IN OPEN SPACE

Over the years, worldwide, there has been an attempt at “homogenising” notions of beauty. A global standard of age, height, weight and colour seems to have been drawn up, not connected in any way to race or natural laws of body type differences. For a while, it was mainly those who were a part of the beauty industry who were the “victims” of the malaise to conform to these “global” standards. We’d see actors (women and men) and models who had had, say, a chin tucked in, or hair “grown back”. And we’d chuckle about their vanity and forget about it. But today is different, much more serious somehow. We don’t laugh at the breast enhancements, the liposuctions to reduce body fat, the Botox pout and the “new” aquiline noses in the market. We’d instead rather try and

trace the cosmetic surgeons who did such good jobs and find out if they’d “repair” our flaws too!

AWID or the The Association for Women’s Rights in Development has just launched Young Feminist Wire, their new portal that brings together young feminists from all over the world. From their mailer:

The Wire is a hub of information by, about, and for young feminists: tools and resources, opportunities and calls for participation, news and updates, in addition to collaborative activities. It also features blog posts, interviews, directories, and a registration form that allows you to plug in to a network of young activists and older allies.

Kalpana Sharma on Sunanda Pushkar (in India Together):

There is another dimension to this story. Sunanda Pushkar is not the first professional woman who has had to face innuendo and sexist remarks. This is something many professional women worldwide would have faced to a lesser or greater degree at some stage in their lives. Of course, there is a tendency amongst women who are successful to forget such experiences, or brush them off as occupational hazards of being a professional woman. But scratch the surface, talk to women who are still struggling to get ahead, and you will hear many similar stories. “How did she land this job?” “Who is her godfather?” “Whose favourite is she?” “Did she use her ‘womanly wiles’ to get ahead?” Etc, etc, etc.

Scavenging is deeply dehumanizing work, and an end to the profession would be truly welcome. But why modelling (not professionally, I must add, but as a novelty event)?

A particularly interesting part of the article:

The ceremony was especially poignant for Usha Chomar, because she was unofficially crowned as princess of sanitation workers.

i don’t think that modelling is necessarily un- or anti-feminist. But I also don’t think that the simple juxtapositioning of a highly enviable profession and a highly undesirable one makes any real statement. I also do not believe that beauty pageants actually empower anyone at all, except perhaps the winners themselves, but in ways that are carefully orchestrated by the real power-holders. If half the promises made during pageants were actually kept, the world would be a much, much different place.

Maybe my feminism is a bit old-school, but attending a UN conference and then “doing some modelling” sort of sounds like a big drop to me. Coming out of one of the most degrading professions in the world… and then hitting the catwalk, en masse? Is that really activism or achievement? Or just another spin on that old oppression-chic cliche? I have no doubt that some of the participants must have really enjoyed the experience. But it’s the motives of the organisers that I question. When will we stop treating underprivileged people — of any background — as pawns that add a touch of controlled reality and an ambience of altruism to otherwise extremely unrelated situations?

What do you think?

Beauty has moved out of the realm of mere aesthetic and now defines how ‘important’ a woman is — or isn’t. Until recently, there was a program called Indian Idol, a musical reality show that ostensibly graded participants only on the basis of singing and stage performance. In one of the episodes, a female participant was practically forced to to go through a makeover because the judges felt she had no “appeal”. An entire episode was dedicated to this makeover (which she hadn’t wanted in the first place) with eager cameras following every step of hair styling, facial and wardrobe change! Towards the end, the judges were allowed to comment on how she was “now” a fitting candidate for the show.

This is well in line with what the Fair & Lovely advertisements try to tell us — that a woman can be important or successful only if she subscribes to public standards of beauty, of which fairness is one of the primary conditions. Naturally, we have a soaring market for fairness and slimming products. Personally, I don’t think there is anything wrong with somebody wanting to be fair or thin, but it is hugely problematic when these become the only yardsticks for beauty. Fairness cream advertisements repeatedly drum in the message that only someone who is fair can find a boyfriend, get married or be successful at work and woe betide the parents of a girl who is dark skinned. It is surprising that this socio-cultural obsession with an ancient stereotype continues to prevail in forms both extreme and subtle.

Most mainstream cinema lays greater stress on how women look than on what they say. Successful or smart women are tagged aggressive or shown as women who have used their sexuality to climb the ladder. The message is clear. It is not enough to be smart or successful; you must also be good-looking. There is such pressure on successful women to also look young and beautiful that face lifts and surgical alterations are becoming increasingly common.

When women’s looks are not the focus, it’s our personal habits and ‘moral’ attitudes. Canadian journalist Jenn Goddu conducted a study of newspaper and magazine coverage of three women’s lobby groups over a 15-year period. From the report on Media Awareness Network:

She discovered that journalists tend to focus on the domestic aspects of the politically active woman’s life (such as “details about the high heels stashed in her bag, her habit of napping in the early evening, and her lack of concern about whether or not she is considered ladylike”) rather than her position on the issues.

I would like to believe that there is some change happening. In recent times, Chak De India actually had women actors who were different from the quintessential ‘heroines’. ‘Citizen journalism‘, which has been introduced by some TV channels, actually allows homemakers and ordinary-looking women without make-up to get on television, give their story and be heard.

Media can be both limiting and empowering for women but it still remains a powerful way of asserting stereotypes. Unless we examine our understanding of ‘beauty’, we will continue to consume these images of objectified and stereotypical women for the vested economic interests of some. After all, what still sells is Fair & Lovely!

Digg This • Add to Del.icio.us • Technorati This • Stumble It!