Beauty and Misogyny: Harmful cultural practices in the West

Women and Psychology

by Sheila Jeffreys

The new edition of Beauty and Misogyny revisits and updates Sheila Jeffreys' uncompromising critique of Western beauty practice and the industries and ideologies behind it. Jeffreys argues that beauty practices are not related to individual female choice or creative expression, but represent instead an important aspect of women's oppression. As these practices have become increasingly brutal and pervasive, the need to scrutinize and dismantle them is if anything more urgent now as it was in 2005 when the first edition of the book was published.

　

The United Nations concept of "harmful traditional/cultural practices" provides a useful lens for the author to advance her critique. She makes the case for including Western beauty practices within this definition, examining their role in damaging women's health, creating sexual difference and enforcing female deference.

　

First-wave feminists of the 1970s criticized pervasive beauty regimes such as dieting and depilation, but a later argument took hold that beauty practices were no longer oppressive now that women could "choose" them. In recent years the reality of Western beauty practices has become much more bloody and severe, requiring the breaking of skin and the rearrangement or amputation of body parts. Beauty and Misogyny seeks to make sense of why beauty practices have not only persisted but become more extreme. It examines the pervasive use of makeup, the misogyny of fashion and high-heeled shoes, and looks at the role of pornography in the creation of increasingly popular beauty practices such as breast implants, genital waxing, surgical alteration of the labia and other forms of self-mutilation. The book concludes by considering how a culture of resistance to these practices can be created.

　

A new and thoroughly updated edition of this essential work will appeal to all levels of students and teachers of gender studies, cultural studies and feminist psychology, and to anyone with an interest in feminism, women and beauty, and women's health.

Genres: Feminism, Nonfiction, Womens, Sociology, Gender, Feminist Theory, Psychology

216 pages, Kindle Edition

First published May 1, 2005

About the author

Sheila Jeffreys writes and teaches in the areas of sexual politics, international gender politics, and lesbian and gay politics. She has written six books on the history and politics of sexuality. Originally from the UK, Sheila moved to Melbourne in 1991 to take up a position at the University of Melbourne. She has been actively involved in feminist and lesbian feminist politics, particularly around the issue of sexual violence, since 1973. She is involved with the international non-government organization, Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, in international organising.

She is the author of The Spinster and Her Enemies: Feminism and Sexuality, 1880-1930 (1985/1997) Anticlimax: A Feminist Perspective on the Sexual Revolution (1990), The Lesbian Heresy: A Feminist Perspective on the Lesbian Sexual Revolution (1993), The Idea of Prostitution (1997), Unpacking Queer Politics: a lesbian feminist perspective (2003) and Beauty and Misogyny: Harmful Cultural Practices in the West (2005).

Reviews

[Yve · Rating 5 out of 5]

“In the west women are supposed to be empowered, possessed of opportunities and choices unimaginable only a generation ago, yet these same women are hobbled by clothing and shoes, maimed by surgery in way that the feminist generation of the 1970s could not have imagined.”

If you care about women, this book will make you angry. Jeffreys makes lucid and incisive analysis of the harmful standards of beauty and the choices women have under them, which are no choices at all. A true antidote to the poisonous philosophies of the sex-pozzies: it is so refreshing to read feminist thought that isn’t pervaded with the circular and unclear language of “empowerment” and “choice.” She doesn’t shy away from things she’s probably gotten a lot of hate for, like arguing that make-up cannot be empowering and condemning Madonna’s normalization of pornographic sexuality, as well as prominent names in the fashion industry. She also brings up important cultural points, like the othering of non-Western cultures that makes it easy for people to recognize practices like female genital mutilation as definitely wrong, but not Western practices like labiaplasty that women supposedly choose freely. Her argument that the beauty routines women are expected to go through should constitute human rights violations is well thought out, easy to follow, and one I agree with. I love this book and I think it’s important for women to read as an eye-opener outside of mainstream third-wave feminism.

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although there is a certain amount to recommend in this thorough critique of beauty practises, it also contains some significantly problematic elements. I found it deeply thought-provoking, though, so much so that I started writing my review before I’d even finished reading. For that, it deserves three stars.

