#like “empowering” products sold by companies that exploit female insecurities

[doesnotloveyou]

(sry to hop in again) i agree with everything you said including tags, but feel it's important to acknowledge that it introduced these ideas in bite size pieces to audiences that weren't aware of them. I overheard several convos between female audience members young and old who were clearly thinking about these things for the first time. anything more complex and less showy would not have gotten them in those seats or kept their attention

to me it was a glitterfied mashup of a hundred discussions here on tumblr. to others it was actually groundbreaking

I feel like if Barbie had been an exploration of an adult woman’s bond with her daughter’s neglected doll and an examination of motherhood/girlhood OR if it had been about how men can feel isolated due to patriarchal norms and in turn become radicalized proponents of patriarchy but men themselves are not bad and deserve to feel wanted and to display healthy emotions and self worth OR if it had been a critique of corporate, it would have worked, but the film crammed everything in and didn’t develop much of it

[katieclark27]

Is Beauty Truly The Beast?

     What do you think of when you hear a $532 billion industry? Is it sports, fast food, energy, health, fashion, technology, education, or finance? Today, the beauty and cosmetics industry grosses roughly $532 billion per year — and this number is growing month to month. While we can never predict its growth, most assume that it will continue to increase at a 5%-to-7% compound-annual-growth-rate, to hit or surpass $800 billion by the year 2025. But what exactly are we buying into, and why are we putting so much money into an industry centered around insecurity and change? Some scholars call it the "lipstick effect,"  or our constant willingness to buy things we do not need — regardless of factors like an economic recession, or how much money we make. Other scholars say we are “beauty sick,” or obsessed with altering ourselves to an idealistic and unattainable image of thinness, whiteness, straightness, and perfection. Rather, women are forced to distort themselves as they try to measure up to artificial beauty standards portrayed in this multi-billion dollar industry. This should not be the case, and the beauty industry fails all women. In a time where gender inequality is so prevalent, and sexism still exists in every arena, the beauty industry must revolutionize females instead of advertising unhealthy change and insecurity. The beauty industry exploits female vulnerability and makes an economic profit from it — your insecurities are bought, sold, and profited off of. Weight loss gadgets, contoured makeup, hunger suppressants, and anti-aging products all target our greatest fears as females. This needs to end in order for women to progress. The beauty and cosmetics industry — with its multi-billion dollar platform — needs to aid women in defining their true potential and identity by celebrating female activism, women of color, and body positivity.

     The beauty and cosmetics industry must be present in the conversation of feminist issues and gender equality. Women’s publications, beauty companies, and other businesses aimed towards female consumption should spotlight female CEO’s and activists, create more celebratory content about females, and recognize the concerns of feminism. You may be wondering why it is so important to make the beauty and cosmetics industry less superficial. Why does this matter to you? According to Joy Chen, the Chairman and CEO of H20+ Beauty, 

“Demonstrating fairness and support for women will reinforce to young people what positive gender dynamics should look like, and will strengthen a foundation for a more equitable future in generations to come.” 

