Mainstream views of beauty

Status
Not open for further replies.

K. Trian

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
195
Reaction score
24
Location
Finlandia
Website
tktrian.wordpress.com
This is an interesting thread to me because a few years ago I took a uni course that concerned beauty ideals, standards, etc.
My course project was something along the lines of representations of ethnic beauty in Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye.

When I did my research, I came across this little book, Ain't I a Beauty Queen. It was interesting, a window to a world completely disregarded by me previously, what with me being white and from a very demographically homogenous culture/country.

The further I read and googled, I found interesting instances when celebrities have played with some ethnic stereotypes; Cindy Margolis, Christina Aguilera, Lil Kim, Katie Price. This is a rather interesting little article about some ethnic makeovers though it's written more or less in jest.

I've often wondered like has Lil Kim thought about Caucasian stereotypes when bleaching her hair and wearing blue contacts, or did she just want to try out something new.

I'm a natural blonde, being a Finn, but I've dyed my hair from black to dark brown and back again ever since I was 17. At first it was because I was something of a metalhead, but later on I realized I was envious of my father's jet-black hair and green eyes combo, or the looks of some other relatives from his side of the family, most with black hair and huge brown eyes. So in a way, I must've also strived for a branch of beauty that isn't mainstream in Finland (it's blue eyes and honey-blonde hair, I think), that to me looked so appealing and even exotic.

If you haven't read Nalo Hopkinson, I recommend her fantasy book The Salt Roads. It had enticing descriptions of the beauty of her female characters.
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
I've actually been talking about "the whole Hollywood/modelling industry using skinny ladies" among other things.

I don't know if this is another cultural thing, maybe things are different where you live, but here in Finland at least when, for instance, you see women's underwear ads on shop windows, the models are mostly of the skinny catwalk type. Now I don't know about you or anybody else, but if I had a daughter, I'd hope she'd rather be like Jillian Michaels than like Stella Tennant. Even if we forget about aesthetics for a moment, I would venture a guess that a person who eats healthy food (and enough of it) and keeps themselves fit would be healthier too. And trust me when I say that one doesn't truly appreciate good health until it's gone. That I do know from personal experience, unfortunately.

By the way, if you type "male model" on Google's image search, most of the dudes look like this, this, this, and this. If you ask me, all of those guys look really fit, don't you think? Now, if you type in "female model," do you really see a comparable level of athlethism? Which group (male models and female models) do you think are generally healthier? Not to mention that if you are fit, the number of activities you can enjoy multiplies exponentially.
An example: we went indoor climbing with our boxing team a week or so ago, men and women together, and I guess she'll smack me upside the head for saying this but I was damn proud when K. Trian climbed four walls all the way to the top. She was the only girl who succeeded in that and only two of the fittest guys managed the same. Now, if she was just skin and bones or noticeably overweight (meaning lots of fat, not muscle), she wouldn't have experienced the joy of conquering those walls.

Yeah, I know, I know, different strokes for different folks, not everybody enjoys physical activities (although the friends we have managed to drag along have suddenly realized how much they enjoy training). Just note that I'm talking about my personal opinion here, not declaring the gospel truth. I just feel a little uneasy every time I see media that promotes less than healthy values since often the target audience are (relatively) impressionalbe youngsters.




That, obviously, depends on who you ask. I've just noticed that a lot of people go "daym!" (and not in the good way) when they first see a picture or video of Cris Cyborg. Same goes for some female swimmers who have broad backs, muscular arms, and flat chests. I have a pretty vast circle of friends but perhaps guys who don't find muscular women aesthetically pleasing gravitate towards me for some reason (and I'm not even being sarcastic here).


Way to completely miss the entire point of my post (and rant about something I said I especially wasn't commenting on)

My point:

You are still judging people by how they look. Whether it's judging people because they are skinny and so (in your opinion only) could not do X even if they could, or skinny people aren't healthy and muscley (that you prefer) women are and could do that stuff (perhaps they could. perhaps not, because while being fit is good it is not the be all and end all of what people can do)..

you are still judging women buy how they look
. Not for them, as women or people. But by how they look to you.* ?

And that is a huge part of the problem. It is, in many ways THE problem. Women are to be judged purely by what they look like (in many different contexts. yours is only one)


Muscley = good and not muscley - bad is just as bad as only skinny is sexy. All you are doing is changing terminology or what you, especially, find attractive. Everyone has their own preferences - that doesn't mean that anyone who falls outside that is not sexy,or competent or whatever

*I could go on here, but I won't. I want to, but I won't.
 