‘Beauty and Misogyny’ links neatly to Gail Dines’ Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality, which provides quite a bit of practise to back up Jeffreys’ theory in chapter four. It also addresses the theme of Natasha Walter’s Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism; the commoditisation of stereotypical femininity and its rebranding as empowerment. The overall framing device of the book is the UN’s concept of ‘harmful traditional/cultural practises’. This provides an interesting perspective on how the Western-dominated UN only admits the existence of cultural practises that are harmful to women in the developing world. Although the term is generally applied to female genital mutilation and forced marriage, it could apply to elements of Western beauty practises.

The strength of this book is its emphasis on how requirements for women’s appearance are reinforced and internalised. In particular, I would pick out the commentary on how a community of women discussing and enforcing beauty rules (be it for foot-binding or dieting) does not mean that these beauty rules are generated by women themselves. Such communities arise from the oppression that obliges women to bind their feet or diet in order to be culturally acceptable. Moreover, Jeffreys comments in chapter eight on plastic surgery discussion fora that, 'they demonstrate how forms of interaction that women have developed to deal with oppression - that is, gossip, sharing of experiences, encouragement and support - have been exploited to increase the profits of the industry'.

There are major elements of the book that trouble me, however. Chapter three is especially problematic, as it discounts any biological basis for being trans and elides trans issues with sexual fetishisation of gender roles. This seems to me (a cis person) pretty offensive to trans people and their struggles to achieve recognition of their gender. To her credit, Jeffreys identifies why this problematisation occurs; she wishes gender to be destroyed. This she contrasts with Judith Butler and postmodern/queer theorists, who (I simplify) consider the strict gender binary and gender roles to be a problem, rather than the notion of gender itself. I’m unsure of my personal opinion about whether gender should exist, but the debate seems pretty theoretical anyway. At heart I am a pragmatist and object to picking on an oppressed group for no apparent reason.

I am somewhat ambivalent about the chapter on fashion. It raises some important points that I agree with. Firstly, Jeffreys highlights the increasing use of pornographic imagery in fashion editorials and fashion advertising. Secondly, she comments on the use of nudity in fashion shows, seemingly for shock value. Thirdly, she articulates very neatly a gender divide in clothing that constantly annoys me:

’The casual observer wandering through the areas devoted to male and female fashion in a department store will notice that all fashion is overwhelmingly, and before all else, gendered… It hardly needs to be said that the men’s department generally offers clothes that are not full of holes to show the body, there are no skirts or dresses, clothes are not skintight, they tend to be functional and look as if they are well-suited to a number of activities. They are not devoted to revealing the male body as a sex object to the female viewer.’

I was reminded of this just today, when I went into a department store menswear area (which was very carefully delineated from womenswear) for Christmas shopping. I saw all these lovely tweed coats, woolly jumpers, tailored shirts, and waistcoats... I would gladly have worn them, as they looked warm, practical, and smart. But as I am short and have hips and breasts, not a one was available in my size. What rankles most to me, and Jeffreys also picks this up, is that men get the choice to wear suits. It is so difficult to find a well-fitting trouser suit in womenswear! What’s more, tailored suits used to be more readily available for women, but not in recent decades. That’s a particular bugbear of mine and I’ve never come across mention of it in a book before.

The reason why I am ambivalent about the fashion chapter, though, is Jeffreys’ critique of several fashion designers, including two of my favourites, Alexander McQueen and Thierry Mugler. I consider both of them to have created some truly beautiful pieces of clothing. However Jeffreys rightly points out that their fashion shows include a lot of misogyny (for instance, McQueen’s collection titled ‘Highland Rape’). To me this ambivalence is much as if I were looking at a beautiful painting depicting some misogynistic scene. Some part of me finds beauty in the craft on display, even if that craft is being used to purvey messages that I dislike. It is tempting to ignore the misogyny in order to appreciate the beauty. I feel similarly about high heels - they can sometimes be lovely to look at as objects, so long as I ignore how painful they are to actually wear. Of course, my cultural perceptions of what is beautiful are unavoidably shaped by the society I’ve grown up in, as everyone’s are.