Simply put — lead by example. If a fair and equal future for all genders is what we want, then it needs to be advertised. Publicizing positive female content will help females gain confidence at an early age, setting them up for a more successful and less “beauty-sick” future. When publications fail to print “positive gender dynamics” they are designing an entire generation full of insecure and vulnerable women. The beauty and cosmetics industry needs to build a foundation of female power. Women are underrepresented and under celebrated, and unfortunately, females endorse a multi-billion dollar industry that does not celebrate them. Female publications objectify women just as much as men’s magazines do, but they do it more subtly. This is called "faux empowerment."  Maria L. Carreon, a graduate student at the University of New York, theorizes that publications use the mantra “all women are beautiful” as a marketing tool, not a true wish to deem all women as “beautiful.”  She argues that female liberation through the beauty industry is currently impossible because publications fail to discuss true women's issues like gender inequality, the lack of female CEOs, women’s activism, and so on. The beauty industry, then, can never liberate us so long as they fail to authentically aim to revolutionize females and celebrate female potential. Female acceptance begins once the beauty industry sets the standard of discussing real feminist issues. Carreon hypothesizes that the beauty industry should avoid the phrasing “all women are beautiful,” and instead, should use “all women are valuable as human beings and we have economic power that should enable us to challenge a system which still does not treat us as equal to men.” From this, “all women are beautiful” is a manipulative tool that the beauty and cosmetics industry uses in order to force us to buy products that change how we look. Companies need to use their advertising tools to push for female representation in the workplace, discuss how our political system fails women, reproductive freedoms, the wage gap, and social justice. When we abandon the “be sexy,” “be thin,” “be active,” “be fit,” we aid women in discovering their full potential as intelligent, capable beings. Women will have success when they see the policies and politics of our world in an industry geared towards them — they will be capable of change and influence when change and influence is advertised in the products they consume daily. So, how exactly can the beauty and cosmetics industry do this? What ways can they advertise female empowerment and still create a successful product? Beauty and cosmetics companies should: 

Hire more female employees and CEOs.

Spotlight female activists using their product, thus, combining beauty and feminism in a harmonious way.

Discuss the importance of activism using their product as a motif or theme through each issue. 

Studies also highlight that beauty and cosmetic companies have a financial incentive to increase female leadership in their brand. According to a study conducted by the Harvard Business Review, companies who had a 30 percent female leadership are associated with a 15 percent increase in profitability. Female involvement and leadership improves the company’s bottom line. Female leadership strongly celebrates female consumers, but also increases business performance. This proves that female involvement is beneficial for both the consumer and the company — not solely the consumer. Once females are involved and celebrated through the entire industry, it will encourage women from the ground up in this manner: 

A female CEO is hired — she uses her platform to instill more celebratory content about women, rather than the degrading “lose weight,” “be sexy,” “be young” themes often portrayed.

She sets the example for young women — and young men — across the world that women are capable, intelligent, powerful beings. In order to create long lasting change, younger generations must be shown the importance of equality in the workplace 

Women can then become truly empowered and find their true identity — not “faux empowered.” 

It is the responsibility of the beauty and cosmetics industry to support women’s bodies “as they come” — celebrate the natural, the untouched, and the so-called “flaws” of our bodies. In turn, advocating for the natural will increase positive female identity, potential, and confidence rather than our current “beauty-sick,” self scrutinizing culture. Beauty and cosmetics companies. and female publications, must start looking at beauty and image as a feminist issue. Depicting women as beings that must constantly improve through phrasings such as “be skinny,” “be white,” “be perfect and young, is just as degrading as a lack of rights. Women can never just be — we are constantly urged to change. Deborah L. Rhode, an SMU Law School graduate student, studying "Appearance as a Feminist Issue,"  remarks that: 

“Because women are held to unattainable ideals, their task is boundless. Almost all areas of the female body are in need of something. The result is to focus women’s attention on self-improvement rather than social action, ” (Rhode, 2016). 

Rendering women as constantly needing to alter themselves distracts women from “social action,” and real change. Rhode also comments that our obsession with weight stems from the way females are illustrated in the beauty and cosmetics world. Models are dangerously thin and borderline emaciated, but they are seen as the goal weight because of how the beauty and cosmetics industry portrays them. From this, eating disorders and cosmetic surgery are glamorized and even encouraged. From the perspective of health, our current fascination with weight loss is toxic and the beauty industry is responsible. Illnesses like anorexia, bulimia, and binge eating disorder compromise work capability and reproductive capacity. These disorders often result in depression, anxiety, low self worth and esteem. Women cannot find their true identity and selves if this cycle persists. Rhode theorizes that the way our society becomes less harmful is through the celebration of “the natural.” She comments:

“the overemphasis of attractiveness diminishes women’s credibility and diverts attention from their capabilities and accomplishments,” (Rhode, 2016). 