Unimportant

No COVID yet. Still masking.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
19,519
Reaction score
22,750
Location
Aotearoa
Whether it's judging people because they are skinny and so (in your opinion only) could not do X even if they could, or skinny people aren't healthy and muscley (that you prefer) women are and could do that stuff (perhaps they could. perhaps not, because while being fit is good it is not the be all and end all of what people can do)...
I agree. Health, fitness, capability, usefulness, sexiness, beauty, and attractiveness are all very different things. In particular, being physically fit does not necessarily equate to being healthy. I know at least one person who'd trade in physical fitness to magically erase metastatic colon cancer.

While I agree that it is not a good thing for the media to promote anorexic-thinness as the beauty ideal for young girls, neither is it a good thing for physical fitness to be equated with a person's worth. Stephen Hawkings may be limited in his physical capabilities, but he's a brilliant genius, and his life work has advanced our knowledge of the universe and done more good for humanity than any Olympic athlete ever could.
 
Last edited:

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
38,197
Reaction score
4,544
Location
The End of the World
True .... But none of those words, with perhaps the exception of hot is currently used as an exact synononym for beautiful. Erotic means exactly what it says, and cute is just, well, cute. Like a bunny!

I like the erotic cute look, which you don't really see in American media, which is more into hot sexy.
 

Kitty27

So Goth That I Was Born Black
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
4,092
Reaction score
951
Location
In The Darkside's Light
This is an interesting thread to me because a few years ago I took a uni course that concerned beauty ideals, standards, etc.
My course project was something along the lines of representations of ethnic beauty in Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye.

When I did my research, I came across this little book, Ain't I a Beauty Queen. It was interesting, a window to a world completely disregarded by me previously, what with me being white and from a very demographically homogenous culture/country.

The further I read and googled, I found interesting instances when celebrities have played with some ethnic stereotypes; Cindy Margolis, Christina Aguilera, Lil Kim, Katie Price. This is a rather interesting little article about some ethnic makeovers though it's written more or less in jest.

I've often wondered like has Lil Kim thought about Caucasian stereotypes when bleaching her hair and wearing blue contacts, or did she just want to try out something new.

I'm a natural blonde, being a Finn, but I've dyed my hair from black to dark brown and back again ever since I was 17. At first it was because I was something of a metalhead, but later on I realized I was envious of my father's jet-black hair and green eyes combo, or the looks of some other relatives from his side of the family, most with black hair and huge brown eyes. So in a way, I must've also strived for a branch of beauty that isn't mainstream in Finland (it's blue eyes and honey-blonde hair, I think), that to me looked so appealing and even exotic.

If you haven't read Nalo Hopkinson, I recommend her fantasy book The Salt Roads. It had enticing descriptions of the beauty of her female characters.

Sadly,it was neither.
She has stated that Notorious BIG repeatedly leaving her for very fair skinned women severely impacted her self esteem. Forgive me for disrespecting the dead,but he was a hideous looking man and I see NO reason as to why Kim should have allowed his choices to impact her so. But she did and in the Black community,colorism is alive and well. It's impact is STILL being felt and I believe Lil Kim is a victim of it,along with her trying to compete with the women he dumped her for.

In the beginning when she still had her face and skin tone,I could accept the platinum weave and blue eyes as her experimenting because this is the woman who made it acceptable for Black women to rock multicolored hair and be as wild as they wanted to be. But as time went on,it became more and more disturbing.

She went from this:

images



To This:
images



People have also speculated that she has a severe case of Body Dysmorphic Disorder because she literally sees nothing wrong with what she has done to herself.
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
That's so sad (and yes, disturbing - I'm sure the pressures of showbiz/constant media exposure/criticism etc don't help in addition to what you've mentioned - they mess up women of all colours)


She looks fantastic in that first piccy. The second doesn't even look like the same woman.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
So, so sad about Lil Kim. Just look at her gorgeous, gorgeous skin in that first pic. That's what I'm talking about: being pressured to hate beauty that is very obviously there if we can take our cultural blinders off.

K Trian, I think muscular women are a good example, too. I don't agree that it's a 'better' body type, but it certainly is one, and there is nothing at all wrong with being strong.

I got called names by my brother for this one growing up, as it turns out :) And my first experience making out with a boyfriend, he felt my arms and said, 'That's all muscle?!' Meh, I say I'm like a Valkyrie to give it a positive visualization. I hate it when folks disparage women athletes for their strong physiques. The Williams sisters come to mind there. If I were a powerful pro athlete the last thing I'd want to have to worry about is trying to look frail or lithe, lol. I'd love to see folks apply that to male athletes for a minute just to see how ridiculous it is :D
 

fireluxlou

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
2,089
Reaction score
283
So, so sad about Lil Kim. Just look at her gorgeous, gorgeous skin in that first pic. That's what I'm talking about: being pressured to hate beauty that is very obviously there if we can take our cultural blinders off.

