In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Wear It, Bitch: Musings on Beauty Culture and the Femme Feminist

Several years ago, Anne leveled an accusation at me that straight pissed me off. She said I was vain.

Me? Vain? Pshaw. I mean, I was only spending an hour on my daily beauty routine and maybe two hours for a really big night. Perhaps twenty or so hours a week on the stair machine and the weight benches at the YWCA. Vain? For real. There was an art to this package.

But the more I thought about it and shucked the initial repulsion of identifying myself with a culture I despised, the more I realized she was correct. I was spending an unbelievable amount of my time maintaining an image I didn’t value. I took it as a challenge, stopped blow-drying my hair, cut the makeup down to three products, and cut the shower routine down to soap, shampoo, conditioner, and a razor (and most of the time, not even the razor). I also cut back on the time at the gym, partially because the YWCA doubled their rates and I could no longer afford it. I substituted an at-home yoga and pilates routine which soon faded for more lifestyle-exercise activities.

To my genuine surprise, I didn’t look much different.

In fact, I looked healthier and more well-rested.

I never gave up the skirts and heels that I took up during a self-imposed pant boycott, partially because I like them and partially because nearly no one my age wears anything remotely similar except to job interviews. But I’ll tell you this, a skirt is far more comfortable than pants on most days.

I’m late to this article, a response to the lawsuit in which the court found that women can be fired for not wearing enough of, or the right, makeup:

Never again is anyone allowed to give me crap about how women naturally want to adorn themselves with makeup, as if there’s some genetic urge to look fake that’s wended its way here on the sparkly pink path of evolution. This ain’t biology. This is your government, endorsing your corporate lackey’s creepy-ass urge to make me turn my happy, natural face into a twisted parody of comeliness. This is some cosmetics executive getting rich on state-enforced gender norms.

This quote resonated with me as well.

Let’s not get into the question of whether it’s degrading or sexist for women to wear makeup. Sure, it might be for some women – but there are plenty of politically aware girls out there who like to get dolled up. The question here is whether women who are forced to wear makeup when men aren’t can be described as experiencing gender equality. The 9th Circuit’s opinion acknowledged that makeup costs money and takes time, then dismissed this point as “academic.” But if these costs are so insignificant, why not require Harrah’s to pay to keep its female employees looking as if they’d just had a makeover? Maybe the company could even pay these women for the time it takes to keep their faces properly clad.

My defiant nature dictates that anyone who requires me to adhere to a gender-based standard will quickly find me behaving in just the opposite fashion. The pedestal of femininity is not only a high place from which to fall, but I will whip that thing out from under me and hit you with it faster than you can blink. Nothing (nothing!) irritates me more than someone informing me how I or someone like me ought to appear or behave.

The operative term here is “ought.”

The lovely Bitch Ph.D. touches on these points in a completely unrelated post:

Now, by doing all this shit, I recognize that I am being shaped by (and myself contributing to) a system that judges women by how they look, that burdens us temporally and economically with adhereing to a fairly narrow standard…

At the same time, I do speak out about the falsehoods inherent in these systems. Should I walk the walk as well as talk the talk and refuse to play the game at all? Should I refuse to wear stylish clothing, refuse to spend $50 on a haircut, refuse to consider my appearance, eschew vanity? Doing so would, on one level, be consistent with my beliefs. But not entirely, because frankly, I enjoy this shit. I enjoy it when my colleagues whisper, “fantastic purse!” or “we were talking earlier about how great your shoes are!” after a meeting. I take pleasure in compliments, and I like it when people find me attractive. I’m not interested in a revolution where I can’t dance, and I think there is not a goddamn thing wrong with enjoying pleasure and flirting. I also, of course, reserve the right to schlep around and look like crap on a given day, and I’m not going to play the game of running other women down, and frankly I go through periods where I am more or less femmey (right now I’m in a femmey phase), and I’m cool with that too.

Because frankly, even while I can criticize the system, even while I can bitch about the beauty standard and point out the constructedness of gender and all of that, I am also well aware that I do live in that system. We all care about what we look like, even if the look we choose to project is “I don’t care about what I look like” or “fuck your fascist beauty standards” or “combat boots kick ass.” I can pull those looks off, too, and sometimes I do. But it is a fact that, if I stand up and identify myself as a feminist, the fact that I am femmey, the fact that I am married and have a kid, the fact that I have a Ph.D., gives my words a certain kind of weight.

In my unbiased opinion, the words of a femme feminist help, in some unenlightened circles, to defy the stereotypical feminist image. This notion in itself is inherently irritating — while my words are rarely different than, and rarely more poignant than, most feminists, the messenger sometimes makes the difference.

One of my goals here on the blog has been to mix the personal and political to an indefinable mush. We cannot easily divorce our politics from our personal experiences thus this has been my experiment in the opposite. I have found readers who have reluctantly begun to stick around and like what I have to say about feminism because something about the rest of my online persona appealed to them, just as I have had people in my tangible life who have approached me for my looks or femmey personality and been turned onto feminism by virtue of my physical persona.