Females are highly sexualized and made insecure from it, making it impossible to find their true potential and best selves. It is the responsibility of the beauty and cosmetics industry to aid women in feeling revolutionized through beauty, not insecure and inadequate. Women cannot be seen as credible because outer beauty takes precedence, making it impossible for gender equality to ensue. The psychological effects of hyper-sexualization are extensive. Graduate Student Anne Marie Britton at the University of New Hampshire crafted her honors thesis on “The Beauty Industry 's Influence on Women in Society.” She explains: 

“consumers who believe they are unattractive will ‘rely heavily on adornments as compensatory tools.’” (Britton, 2012). 

Britton theorizes that publications should use their platform as a tool of female empowerment because our current reliance on cosmetics and plastic surgery is becoming unhealthy. She goes further to say that “women manipulate their appearance and in so doing, may benefit from a boost in positive self perception and well-being that appears to be associated with wearing makeup.” Britton asserts that this “positive self perception” is short-lived and extremely temporary, and women would receive a more long-term benefit from the celebration of the natural body. In fact, she highlights that the fleeting nature of this “positive self perception” is profoundly harmful for female self esteem and self worth. We learn from a young age that makeshift confidence stems from makeup and compensatory tools — we rely on these habits as we grow older and fail to develop a real sense of self. However, various beauty companies are making strides towards natural beauty. Dove's campaign for "Real Beauty" which launched in 2004, spotlights “real women” instead of traditional models. Dove illustrates real-life scenarios in an attempt to relate to the average consumer with a “natural” body type. Reebok’s #PerfectNever campaign, which ironically uses supermodel Gigi Hadid as its spokesperson, aims attention on society’s insurmountable standards of perfection and beauty. But what are these campaigns worth when they continue to use supermodels that are nearly “perfect” on the outside as their forefront? Celebrating imperfection is the key to liberating women — but it must be done authentically. We are constantly dissatisfied with our bodies because publications and companies fail to use models that look like us. This is called the "thin ideal."  The thin ideal is the concept that the perfect female body has a slim waist, low body fat percentage, and feminine qualities like wide eyes, small and sloped nose, petite shoulders, flat stomach, and skinny thighs. These characteristics are often achievable only through cosmetic surgery, leaving many with a feeling of ineptitude. There is a strong link between media exposure and body dissatisfaction. Body dissatisfaction is a main factor in eating disorder symptoms and a lack of confidence, leaving women unable to find their true potential. By glorifying slenderness and the thin ideal, the beauty and cosmetics industry is emphasizing the supposed “importance” of appearance, rather than the natural and unrefined. Body dissatisfaction has become such a relevant factor of our culture that brands distinguish themselves based on “plus size” and “regular size” and “petite size.” These various categories have played a significant role in the process of identity development amongst young women, gender-role learning, and the maturation of values and beliefs. From the beginning, women learn their value and worth based on their category — if they are “plus size,” they are less beautiful and ideal, “regular size” is ordinary and mundane, and “petite size” is the ideal. In a survey conducted by Wendy Spettigue, a child and adolescent psychiatrist at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, 

“the number one wish of girls aged 11–17 who were given three magic wishes for anything they wanted was “to lose weight and keep it off.” In another survey, middle-aged women were asked what they would most like to change about their lives, and more than half of them said “their weight.” 

Spettigue comments that this constant feeling of inadequacy is due to the beauty and cosmetics industry failing to normalize “real” bodies.  She goes further to say that beauty magazines have even established “how-to” manuals for weight loss, supporting the common desire to restrict. 