In countries in Asia and Africa companies like L'oreal market skin whitening creams to PoC they are quite popular. I know this BB cream I bought from a seller in Hong Kong has a bleaching agent in. It's not much. http://susanbagleydotme.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/ethnic-skin-whitening/

I'd say that the way bleaching creams in Asia and Africa are marketed and the attitudes about lighter skin amongst PoC is completely different to the way white people tan. They are not comparable to me or on the same level. You just have to look at L'Oreal skin bleaching adverts.
 

backslashbaby

~~~~*~~~~
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
12,635
Reaction score
1,603
Location
NC
Yeah, I don't really like tans. I always think of the wrinkles later, or I worry about skin cancer for the person (I had a friend who died young from that, and she was a tanaholic :( ).

I like naturally dark skin tones very much. I don't know why; they just look aesthetically very pleasing. Of course, I can see my own veins through my skin, so it may have to do with how pale I am that I think the grass is greener for other folks as far as beauty is concerned :)
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
K Trian, I think muscular women are a good example, too. I don't agree that it's a 'better' body type, but it certainly is one, and there is nothing at all wrong with being strong.

I think that's absolutely true

Thing is 'healthy' comes in many shapes and sizes, the problem comes when one is lauded over the others. If, say, muscley women, or Rubenesque women were suddenly the hottest things on the planet, I'd be screwed - it's only very recently that I've been able to put on weight. God what I wouldn;t have given for boobs in my teens! lol. Even when I trained at the gym (and hard) I never put on more than two pounds - I just toned up. A lot. To get muscley as per that boxer chick mentioned earlier (and let's face it, that's not a usual body shape for many, many women, it's like saying Brock Lesnar is usual/desirable in all men) I'd have to shove a load of those protein things down my neck, and/or take testosterone and I don't think that would be healthy for me. The pressure would still be there, just the other way around, and perhaps on different women(those who are not naturally whatever shape is 'in')


Now, if it could be accepted that as long as you weren't in extreme shape, (ie way over your BMI, or under it), then that can be sexy, well, now we're talking! For instance I think it's great that say Nigella Lawson is lauded as a highly attractive woman, despite not being sylph like. Or that China (a very muscley woman who was in the WWE for a time) got regular marriage proposals from guys who thought she was the sex bomb.

It reminds me of a blog post I saw not long ago, a woman saying she 'wasn't like those girls' ie she wasn't like the girls the media portrayed in shows like Sex and the City etc. She didn't like shopping, or many supposed 'girly' things. Thousands and thousands of women commented etc - saying they, too, weren't like that. If we and the media can encourage people to be themselves, that would be a start. Because it was when I started to think that I was okay as I was that I started being happy.

PS: A friend of mine would probably love your number Backslash - he loves Valkyrie types! Because not all men are as the media portray them either - they don't all like very slender women with massive boobs.
 

fireluxlou

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
2,089
Reaction score
283
I think that's absolutely true

Thing is 'healthy' comes in many shapes and sizes, the problem comes when one is lauded over the others. If, say, muscley women, or Rubenesque women were suddenly the hottest things on the planet, I'd be screwed - it's only very recently that I've been able to put on weight. God what I wouldn;t have given for boobs in my teens! lol. Even when I trained at the gym (and hard) I never put on more than two pounds - I just toned up. A lot. To get muscley as per that boxer chick mentioned earlier (and let's face it, that's not a usual body shape for many, many women, it's like saying Brock Lesnar is usual/desirable in all men) I'd have to shove a load of those protein things down my neck, and/or take testosterone and I don't think that would be healthy for me. The pressure would still be there, just the other way around, and perhaps on different women(those who are not naturally whatever shape is 'in')


Now, if it could be accepted that as long as you weren't in extreme shape, (ie way over your BMI, or under it), then that can be sexy, well, now we're talking! For instance I think it's great that say Nigella Lawson is lauded as a highly attractive woman, despite not being sylph like. Or that China (a very muscley woman who was in the WWE for a time) got regular marriage proposals from guys who thought she was the sex bomb.

It reminds me of a blog post I saw not long ago, a woman saying she 'wasn't like those girls' ie she wasn't like the girls the media portrayed in shows like Sex and the City etc. She didn't like shopping, or many supposed 'girly' things. Thousands and thousands of women commented etc - saying they, too, weren't like that. If we and the media can encourage people to be themselves, that would be a start. Because it was when I started to think that I was okay as I was that I started being happy.

PS: A friend of mine would probably love your number Backslash - he loves Valkyrie types! Because not all men are as the media portray them either - they don't all like very slender women with massive boobs.