In the latter chapters, I find that this book spends excessive time and places excessive importance on male sexual fetishism and sadomasochism. Again the assumption that the vast majority of fetishists are male gets an airing. This has always seemed to me like an odd quirk of sexuality research - how can you be sure that women aren’t fetishists? Maybe they have been socialised not to consider their fetishes as such. Perhaps the whole concept is deliberately defined in masculine terms. I am reminded of the section in Understanding Asexuality when female sexuality is painted as terribly mysterious and complex. If that’s the current state of sexuality research, how is it possible to make sweeping generalisations about whether women have fetishes (sexual or otherwise).

Despite Jeffreys’ disparagement of psychoanalytic theory at several points, this book cannot seem to stray far from psychological speculation. There seems to me to be a great irony in this. Jeffreys repeatedly mentions that the growth of current ‘harmful cultural practises’ coincides with the rise of neoliberal free market economic ideology, yet this ideology and its institutionalisation of sexism for the purposes of profit is not addressed. Instead, she seemingly internalises the individualism of this ideology by focussing her critique on individual male psyches. This seems to me ultimately unhelpful as it does not lend itself to useful responses or potential solutions. Jeffreys suggests giving up beauty practises and campaigning for government regulation. These proscriptions do not seem to me new, nor sufficient. Thus I am still searching hopefully for a critique of sexist capitalism - where is the feminist economic theory?

[Melanie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this book of hard-core, old-school feminism whilst browsing the half-empty shelves of my soon-to-be demolished local library.

The central tenant of this book is that western beauty practices (from lipstick wearing to high heels and breast implants) should be registered with the UN as ‘harmful cultural practices’.

Not sure that I understood all of it (I skipped some pages), nor agreed with everything, but I do agree that most of us are spending too much time waxing, plucking, dying, exfoliating, dieting and just goddamn WORRYING about how we look.

That doesn’t leave us much time and energy to plot the revolution does it?

[missy jean · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jeffreys details the physical and psychological harms caused by Western beauty practices, and argues that they should be considered as being from the same mold as harmful cultural practices from other parts of the world. I completely agree with this-- FGM in Africa and labiaplasty/breast implants in the USA grow from similar male-centric ideologies, that women's sexual attractiveness to men and their ability to meet arbitrary cultural beauty standards are paramount pursuits for women, worth cutting/mutilating/altering female bodies to achieve. I think this is such an important perspective, and one that can help Western feminists avoid slipping into paternalistic language about the ways in which "other" women suffer, because it binds cultural oppressions (from foot-binding to high heels) together into whole cloth.

While I'm not sure about some of her assertions (including her take on transfemininity and social constructions of homosexuality), so much of this book really resonated with me. I've had so many conversations with women who think they look weird and bad without the accouterments of stylized femininity--women who think their faces look strange without makeup, their feet look weird without nail polish--because we are so conditioned to see decorated/depilated/altered female bodies as the norm and the ideal. I think it's so critical for women to consider where we get these ideas that the natural forms of our bodies are somehow strange--that undecorated women are somehow aberrant (and decorated men are aberrant in their own way, because the male form demands no alteration). Jeffreys argues that the main purpose of cultural practices like these is to further (visually and viscerally) encode perceived differences between the sexes as a method of perpetuating power structures in relationships and societies. Once we start thinking about where these ideas come from, it is possible to start seeing who is benefiting from them, both financially and in terms of power dynamics.

[Lestari Hairul · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book that haunted me long after I was done with it. I stopped wearing makeup and bras, f'real.

[Damaskcat · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book deserves to be more popular in my opinion. It highlights something that many people in the West take for granted. Women are expected to wear makeup, remove all body hair, diet until they are an `acceptable' weight and even contemplate drastic cosmetic surgery if their bodies do not match up in every way to modern society's ideas of beauty. Where is the difference between some cosmetic surgery practices and cultural practices in other countries which mutilate women as a matter of routine?

As someone who does not wear makeup and refuses to remove body hair I found this book echoing many of my own half formed thoughts on the subject. The book examines some of the influences which ensure the majority of women spend a great deal of time conforming to beauty stereotypes regardless of their own preferences. The author shows how women themselves police the `system' by criticising and ostracising their friends until they conform. Online communities discussing cosmetic surgery after effects read like a network supporting the oppressed - rather than a group of empowered women making informed choices about their bodies.