     The beauty and cosmetics industry underserves women of color, causing women of color to constantly feel less supported and recognized. The underrepresentation of minority women leaves them feeling inherently less beautiful than white women. It is the obligation of this multi-billion dollar industry to support all women, embrace intersectionality, and create a non-binary vision of beauty. All women, regardless of race, are subject to demanding beauty standards mentioned in the “thin ideal.” White skin, long straight hair, tall and thin body, petite features, blue eyes. This Eurocentric, hegemonic image of beauty is promoted through the media and deeply fails women of color. The beauty and cosmetic industry largely favors the white consumer by limiting the availability of products for women with darker skin tones and rarely using minority models. Many brands like MAC, Covergirl, Bobbi Brown, and Maybelline have received backlash over a lack of minority representation, and their response has been insincere at best. Beauty companies have attempted to include more shades of brown in their lines, but of the 20-50 shades included in the collection, only six to seven of them will feature a darker pigment. This failed attempt at racial inclusivity proves that beauty and cosmetics companies see racial inclusion as a secondary problem. The lack of shades available for women of color speaks to a greater lack of representation within this industry — how can women of color succeed if the economy's main female industry shows them that their needs, and their skin tone, make them a secondary consumer? Aside from the disproportionate amount of brown shades, other beauty companies have been blamed for using black models as a marketing strategy, hence “faux empowerment.” In 2016, MAC makeup released its spring line “Vibe Tribe,” which featured motifs of Native American heritage through packaging, marketing, and advertising. Using Chinle and Ganado designs, which are traditional Navajo patterns, MAC was accused of cultural appropriation.  MAC defended this line as an ode to music festival season, but many recognized its  attempt to use minority culture for economic profit. The use of “tribe” clearly coincides with Native American culture. But “Vibe Tribe” represents much more than a failed makeup line — it represents deep rooted underrepresentation and a major lack of authenticity within the beauty world. MAC makeup, owned by Estée Lauder, is worth $6.3 billion alone. If this billion dollar brand severely fails at authentically representing minority consumers, women of color suffer. Other brands, like L’Oreal, have been accused of tokenizing or whitewashing women of color models. Major beauty campaigns often feature black models with lighter skin, blonde hair, and photoshopped thin noses in an attempt to appeal to the white consumer. According to Tiffany Gill, a professor of history and black studies at the University of Delaware, 

“many brands are unwilling to cater to women of color in fear that it will damage their brand, in fear that it will make their brand less glamorous, less beautiful if it’s attached to black women, if it’s attached to darker skin women.” 

Regardless of financial incentive, beauty companies fail to understand that underrepresentation leaves women of color feeling abandoned by the most powerful female industry in the world. The idea that brands are less desirable because they feature black women are deep-rooted in racism and prejudice. Desiree Reid, vice president of Iman Cosmetics sees the issue of tokenizing and whitewashing black models as something that's fixable — but it takes authenticity to be successful. She remarks that “it's not enough to slap Lupita or Kerry or Zendaya's face on your ad and call it a day — you have to also deliver with the product.” Beauty brands need to find a way to genuinely speak to their consumer, listen to their needs, and deliver a product that makes them feel represented. When people feel heard and acknowledged, they succeed. Companies must stop treating women of color like a category. When a woman is walking down the beauty aisle, observing lipstick, foundation, or moisturizer, she is looking for a product that meets her personal needs as a woman — not a black woman, not a woman of color, but simply as a female. By separating the beauty needs of white women and black women so greatly, beauty companies are creating more polarization between the two races, leaving black women to constantly feel insufficient and secondary. Challenging female publications and beauty brands to become more diverse is crucial to the future of gender equality and female autonomy. Diversity cannot be a single social media post, or the usage of one black model in an advert, but a revamp of an entire brand to make beauty non-discriminatory. Like including more female CEOs and employees, companies could financially benefit from inclusivity. There is an unexplored market of beauty for women of color. Rihanna’s “Fenty Beauty: Makeup for Dark, Medium, and Light Skin,” which launched in September of 2017, is a beauty brand that has a product for every woman regardless of age, skin tone, race, and socioeconomic status. After its launch, Fenty made roughly $100 million within the first 3 weeks. There is an untapped market for companies who weave inclusivity into every aspect of their business plan. Fenty is an outlier — it does not just offer six to seven shades for an entire demographic, but its entire line speaks to all women of every color. But Fenty is successful because it has been advertised as an all inclusive brand since its release. Brands and publications often receive backlash from minority consumers over labeling products for black women “chocolate,” “caramel,” “mocha,” or “coffee,” contrary to the lighter shades being “porcelain,” “ivory,” “milk” or “pearl. These dehumanizing labels reinforce the idea that women need to be a certain category in order to be beautiful. Am I a beautiful woman if I do not match any of these shades of makeup? What am I if none of these apply to me? The feeling of discomfort and disappointment women of color feel when a product does not apply to them, or does not ‘fit’ them contributes to how females are always looking to change. Your product must reflect your consumer authentically — a woman is not “mocha” or “chocolate,” she is a person with real necessities. Women of color cannot feel empowered if their daily product does not liberate them in every arena. 