I don't really like when other women say that about other women who are feminine though. Like myself. Feeds into internalised misogyny and basically throws those other women under the bus because 9 times out of 10 it means 'I'm not like one of those girls.... I'm one of the boys'.
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
That wasn't what they were saying though, not dissing women for being feminine but media for portraying a certain type of femininity as the 'proper' one and if you aren't like that, you aren't properly female. Again - a media imposed standard of what we should be interested in (as opposed to how we look - all linked imo) etc.

It was 'I am me, not some conglomeration of what the media say femininity should be'

I'll see if I can dig it up.

Actually this came up with my son not too long ago, the concept of 'lady like behaviour' and how it's historically been used to stop women from, well, doing the things they want. My answer? I am a lady, therefore by definition my behaviour is ladylike. :D
 

T. Trian

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
99
Reaction score
8
Way to completely miss the entire point of my post (and rant about something I said I especially wasn't commenting on)

My point:

You are still judging people by how they look. Whether it's judging people because they are skinny and so (in your opinion only) could not do X even if they could, or skinny people aren't healthy and muscley (that you prefer) women are and could do that stuff (perhaps they could. perhaps not, because while being fit is good it is not the be all and end all of what people can do)..

you are still judging women buy how they look
. Not for them, as women or people. But by how they look to you.* ?

And that is a huge part of the problem. It is, in many ways THE problem. Women are to be judged purely by what they look like (in many different contexts. yours is only one)


Muscley = good and not muscley - bad is just as bad as only skinny is sexy. All you are doing is changing terminology or what you, especially, find attractive. Everyone has their own preferences - that doesn't mean that anyone who falls outside that is not sexy,or competent or whatever

*I could go on here, but I won't. I want to, but I won't.

I'm sorry, but from my perspective your tone seems somewhat frustrated, perhaps even a bit hostile. I'm not saying that's how it is, only that that's how it appears to me (please do correct me if I'm wrong).
I know that sort of a thing is an accepted mode of conduct on some other forum, but I think AW is such a great place and a real well of information that it's well worth the effort to go the extra mile and keep things polite and friendly even if something someone says may appear aggravating in some way. :)

I understand that my posts may lack clarity at times but I think that's the one (sometimes big) minus when it comes to the pros and cons of, well, communities where communication is in written format and lacks the versatility of face to face communication.

So I'll do my best to correct this misunderstanding:
I'm not saying skinny women are somehow inferior to athletic women, nor am I saying that more robust women are inferior to athletic (or skinny) women.

I will now do away with the word "healthy." It was a poor choice, sorry about that.

What I did mean was that I don't like the fact that in general the more high profile media (such as ad campaigns for clothing e.g.) appear to favor men who do not look emaciated or over-fed but, rather, the athletic (but not in an excessive, steroid-fueled bodybuilder-like way) models "ooze" the type of sporty, active lifestyle that's portrayed as desirable and healthy (I'm sorry but I feel compelled to use that word here
icon11.gif
) e.g. in many hit tv shows (e.g. The Biggest Loser), while female models in catalogues, on bus stops, and huge posters behind shop windows most often look very thin, which has more connotations to anorexia than to an active, strong (and not just physically), sporty life style.

I just don't understand why a sportier, more muscular woman couldn't be used as a model in a perfume/hair care/lingerie ad etc (unless she's a celebrity).

I'm also talking about the general trend in media like fashion magazines and product adverts. And I do believe that the predominant beauty ideal (the one conveyed by the aforementioned media) is not conveying a positive image to impressionable people (especially children/teenagers).

In fact, if you look at what they are doing in TV shows like The Biggest Loser, it isn't about getting skinny. The competitors are taught things about nutrition that aims to make their bodies stronger, help build and conserve muscle mass, and minimize health hazards such as visceral fat and diabetes without starving the competitors. It seems the key to reach a desirable lifestyle is then the right kind of exercise: the coaches take into consideration the limitations some competitors have (e.g. if someone has bad knees, they are taught to exercise so that they avoid worsening the state of the competitor's knees and still get a good full-body workout).

Now if this is the desired goal for men and women alike, why are muscular women so under-represented in mainstream beauty circles while the current mainstream beauty ideal for men is the product of a "biggest loser"-kind of a lifestyle?

I do believe we are moving in the right direction, that the mainstream media is starting to warm up to more muscular women little by little with people like Gina Carano and Jillian Michaels, which, in my opinion, is a good thing. The sad thing is that, yes, they are considered beautiful women, but they are still first and foremost athletes whereas muscular female models are still largely absent in mainstream media.
