The Question of Performing Feminism

The post which prompted this, well, post, is publicly available on Instagram here. The text of both the post and selected comments/snippets thereof are included in the following as well.

The OP sells training and nutrition plans, books related to that, and online coaching. She also has a podcast and a reasonable sized following on Instagram. I'm not sure of her exact qualifications, but hey, they also aren't relevant to the post at hand here. This is very much, as a change of pace for what I had intended this blog to be, as I am discussing a post expressing an opinion, rather than challenging information and how it is presented.

The post is a complaint about something said by Jamilla Jamil - likely sparked by her most recent Instagram post. I'm not sure if it relates solely to that post, or if it is a more general complaint about the themes of her conversations and writing. It is, as follows:

I do love when genetically gifted, tall, skinny women with faces full of makeup, professionally styled hair, posing in expensive dresses, tell the female masses not to alter their natural faces or change their bodies in any way, because that makes them slaves to the patriarchy. 

Honestly, the deludedness of some of these self opposed feminist megaphones is astonishing.

 Dolly Parton was/is an incredible feminist role model and she had fake tits the size of the sun.

You can care about how you look and not be a slave to the patriarchy, to sell this false dichotomy as feminist is, ironically, pretty fucking anti-feminist.

Ah, and here we have it. A tale as old as time - women with different views calling other women out as feminist/not feminist. Excellent.

The Fact Checking Component

So, to start with, as is standard for social media posts designed to ignite feelings and therefore get clicks... this appears to be an oversimplification of the points Jamil makes on a regular basis and this post about Botox, quite specifically. The term 'slave to the patriarchy' isn't specifically used in the post, and the closest she comes is "We should not be paying to take risks with our faces and our health, to be tamed by men who fancy children."

She also does not specifically say that women should not change their bodies in any way, although as a ED survivor Jamil has been quite outspoken about body image and ED in the past.

The Opinion Component

Everything from here on in is my issue with the opinions expressed in this very simplistic response.

Firstly, feminism can not be reduced solely to 'if a woman chooses it, it's fine' - we should be criticising both the ability for women to have agency, and the conditions which surround and influence that agency. 

Secondly, there is scope and space within the feminist movement to challenge and critique the decisions of women, individually and collectively, the provided reasoning for those decisions, and to debate the influence of the patriarchy on decision-making.

Participation in the beauty industry and upholding conventional beauty standards is inherently participating in the capitalist patriarchy. Women absolutely have the ability to make this choice for themselves, and almost all of us choose to participate in some way, shape or form... but conventional beauty standards are indisputably informed and shaped by the male gaze. Each individual may make a decision on the basis of 'I am doing this for myself', but it is rare that those reasons exist outside of 'it helps me feel more confident,' 'I like looking like this,' or 'I didn't like this about myself.' The reason for those feelings is that we are conditioned to aspire to meet the beauty standard established by the patriarchy, which is consistently and aggressively promoted by an industry that wants to sell products and services. We don't like our wrinkles because we have had a lifetime of messaging telling us how unattractive wrinkles are, absorbing negative language around older women who are consistently described as hags, or shown in articles comparing them with their 20 year old selves, with alarmed exclaimations of, "What happened to her?!' We are concerned with the size and shape of our bodies because we are bombarded with negative messaging about any body that isn't slim, trim and toned, and adulation for those that are. We can absolutely tell ourselves we are doing this for ourselves, but we mustn't fail to recognise that we have these feelings about our self-image for a reason.

Look, not a one of us is exempt from this. We almost all participate in the same way. As I commented on the post:

I really think a balance needs to be struck between accepting women's choices while also critiquing the societal conditions that lead to those choices... and it's hard to do perfectly, and consistently, for all of us, because we all make imperfect choices. I see botox as a more expensive version of the argument around shaving my legs. I do it... I tell myself it's for me - and it is - but it's also not, because I'll be less on top of it in winter, and I'll scramble to do it in summer or before a date. Yes, it does feel nicer, but also, I really only care when people can see, or when I critique my own appearance through the lens of what society has taught me. I'm aware that there is an industry entirely dedicated to making me feel concern for how I look, and give myself grace (occasionally) for being part of it, while also critiquing myself and holding myself somewhat accountable. We need to do the same with the beauty industry altogether and our own participation in it - grace with accountability.

 It is difficult, if not near impossible, to not uphold the beauty standards society expects of us. Jamilla wears makeup and has her hair styled. I shave my legs and wear a bra when I leave the house, even though it annoys the fuck out of me to do so. I am, by no stretch of the imagination, a 'perfect feminist'. Some women get Botox and fillers. But participating in this doesn't mean we cannot critique, nor judge, the systemic structures that manipulate us into doing these things, or the way women uphold the beauty standard - and it doesn't mean that we shouldn't.