While this wasn’t a conscious effort on my part, I have noticed over time that for some people, especially young women, the acceptance of the belief system and the feminist label are far more acceptable from someone who appears in every other way to be like them (and for young men, from someone physically unthreatening). Sometimes I want to hold them down and wash them of this silliness, but I usually tell carefully crafted stories about my coming out as a feminist at the same time I came out as an unabashed femme.

This may get me some criticism, but I’m not sure I care. As the doctor paraphrased: “I’m not interested in a revolution where I can’t dance.”

Today’s Observations

Because I feel like bitching about my illness:

1. If I see Donald Trump one more time today I will throw something through my television.

2. The chili was excellent, thanks for asking. However, it is probably a good thing I am sleeping alone tonight.

3. I must shave my cat — there is no other solution to The Hair Problem. (and by that, I mean Pablo. Don’t read into this)

4. Finished three books today: A People’s History of the United States, Stolen Harvest, and Nickel and Dimed.

5. No, there will not be a book report. They have been sitting around half-read for well over a month and it was my duty as their owner to read them.

6. My bathtub is absolutely filthy, but taking a bath in it is very close to cleaning it, so that will have to do.

7. Why must I always have a horrendous break out when I get ill? Really.

8. Stephen King’s made-for-TV movies are really bad, but I will watch them anyway.

9. “Anways” is not a word. Neither is “irregardless.” Let’s strike them from the lexicon.

10. No, I do not want the “watch this blonde hottie strip for the camera now!” or “enlarge my penis in ten days!” so please stop soliciting me.

11. I really don’t like those Lysol wipes thingies, but Ethan was so excited that they were on sale at the grocery store that I bought some and he cleaned two whole bathrooms today on his own. And liked it! His next lesson in home maintenance: shoveling the driveway.

Now, back to the dishes and the floors and the hearty expulsion of phlegm.

Snow Day

We are under warning of a Winter Storm, but the snow is so peacefully falling that “storm” is wholly the wrong word for this bit of natural serenity.


I would enjoy this view from my back window if I weren’t feeling so under the weather. Some time last night I began to feel that nasty feeling in the back of my throat, the kind where you realize you’ve been draining something nasty on a direct route from the sinuses to the stomach all day long. This shouldn’t have been a surprise. I’ve felt run down all week — achy, tired, like my mind and body are moving through molasses. To comfort myself, I threw together a chili recipe in a crockpot that hasn’t seen the light of day since before I was born. Scary.

I’m almost done with the first of four panels for the Klaralund sweater. Two rows and a bind-off row to go.


I wasn’t keen on the colors after knitting them up, but it usually takes me a full skein to warm to the color repeats. Once I began the second skein, a love affair with Silk Garden had begun. This is exciting – it’s my first wearable object that isn’t an accessory. Conversely, it is also dangerous. After seeing this poetic take on the Clapotis, I could be in for some serious debt. The colors! The drape! Lovely!

I’m also finishing up with massive felted Skully bag this weekend, I hope. I hate sewing and two very large pockets must be sewn onto the front after the bag dries. Pictures to follow.

The rest of the day will be spent watching horrible TV movies on the couch, knitting and coughing, and attempting not to move in any direction further than my arms’ length. And being short, that’s not very far.

Anti-Abortion Catholic Group Targets Pro-Abortion Rights Catholic Politicians

Grab your torches, it’s a witchhunt!

American Life League, the nation’s largest grassroots Catholic pro-life educational organization, will hold a press conference on Monday, Jan. 24 at the Hyatt Regency on Capitol Hill. At the press conference, American Life League will unveil a two-page ad identifying the 72 pro-abortion Catholics in the U.S. House and Senate.

“This is the first time American Life League has publicly identified all pro-abortion Catholic Republicans and Democrats in both houses of Congress,” said Joe Starrs, Director of American Life League’s Crusade for the Defense of Our Catholic Church.

He sounds so proud.

“A public figure who claims to be Catholic cannot support the direct killing of preborn babies through abortion. It is our hope that the bishops will use this opportunity to counsel Catholic members of Congress who support abortion, impressing upon them the immorality of their stance and the gravity of maintaining such positions.”

Oh, I see. These poor politicians are just misguided. With enough guilt-tripping and bible-banging (I mean, “counseling”) they’ll see the light, give themselves back to Jesus, and halt the “preborn” fetus roast.

I love terms like “preborn,” really I do. Such language is precious. But be wary of any rhetoric coming from a group with “Crusade” in their name. It’s not only creepy, it alludes to the kind of sweeping accusatory judgement, supposedly from above, being hoisted on Congress next Monday.

Hell, I say we do what they want. Let’s uproot Vatican city, plunk it down right atop DC, and elect the Pope president for life. Sure beats democracy!