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
Hmm, not hostile*. Maybe a little frustrated but this was one comment among several made me think as I did:
uckily nobody here has said anything like that but I know quite a few people who do think like that and there's probably a (ludicrous) reason why modeling agencies, movie producers etc. favor... well, less physically capable women.
You equate not-muscley or slender with inferior capability (also, less physically capable of what?). See how that looks?


* also, being frustrated with your words isn't always the same as frustrated with you.
 

aruna

On a wing and a prayer
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 14, 2005
Messages
12,862
Reaction score
2,846
Location
A Small Town in Germany
Website
www.sharonmaas.co.uk
I think that's absolutely true




It reminds me of a blog post I saw not long ago, a woman saying she 'wasn't like those girls' ie she wasn't like the girls the media portrayed in shows like Sex and the City etc. She didn't like shopping, or many supposed 'girly' things. Thousands and thousands of women commented etc - saying they, too, weren't like that. If we and the media can encourage people to be themselves, that would be a start. Because it was when I started to think that I was okay as I was that I started being happy.
.

I absolutely agree. There's a trend in the media these days to equate "womanly stuff" with shoes, cosmetics, fashion, etc, and I it drives me round the bend. For instance, the German host to Who Wants to be a Millionaire constantly jokes with female winners that they are going to fill their closet with shoes. Once, one woman said she wanted to buy a Harry Potter first edition with her winnings; big joke from host about books not being a female thing, ha ha, and so she adds, haha, and lots of shoes too, hahaha. Or big jokes about now buying bigger closets for all the clothes they'll buy, hahaha, and all the shopping they'll do, hahaha. He does it every time a woman wins. It's a running joke. And he's not the only one. I see this all the time!



I don't really like when other women say that about other women who are feminine though. Like myself. Feeds into internalised misogyny and basically throws those other women under the bus because 9 times out of 10 it means 'I'm not like one of those girls.... I'm one of the boys'.

I don't see it that way. I consider myself a feminine woman. Curvy, big bosomed, soft natured. I love babies and was a stay at home mom. But there's nothing about being feminine that means you have to be obsessed with clothes, cosmetics, shopping, and shoes, and I don't see why the media has to assume that's part of being female, and constantly feed that stereotype. You can take care of your looks, try to look your best, without being vain, materialistic, and narcissistic and I think that's what the women in the post above were objecting to. Can't say; I haven't read the blog referred to, but it's what I immediately thought.
 

RichardGarfinkle

Nurture Phoenixes
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 2, 2012
Messages
11,138
Reaction score
3,082
Location
Walking the Underworld
Website
www.richardgarfinkle.com
Actually this came up with my son not too long ago, the concept of 'lady like behaviour' and how it's historically been used to stop women from, well, doing the things they want. My answer? I am a lady, therefore by definition my behaviour is ladylike. :D


Ladylike was more a matter of classism than sexism. If I've got this right, Ladylike and Gentlemanlike were references to the manners of the British upper classes. So acting in a ladylike or gentlemanlike fashion was being mannerly.

There were and are sexist elements to that, but the focus is classist.
 

fireluxlou

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
2,089
Reaction score
283
I'm sorry, but from my perspective your tone seems somewhat frustrated, perhaps even a bit hostile. I'm not saying that's how it is, only that that's how it appears to me (please do correct me if I'm wrong).
I know that sort of a thing is an accepted mode of conduct on some other forum, but I think AW is such a great place and a real well of information that it's well worth the effort to go the extra mile and keep things polite and friendly even if something someone says may appear aggravating in some way. :)

Wow a man using the tone argument on a woman... never heard that one before.

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument

Yea I agree with Mr Flibble on your warped view of non-muscely women.

I don't see it that way. I consider myself a feminine woman. Curvy, big bosomed, soft natured. I love babies and was a stay at home mom. But there's nothing about being feminine that means you have to be obsessed with clothes, cosmetics, shopping, and shoes, and I don't see why the media has to assume that's part of being female, and constantly feed that stereotype. You can take care of your looks, try to look your best, without being vain, materialistic, and narcissistic and I think that's what the women in the post above were objecting to. Can't say; I haven't read the blog referred to, but it's what I immediately thought.

Ah I misread wrong. After that post I took a 2 hour nap. Lol. Yea I don't understand it either and it's also the stuff that daytime TV always focuses on such trivial things as if that's all women care about. But there's nothing wrong with enjoying or liking those things either as a woman.
 
Last edited:

lastlittlebird

avem narrans
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
