. Print.
France-Presse, Agence. “German 'Venus' Oldest Piece of Figurative Art.” Cosmos 14 May 2009. Web.
Galloway, Jim. “Florida Study: Sarah Palin Hurt by a Focus on her Looks.” Political Insider 5 Mar 2009. Web.
Giorgio, Kathie. “Kathie Giorgio on Presidential Election 2008.” The Externalist 2 Oct 2008. Web.
Grabe, Maria Elizabeth. Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.
Hall, Kim F. “Beauty and the Beast of Whiteness: Teaching Race and Gender.” Shakespeare Quarterly 47.4 (1996): 461-475. Print.
Hao, Rita. “For Realz?: Caucasian America's Next Top Model.” Bitch Magazine Blog 24 Apr 2009.
Web.
Hawaii), Liliuokalani (Queen of. Hawaii's story by Hawaii's queen, Liliuokalani. Lee and Shepard, 1898. Print.
Images of the Disabled, Disabling Images. New York: Praeger, 1987. Print.
Images That Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media. 2nd ed. Westport, Conn: Praeger, 2003. Print.
Kilbourne, Jean. Killing Us Softly 3: Advertising's Image of Women. Media Education Foundation. Print.
McNerney, Tracey. “Ageism May be a Bigger Barrier in Presidential Election than Racism (or Sexism).” 24 Sep 2008. Web.
Multimedia Entertainment (Firm), and Films for the Humanities (Firm). Age Discrimination. Films for the Humanities & Sciences, 2004. Print.
News and Sexuality: Media Portraits of Diversity. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 2006. Print.
Roeper, Richard. Hollywood urban legends. New Page Books, 2001. Print.
Sekayi, Dia. “Aesthetic Resistance to Commercial Influences: The Impact of the Eurocentric Beauty Standard on Black College Women.” The Journal of Negro Education 72.4 (2003): 467-477.
Print.
Undressing the Ad: Reading Culture in Advertising. New York: Peter Lang, 1997. Print.
Webster, Murray, and James E. Driskell. “Beauty as Status.” The American Journal of Sociology 89.1 (1983): 140-165. Print.
Weight Bias: Nature, Consequences, and Remedies. New York: Guilford Press, 2005. Print.
Widner, Cindy. “Vagina- Americans Get it Both Ways.” Bitch Magazine 200914-15. Print.