Coverville

Coverville might be my heaven. I’m listening to Aretha Franklin’s cover of “Eleanor Rigby” until my ears implode, and thus, it’s good to know that Coverville has me, um, covered with Joe Jackson’s version of the song once I’m done with Aretha.

Blame it on the lack of sleep.

via JC

What I’m Reading Since I’m Not Writing

• Lynn discusses a study on gender and sexuality in great detail:

The main thesis of the paper is, of course, what the title would suggest: Both men and women act as if sex is something women supply and men demand. It’s not enough for men and women to trade sex for sex; men need to supply something else to women to make it worth their while to sleep with them. This can be money or other resources, or it can be love, commitment, etc. So you can either read the argument as “Women are a bunch of frigid gold-diggers who exploit men by supplying sex to the highest bidder” – the cynical, “marriage is nothing but a longer term form of prostitution in which a woman sells to a single buyer” sort of take on the matter, or you can take the more angelic view of women, in which we’re purer and chaster than men, and therefore can control male sexual behavior by holding out for that ring on the finger (and someone who will actually, you know, hang around when sex starts producing kids).

Excellent post. Please read in it’s entirety.

• At Mousewords, Amanda continues to challenge the assertion that smart women are less marriagable by examining the masculine-active and feminine-passive.

• I’m down with LiL’s Rules for Life:

1.) to fail publicly and often; 2.) to learn to do something one is not naturally inclined towards; and the last 3.) the no jerk rule, which means you can’t be a jerk to people and have to try and get others not to be jerks either.

Every now and again, feel free to refer me back to these rules.

• In “Is this part of my sentence?” the Health Diva of Black Feminism looks at new statistics on prisoner abuse and assault. Most interesting is her pontification on the potential for the creation of a class of sexual slaves.

• Body and Soul looks at the unveiling of photographs of British soldiers abusing prisoners of war. Look familiar? At least the British will acknowledge that orders were given. Maybe W will too now that he’s been given this official providential mandate.

• Norbizness holds an Inaugural Nausea Captioning party. BYOB.

• One of the funniest polls I’ve seen of late is this one highlighted by Jacqui: “It appears as if 49% of our country views Bush as a ‘uniter’ while 49% think of him as a ‘divider.’ ” I hate whomever reported this poll on principle alone.

• Food Politicized: At Half-Changed World, this family of four engages in a social experiment to see what happens when they try to live on the government’s suggested food plan for a family of their size. Explanation of their original goal can be found here.

Hugo Schwyzer prepares to be interviewed (or “attacked”) by the infamous Glenn Sacks, a virulent anti-feminist radio talk show host, this Sunday. Scary.

• Netaloid looks at the institutionalization of racism for the MLK Jr. holiday:

…And so the influence of the white, rural congressional districts grows, and the representatives from black, urban districts lose influence among their peers in Congress. And, in white rural districts with no industry or job base, new private prisons become major job centers and economic engines, popular with the white residents and thus popular with their congressional representatives.

And so the disparity already present in the “justice” system becomes greater, and there is no outcry in Washington about the disparity because it feeds the private-prison growth industry. All with the unspoken approval of those faithful to a dominant political party so attuned to the concept of We the People that it has garnered a grand total of zero black members in the House of Representatives or the Senate.

And so American racism is even more insidiously institutionalized.

• Lynn explains the use of Emma Goldman’s horsewhip against fellow anarchist Johann Most. Well done.

Bitch Ph.D., Fred Vincy (additional writings on the topic listed at the end of the post), and Maureen Craig look further into the Summers statements, backlash, backpedaling, justification, and reactionary posturing. That anyone readily defends these kinds of beliefs is absolutely amazing.

Friday Random Ten – The “Holiday in Cambodia” Edition

This is the last week Roxanne will host the Friday Random Ten. From now on, my pretties, you can find it here.

Do it like you know you should: Fire up your IPOD, MP3 or other digital media player, set to random play, list the first ten songs.

1. Bratmobile – Make Me Miss America
2. Slick Rick – Teenage Love
3. Reverend Horton Heat – It Hurts Your Daddy Bad
4. Jimi Hendrix – All Along the Watchtower
5. Nina Simone – Central Park Blues
6. The Kinks – Til the End of the Day
7. Johnny Cash – Sixteen Tons
8. Motorhead – Ace of Spades
9. L7 – Slide
10. B-52s – Roam

And now it’s your turn, on your own blog, at Roxanne’s, or in the comments below.

Request Lines

Several topics to write on have been swirling about the head this week, primarily dealing with a small excerpt from one of my required readings that inspired an inner dialogue about my experience with and without teachers of color. I’m not quite ready to write on that yet. Still composing.

And thus, as it is done at the Republic of T, I’m opening the request line for this Friday.

Give me a topic to write on and I will pick one and do so.