1,316
Reaction score
161
Location
Australia
Website
lastlittlebird.blogspot.com
I just don't understand why a sportier, more muscular woman couldn't be used as a model in a perfume/hair care/lingerie ad etc (unless she's a celebrity).

I'm not sure if this has already been said, but I think it's because obvious muscles are currently associated with masculinity.
I have (sadly) heard enough negative talk about female athletes of a muscular build to know that association well. Being a tomboy is "cute" because we all know tomboys will "clean up nice".
But, being physically masculine? Even a little? Apparently disgusting.

Advertisers try to sell themselves as edgy, but they are conservative as heck. They aren't going to risk getting close to the edge of what society in general (well, my society at least) considers feminine, let alone stepping over it.
 

K. Trian

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
195
Reaction score
24
Location
Finlandia
Website
tktrian.wordpress.com
You equate not-muscley or slender with inferior capability (also, less physically capable of what?). See how that looks?
I think here it would've helped to elaborate on what he means about physical capability. Here, afaik, he kind of like draws parallels with the representations of female beauty in the mainstream with those of men, i.e. the functional male models whose bodies reflect an ability to lift iron, run the famous 400m dash under a minute, save cats from trees and babies from burning buildings, wrestle a bear, etc. while the very thin or, conversely, very plus-size, do not necessarily reflect this kind of functionality. But as pointed out, there're always people like Mr. Fibble who, despite having been (and still is) a slender woman has kicked big men's asses in bar fights and sparring (I so wish I could say that for myself; got my ass handed over to myself just yesterday when boxing with a 90kg dude :D) and there're also those somewhat robust female olympic athletes whose weight hasn't compromised their, well, functionality (athletic functionality?). This topic was covered on one of my university classes as well, the functional male vs. the decorative woman. It's a broad divide, yes, but those were pretty much the ying and yang of it.

I find this a challenging subject to discuss, albeit interesting.

Just to give you a real-life example of how ingrained this what-is-beautiful can be: I was teaching PT to 17 year-olds. We were at the gym, and I was chatting with a couple of female pupils about doing exercises with giryas, but they were reluctant to do too much because they feared about becoming too muscular and that wasn't attractive in their opinion, in fact, it was very undesirable. I wasn't surprised to hear this though, sadly enough.
(On another note, I asked why isn't anyone doing the bench. The answer was, 'that's not for girls!' Yeah right. When I taught them how to work the bench, they realized it's for everyone, and it's fun...)

Another example:
A while back a bunch of guys at work talked about this rather famous Finnish poledancer who had performed in yesternight's BB episode. They unabashedly dissed her very muscular looks, talked how that was "too much for a woman," and how they didn't find it hot at all (despite her occupation, poledancing is generally considered a sexy act, right? :p)

Yet another example: broad shoulders on women and how we should try to make them look less broad and more, just say it, attractive! There are guides like this all over the internet. An attractive female body is clearly not Y-shaped if you need to "balance out" broad shoulders (and how do you usually get broad shoulders? By lifting weights, swimming, boxing... )

I hope these examples cast some light on the issue discussed here.

Ladylike was more a matter of classism than sexism. If I've got this right, Ladylike and Gentlemanlike were references to the manners of the British upper classes. So acting in a ladylike or gentlemanlike fashion was being mannerly.

There were and are sexist elements to that, but the focus is classist.
Yay, you just said what I was gonna say :)

Yea I agree with Mr Flibble on your warped view of non-muscely women.
I think it's a different thing to say someone has a warped view and someone's post conveyed a warped view ("please revise your words if this is not what you meant").
 

T. Trian

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
99
Reaction score
8
Hmm, not hostile*. Maybe a little frustrated but this was one comment among several made me think as I did:
You equate not-muscley or slender with inferior capability (also, less physically capable of what?). See how that looks?

Now that I see the phrase taken out of context, it does come off like that. I hope I did manage to explain what I meant in my previous post. Did I? :)


* also, being frustrated with your words isn't always the same as frustrated with you.

I think the operative words there are "isn't always." I just couldn't tell which case was in question and I do hope we could steer clear from the frustrated tone if at all possible because I believe that polite discourse would help keep the atmosphere of AW as great as it is. :)


Wow a man using the tone argument on a woman...

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument

never heard that one before.

I'm sorry, but I'm a little confused here; perhaps because I am an EFL speaker, but I believe I didn't argue anything in my post. I merely expressed a wish that we ought try to avoid allowing our frustrations seep into our posts in order to keep up the posititive and inspiring atmosphere.

