February 28, 2007
do these boots make me look smart?
Yesterday I wrote a post at BlogHer about MAC cosmetics new Barbie Loves MAC line, specifically about what it means for MAC to choose Barbie as the face for this line.
Thirteen years later, however, MAC has turned to Barbie as the new face of beauty. Unlike RuPaul, who was entirely self created (a man who becomes a woman through sheer force of will and great makeup and clothes), Barbie is a plastic mock-up of an unattainable female form. The models in the new Barbie Loves MAC ad campaign are styled to look like dolls; their facial expressions are vacant and frankly, a little frightening.
I don’t like the way MAC is marketing this line; aside from the fact that it targets very young girls, children who are too old for Barbie dolls but too young for makeup, it infantilizes adult women by encouraging them to think of themselves both as objects (”living dolls”) and as children. I’m not opposed to makeup, though, or even to MAC makeup; what I am resisting is this particular marketing gimmick.
But this begs the larger question: it is possible to be a fashionista AND a feminist? If I wear lipstick and heels will I be taken seriously when I assert that women should not be viewed as objects? Or is participation in the culture of style a capitulation to the patriarchy? What is the distinction, as one BlogHer commenter asked, between Barbie and Pam Anderson? Or between Pam Anderson and RuPaul? Or–go further–between Barbie and Molly Simms or Eva Longoria or any of the other models who are the faces of various cosmetics companies? IS there a distinction?
Am I less of a feminist because I think about what I (and you!) wear?
I would say no, of course; I don’t believe that at all. I don’t think that strong female role models have to give up beauty. In fact, I think it’s easier for stylish women to have their voices heard, which is a problematic statement in itself, but true nonetheless. I think there is a distinction between being thoughtful about how I present myself and giving in to some amorphous and unattainable ideal of female beauty.
But I also think a lot about what it means to say that I write about fashion or parenting, rather than about politics or literature or feminism itself. Real life feminism is a different animal from academic feminism; in the classroom, it is easy to talk about patriarchal oppression and resisting hegemony, but in the everyday world, we think more about the quotidian details of carpool and dinner and the checking account balance. Sometimes it is in these “soft” topics that we find the most powerful statements about how the world works for real women.
I think we’re seeing a cultural swing back toward a kind of pre-feminist world, where women were not expected to do much in the world because they were women. I see it in places like this MAC ad campaign, and it infuriates me. I agree that it is possible to read the entire beauty industry as essentially anti-feminist, but I also think that makeup and clothing can be powerful tools to help smart, thoughtful women get their voices heard. We are a culture that values beauty, and that rewards appearance; there is no getting around that. We can reject that or we can make it work for us.
I’m opting for working it. And I’m not going to feel bad about it.
You can see what I’m wearing today here.
Posted by Susan @ 9:09 am • Uncategorized
RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI
February 28th, 2007 at 12:18 pm, Jenny Says:
hmmm… thought-provoking. Here’s what I’d like to think: if you are “getting dolled up” for the sake of OTHER people and to portray a certain image so that you’ll be listened to, you could argue that you’re actions are counter to your feminist agenda. But if fashion/makeup/etc bring you joy… i.e. if you’re happy gazing on your new prada shoes even when you’re all alone, then these things are something you’re doing just for YOU, an expression of your character, and NOT at odds with your feminists leanings.
Adventures in Parenting
February 28th, 2007 at 12:39 pm, Jen Says:
When I taught college freshman about writing as critical thinking, I showed them a video called Killing Us Softly. It is a compelling look at how women (and little girls) are portrayed in media and advertising: We are encouraged to be less– less in our physical bodies, and there are frequent images of women being silenced.
Jean Kilbourne was the psychologist (I believe) who presented these images in the video, and I had the pleasure of meeting her when she came to speak. I asked her whether or not it was problematic for her that she is slender and attractive, when she is fighting against a world that demands that women be slender and attractive.
She conceded that it was problematic in that she felt that because of her appearance, she was better-listened to.
I think about these things a lot– but I think that feminism encompasses empowerment, taking care of ourselves, and also being free to make our own choices. And I think those choices can include how we present ourselves to the world. And it’s okay to talk about and think about those presentations– besides, fashion is a political choice.
Hope you had a fun lunch.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:51 pm, Anarchy in the OK Says:
Wow, Susan, what a great post. I especially love the question “Is a participation in the culture of style a capitulation to the patriarchy?” It just about sums up the history of fashion in the western world. I find a glimmer of hope in the Minoans and other more gender-equal societies where women were accepted, taken seriously, and even worshipped (in healthy ways, not the weird little-girl worship we do today). Those women were fashionistas to the max, but still held equal footing. I agree that it’s possible to be a fashionista and a feminist, but I believe that since we women don’t ultimately set the aesthetic agenda in our culture that we must be aware of the subtle overtones of our fashion choices - we all know that one button can be the difference between being looked in the eyes and, well, being looked at somewhere else.
Great post - thanks a lot.
March 2nd, 2007 at 12:47 am, Michele Says:
Hmmm. I admit that I’m not one to think about such things often. It makes my brain hurt. However - I think of it this way. If I wear makeup and wear something “fashionable” and it makes me smile? I’m all for it. Because if it give me, a sufferer of depression, a small bright spot - I don’t really care if it’s feminist or not. And that - the not caring because it’s already doing something good for my mental state (and yes I mean makeup helps my mental state - I walk taller for some reason) - I suppose is feminist in it’s own way.
March 2nd, 2007 at 10:34 am, Anonymous Says:
To all interested moms out there:
I would like to invite you to participate in a research study of parenting views and practices. Dr. Kim White-Mills and Dr. Catherine Dobris of IUPUI (both are moms) are interested in understanding what sources parents find useful in their parenting practices, how parents use different parenting information, and what views parents across the county hold regarding parenting issues.
To access this survey, go to http://www.iupui.edu/~momviews/
March 2nd, 2007 at 7:07 pm, Daisy Says:
Very thought provoking. I teach pre-adolescents, and the girls are just learning and dealing with the curves developing in their bodies. I hope they develop a solid self-image so that they don’t turn into Doll-Babies as they grow older.
March 4th, 2007 at 8:58 pm, proeats Says:
What an interesting, well expressed group. I am so glad to have stumbled onto this site!