     What’s the big deal about changing the conversation surrounding beauty? It's just beauty, right? Makeup, skincare, and beauty have become powerful tools for females globally. Whether beauty is your source of relief, or way to achieve confidence, beauty deeply matters to all women. This will never change — our entire society does not function without the aesthetics of beauty. Arts, architecture, infrastructure, fashion, engineering, science, mathematics, and fashion all rely on a sense of order and style. In an ideal world, inner beauty would triumph exterior beauty. The superficiality of our world is unchangeable, but we must challenge beauty brands to use their platform to encourage women to be their best selves. The beauty world, created for women, ironically underserves and abandons the consumers that keeps its economy thriving. It is the responsibility of the beauty and cosmetics world to fulfill the needs of women and actually support them as proficient, capable people. Women cannot, and will not, be seen as equal if one of the world’s leading economies disregards the needs of its audience. 

                                                 Works Cited

Boyd, Sarah. "The Fashion and Beauty Industries Celebrate the Beauty of Imperfection." Forbes Magazine, 31 Oct. 2016, www.forbes.com/sites/sboyd/2016/10/31/the-fashion-and-beauty-industries-celebrate-the-beauty-of-imperfection/#3b0fcda33a4b.

Britton, Ann Marie. The Beauty Industry 's Influence on Women in Society. 2012. U of New Hampshire, MS thesis. University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository, scholars.unh.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1085&context=honors.

Carreon, Maria L. By Beauty Damned: Millennial Feminism and the Exploitation of Women 's Empowerment in Pop Culture and Corporate Advertising. 2017. City U of New York, MS thesis. Cuny Academic Works, academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2950&context=gc_etds.

Chen, Joy. "Improving Gender Equality in the Beauty Industry." Entrepreneur Magazine, 25 Apr. 2017, www.entrepreneur.com/article/290938.

Cheng, Andrea. "There Aren't Enough Women CEOs in the Beauty Industry—These Colleges Are Changing That." Glamour Magazine, Condé Nast, 28 Jan. 2019, www.glamour.com/story/women-ceos-in-the-beauty-industry.

Danziger, Pamela N. "6 Trends Shaping the Future of the $532B Beauty Business." Forbes Magazine, 1 Sept. 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/pamdanziger/2019/09/01/6-trends-shaping-the-future-of-the-532b-beauty-business/#21203533588d.

Greenfield, Savannah. When Beauty is the Beast: The Effects of Beauty Propaganda on Female Consumers. 2018. U of Nebraska at Omaha, MS thesis. University of Nebraska at Omaha Digital Commons, digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=university_honors_program.

Hill, Morgan. "From White to Very White to Kinda Brown: Analysis of Racist Practices in the Cosmetic Industry." Colorado Honors Journal, www.colorado.edu/honorsjournal/sites/default/files/attached-files/morgan_fromwhitetoverywhite.pdf.

Rhode, Deborah L. Appearance as a Feminist Issue. 2016. SMU Dedman School of Law, MS thesis. SMU Law Review, scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4667&context=smulr.

Swiatkowski, Paulina, and Tonny Krijnen. "Magazine Influence on Body Dissatisfaction: Fashion Vs. Health?" Cogent Social Sciences, vol. 2, no. 2016, www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311886.2016.1250702?af=R.