Now I do argue: to me it seems like the part of your post that I quote here is a strawman, but I may have misunderstood your position and would appreciate it if you would elaborate your intent once more to a possibly obtuse Finn because I wasn't and am not trolling or attempting to derail the conversation (either or both of which ought to be the case if I really was using the tone argument in the way as it is described in the link in your post). I swear that :)


Yea I agree with Mr Flibble on your warped view of non-muscely women.

Could you please elaborate on which part(s) of my post gave you such an impression; that I have a warped view of non-muscular women? Did you read the entire post? I'm only asking because I did say (and I quote myself):
T. Trian said:
So I'll do my best to correct this misunderstanding:
I'm not saying skinny women are somehow inferior to athletic women, nor am I saying that more robust women are inferior to athletic (or skinny) women.

I will now do away with the word "healthy." It was a poor choice, sorry about that.

What I did mean was that I don't like the fact that in general the more high profile media (such as ad campaigns for clothing e.g.) appear to favor men who do not look emaciated or over-fed but, rather, the athletic (but not in an excessive, steroid-fueled bodybuilder-like way) models "ooze" the type of sporty, active lifestyle that's portrayed as desirable and healthy (I'm sorry but I feel compelled to use that word here
icon11.gif
) e.g. in many hit tv shows (e.g. The Biggest Loser), while female models in catalogues, on bus stops, and huge posters behind shop windows most often look very thin, which has more connotations to anorexia than to an active, strong (and not just physically), sporty life style.

I just don't understand why a sportier, more muscular woman couldn't be used as a model in a perfume/hair care/lingerie ad etc (unless she's a celebrity).

I'm also talking about the general trend in media like fashion magazines and product adverts. And I do believe that the predominant beauty ideal (the one conveyed by the aforementioned media) is not conveying a positive image to impressionable people (especially children/teenagers).

In fact, if you look at what they are doing in TV shows like The Biggest Loser, it isn't about getting skinny. The competitors are taught things about nutrition that aims to make their bodies stronger, help build and conserve muscle mass, and minimize health hazards such as visceral fat and diabetes without starving the competitors. It seems the key to reach a desirable lifestyle is then the right kind of exercise: the coaches take into consideration the limitations some competitors have (e.g. if someone has bad knees, they are taught to exercise so that they avoid worsening the state of the competitor's knees and still get a good full-body workout).

Now if this is the desired goal for men and women alike, why are muscular women so under-represented in mainstream beauty circles while the current mainstream beauty ideal for men is the product of a "biggest loser"-kind of a lifestyle?

I would also like to point out that lastlittlebird and K. Trian did understand exactly what I was going for (and I perhaps explained my point less clearly than they did so my thanks to both of you :)) as is demonstrated in their given posts, meaning this and this post.
 

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
18,889
Reaction score
5,029
Location
We couldn't possibly do that. Who'd clear up the m
Website
francisknightbooks.co.uk
I think here it would've helped to elaborate on what he means about physical capability. Here, afaik, he kind of like draws parallels with the representations of female beauty in the mainstream with those of men, i.e. the functional male models whose bodies reflect an ability to lift iron, run the famous 400m dash under a minute, save cats from trees and babies from burning buildings, wrestle a bear, etc. while the very thin or, conversely, very plus-size, do not necessarily reflect this kind of functionality.
Judging functionality by looking at someone - judging some one by their looks

Ok. I went by what he actually said. (and he should answer, not you.) Nt what he meant - though I will grant that perhaps it was phrased badly in which case HE should come and clarify, not send you.

So we have the female boxer linked upthread

Have some other ladies. Check out their functionality and their looks .

How about this lady. Your boxer may be more functional at hitting people, but I bet this lady is more functional at being limber. Oh look, she isn't appreciably muscley. In fact she's quite slender, so she'll be out. Or if you prefer, these two who are fit and healthy and og look, slender and could knock your boxer into a cocked hat if it came to agility.

Or this, a very skinny woman who could whip your boxer's arse on endurance.


hey, even this who is the cover lady on the Times today. And could almost certainly kick your boxer's backside at swimming.

I could go on....

Do they look more physically capable than the boxer? Are they? IN what way? Your boxer may be more physically capable in one way, but not in others. In the things they train for, yes. Do the women I've noted look stereotypically healthy/muscley? Not especially. At least one would fail T's )??_ skinny test. Yet they excelled at they Olympics....

One is training to knock someone out. Are they functionally better than someone who trains for litheness? For endurance? For speed at swimming?

Is judging someone by how they look for their functional capability a good thing to do? Is it any better than judging someone by their look for their ability to wear clothes nicely (catwalk models)