Commenters, and the OP, throughout the comment section have misrepresented aspects of Jamil's post, and stripped the already minimal nuance from the original content. "I’m not 'conforming to the patriarchy' or trying to look a certain way for so-called 'men who love children',” is a criticism one person levels at Jamil's statement, ignoring the fact that the conventional beauty standard is indeed best met by slender, young white women with long legs and just the right amount of curve and perk in their breasts and buttocks, usually between the ages of 16 and 20. Youthfulness is what people have been pursuing for as long as I can recall, whether it be the Oil of Olay ads on TV when I was a child, through to Botox and fillers designed to remove any vestiges of aging from our faces as I have gotten older. There is nothing feminist about a society that actively discourages women from looking older, wiser, perhaps less fertile, and certainly less powerful. The fact that men are now being caught up in this industry at increasing rates doesn't change the nature of it - it merely emphasises the power of capitalism, and the desire to achieve more profit. I do not have the investigative energy at this time to see whether the rise in Botox specifically for bruxism corresponds with cocaine usage patterns, although I would expect that there are many overlaps between those two male markets... but men are increasingly caught in the web of the beauty and wellness industry (although a more obvious symptom is the explosion in the use of performance and image enhancing drugs). They, too, are victims of the patriarchy.

There is also the expected criticism levelled at Jamil's participation in the beauty industry through clothes, hair and makeup - which, yes, is absolutely also shaped by the capitalist patriarchy. None of us do a particularly good job of escaping it, and we have been conditioned to feel nice when we 'look nice' (don't start me on the notion of looking 'nice,' which could be an entirely separate rant). A bit of whataboutism/youtooism is always an easy comeback when we feel uncomfortable or targeted - there is a reason "I know you are, you said you are, but what am I?' has survived generations of playground interactions - but it is important to distinguish between what is effectively costume, and what fundamentally changes who we are as people... and that is, I feel, the crux of the point. Costume is fun, it is entertaining... and can be abandoned or changed at will. Botox, while not forever, is certainly there for a while... and so is the hole in your budget. Plastic surgery may be a forever commitment; some nips can not be untucked. When we commit to these changes in the name of self-confidence, we must at least be honest about why this makes us feel confident. One woman pretty much nailed it - completely ironically - when she was justifying her decision by saying, "No one else commented on the lines on my face. I got it done to make myself feel good." The most sophisticated tool of the beauty industry is that it has convinced us that we are entirely in control of these decisions and that it is empowering to make them. It has stopped us from questioning why those lines on our faces bother us so much in the first place, when they clearly matter not one jot to those who know and love us.

The other part of this post that needs addressing is, of course, that someone who meets conventional beauty standards has no right to comment on the beauty industry and feminist issues associated with it. I find this fascinating, as someone who sits pretty squarely in the middle of the range when it comes to appearance - I often refer to myself as the most generic looking white woman one could possibly imagine, not thin enough to be the ideal, not fat enough to suffer the social cruelties we insist on heaping on fat people, because I have the least to lose and to gain from having anything done. I am not attractive enough to be noticed, nor do I sit outside the beauty standard enough for people to ask 'have you ever thought about...?' For Jamil, and for everyone, there is absolutely a relationship between beauty and influence/power... but someone who gains their influence and power from their appearance inherently has more to lose as it fades. Jamil would undoubtedly have much to gain from a discreet nip or tuck, a couple of injections, and ongoing cosmetic refinements as she ages. She would be marketable for longer, would gain work more easily, and would continue to be seen as 'relevant'. Beauty currency fades and crashes hard and fast in our society. For Jamil's privilege (one which she has never denied having) to be weaponised by someone who markets her services, from what social media shows me, very much at the fat loss/body shaping side of the fitness industry, and who uses her own body as a marketing tool... well, there is an uncomfortable, unacknowledged hypocrisy there. If your business model relies on conventional beauty standards, it follows that you are going to have some vested interest in maintaining both the standard and women's interest in meeting it, even if there are other health benefits thrown in and mentioned along the way. There is an uncomfortable lack of awareness in this complaint - quite the irony.

Ultimately, this again comes down to the question of what is feminism, and when it is performative? My view sits somewhere in the uncomfortable tension - women have the agency to do what they want with their bodies... but they also have a responsibility to understand and acknowledge the societal forces that influence and shape these decisions. We have a responsibility to stop marketing or discussing our beauty procedures as self-fulfilment, as empowerment, or as some symbol of female decision making power. The OP shows that she has somehow missed the point entirely in this comment in response to another on her own post, "Ohhh, wait, hang on, is it part of human nature to like certain aesthetics in all things, including beauty / attractiveness, and stoke your own flames of self confidence? Not everything women do is about men, and constantly making it about men is pretty ironic." An astounding, and one would hope unintentional, lack of awareness of how the beauty standard is developed, maintained and upheld in our society, and a total lack of understanding of the difference between 'men' [individuals, and even collectively] and 'the patriarchy' [the male dominated power structure which drives our society]. Men are also affected by the patriarchy! None of us can escape it!

The Stay Puft Marshmallow Man is how I mentally picture the patriarchy at all times. He is coming for you, he will crush you... but look at him trying to look benign, even cheerful, as he does so!

TL;DR: yes, you can do what you like with your body - you have personal agency. But don't pretend it is feminist to get Botox, surgery, or anything else designed to make you 'more attractive and confident', and don't criticise someone for saying the industry is inherently anti-feminist. Acknowledge that you are driven by patriarchal forces when you make those decisions and sit in that discomfort. We don't expect everyone to perform feminism perfectly at all times, but pretending things are feminist when they are not is absurd. 

Please imagine this as the David and Victoria meme, but saying:

"I get this done because as a feminist, women can make choices to make them feel good"

"Be honest"

"I have the agency to make choices to improve my confidence!"

"Be. Honest."

"It makes me feel good because I have been conditioned to think a particular look is more attractive and desirable."

"Thank you"