Is judging someone by how they fit to your expectations and whether you , T's (??right one?) trian, want to look at them or find them attractive, any better than some other guy arbitrating the same? Or should we celebrate all womenhood?

If you judge by looks (however you do), you judge by looks. It is no different to someone judging whether a catwalk model is too fat. If you (or I) say 'I prefer that all women are celebrated for their natural shape,' yay! Celebration of all woman hood in al its glory! No one here will disagree. If I (or you) say 'I prefer to look at muscley women because skinny women are yucky/inferior' then very not yay. Because it's all about whether a guy likes them/finds them sexy and that is where the Hollywood problem arises! And then how are you any different to the people applying the standards right now? Hmm? You aren't. Because if you do , you judge on looks not capability or personality. And that's not right.
 

Rachel Udin

Banned
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Messages
1,514
Reaction score
133
Location
USA... sometimes.
Website
www.racheludin.com
In countries in Asia and Africa companies like L'oreal market skin whitening creams to PoC they are quite popular. I know this BB cream I bought from a seller in Hong Kong has a bleaching agent in. It's not much. http://susanbagleydotme.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/ethnic-skin-whitening/

I'd say that the way bleaching creams in Asia and Africa are marketed and the attitudes about lighter skin amongst PoC is completely different to the way white people tan. They are not comparable to me or on the same level. You just have to look at L'Oreal skin bleaching adverts.
Sad to say, but the idea of whiter skin has been prevalent before white people arrived in Asia. I found this out listening to some lectures from a professor at Berkley where he listed the beauty standards from a Chinese POV. Amoung them was no freckles because it equals X personality trait and also lighter skin, because darker skin==you can't trust them.

This is also true in Indian literature/culture too.

--;;

I think this goes to show that men when in the dominant position in society have been dictating physical traits as personality traits for a long, long time, no matter what the culture they come from. Maybe this is the core problem. I still hear it from men. They think a physical feature means some kind of personality trait.

But anyway, the skin whitening probably was amped up by the exportation of television from Western countries which has also been shown to export anorexia with it. Also, I should note that having darker skin as a man in the same countries is not seen as undesirable as it is for a woman.

Still, as an Asian with naturally wavy hair that I can coax into being naturally curly, (just need some hair wax) with freckles, and a naturally skinny body no matter what I eat (We'll see about middle age) at about 5'6". I don't fit the stereotyped Asian, so people literally will argue that I am not fully Asian. (Excuse me?) (As an aside, why do people feel the need to argue with me how Asian I am or aren't?)

When I got to Korea the older generation says I'm too skinny and I should eat more and the younger generation would say I'm too fat. (Korean girls are amazingly thinner and I have a BMI around 19... so I can't imagine that).

Which shows disparity between generations.

The double eyelid v. single eyelid thing apparently also goes back to Chinese literature. (Though if I was back then, I think though I do have double eyelids and lighter skin, I'd still kick those men into not reproducing).

Despite that, the one cool thing that I did do was go to a Korean spa. There there are women of all shapes and all sides who don't care if you are whatever shape. That definitely helped my own self esteem.
 

T. Trian

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Messages
99
Reaction score
8
Judging functionality by looking at someone - judging some one by their looks

Ok. I went by what he actually said. (and he should answer, not you.) Nt what he meant - though I will grant that perhaps it was phrased badly in which case HE should come and clarify, not send you.

I feel obligated to clear up a few things here so bear with me :)

First, I did not send K. Trian to do anything: she posts here as herself, not as my envoy. And just so we're clear on the subject, I post here as myself, not as her envoy either. Unless either of us specifically mentions that we're speaking for the other/posting on the other's behalf. I honestly expected this to be the default assumption on any forum but I hope this clears things up for you :)

Secondly, did you read the definitions I posted in this and this post and K. Trian in the first paragraph of this post?

Thirdly, none of the women you linked look like the average catwalk model to me. They look like athletes (especially in person as even though I've never met any of the ladies you used as examples in your post I'm quoting above, I've met gymnasts, artistic skaters, and swimmers who compete on an international level etc).
At least I've so far been able to tell apart a female gymnast of aforementioned level from the average female catwalk model IRL (and usually in pictures too).

Do female gymnasts and female catwalk models really appear to have matching body types (meaning height/weight-ratio, amount of bodyfat vs. muscle mass etc) to you? If they do, I suppose it won't do much good to carry on with this conversation because it would mean we perceive things a little bit too differently, but that's okay too :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.