The author points out with telling detail the way the media constantly reinforce what people have to do to be a woman. She also analyses the way fashion is controlled by mainly gay men who appear to project their own hatred of women onto the models they use for displaying their outlandish creations on the catwalk. She describes some of the more extreme `clothes' and uses examples of the way fashion advertisements have changed in the late 20th century and early 21st century until they are almost pornographic in content. Jeffreys shows how the fashion industry is controlled by men and how all fashion is designed to make women sexually attractive to men.

Clothes, makeup and beauty practices are all aimed at fulfilling the sexual fantasies of men. The author quotes from Internet sites showing how advice given to women querying extreme beauty practices or cosmetic surgery is that they must conform or they will never attract a man. A woman's body, by definition, is inferior - however beautiful she is naturally. The author quotes research showing how women in the workplace are pressured into wearing certain clothes if they want to be taken seriously. She compares the wearing of stiletto heeled shoes with the Chinese practice of foot binding - which was a revelation to me.

The author suggests things have got worse from the point of view of women's freedom and equality in the last twenty or thirty years and I would agree with her. Cosmetics are big business now and everything is aimed at women continuing to use them on a large scale. Makeup is marketed at small children to get them used to it at an early age in order to recruit future consumers. She questions why women need to follow beauty routines or alter their bodies to conform to stereotypes and suggests that if they didn't do so, they would have far more time and energy available to do the things they really want to do. She advocates women wearing clothes they can move in and which are suitable for a variety of tasks and occasions and shoes they can run in and which don't seriously damage the feet in normal wear.

I found this book an eye opener especially as regards some of the more extreme beauty practices and the way fashion is influenced by men. It covers some of the same ground as Natasha Walter's `Living Dolls', Naomi Wolf's `The Beauty Myth' and Nina Power's `One Dimensional Woman' and will appeal to anyone who is interested in gender from an academic or lay perspective. It provides a comprehensive bibliography and index and quotes a great many less well known studies, so there is plenty of material for further research. Though it is aimed at the academic market it is well written and accessible to anyone with some familiarity with the issues covered. As the previous reviewer says, I wish I had written this book.

[Oliver Björnsson · Rating 1 out of 5]

I hasten to insert myself into feminist debates, but this book is hateful.

I'll let Judith Butler take over:
" I have never agreed with Sheila Jeffreys or Janice Raymond, and for many years have been on quite the contrasting side of feminist debates. She appoints herself to the position of judge, and she offers a kind of feminist policing of trans lives and trans choices. I oppose this kind of prescriptivism, which seems me to aspire to a kind of feminist tyranny.

If she makes use of social construction as a theory to support her view, she very badly misunderstands its terms. In her view, a trans person is “constructed” by a medical discourse and therefore is the victim of a social construct. But this idea of social constructs does not acknowledge that all of us, as bodies, are in the active position of figuring out how to live with and against the constructions – or norms – that help to form us. We form ourselves within the vocabularies that we did not choose, and sometimes we have to reject those vocabularies, or actively develop new ones. For instance, gender assignment is a “construction” and yet many genderqueer and trans people refuse those assignments in part or in full. That refusal opens the way for a more radical form of self-determination, one that happens in solidarity with others who are undergoing a similar struggle.

One problem with that view of social construction is that it suggests that what trans people feel about what their gender is, and should be, is itself “constructed” and, therefore, not real. And then the feminist police comes along to expose the construction and dispute a trans person’s sense of their lived reality. I oppose this use of social construction absolutely, and consider it to be a false, misleading, and oppressive use of the theory."

source: http://theterfs.com/2014/05/01/judith...

[Derneeks · Rating 4 out of 5]

An eye opening read for sure, especially as Sheila Jeffreys is my lecturer at the moment. Her commentary though radical is thought provoking and that I can appreciate. Though I didn't agree with it all, I was able to indulge in new viewpoints that I've ner considered before.

[Gayle (OutsmartYourShelf) · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not sure that 'enjoyed' is the right way to describe my experience in reading this book as parts of it made me absolutely furious. It was certainly very informative though.

Being naturally tall, I've never felt the need to wear heels so have been spared the pain and I rarely wear make-up but even I have not been immune to some of the demands talked about in this book. I find it depressing that women, from being young girls, are made to feel that every bit of their bodies are not good enough and need reducing, reshaping, or even removing altogether. I fear that in the 10 years since the book was published, things have only gotten worse for the next generation of women.

I don't agree with everything the author argues but the chapters on plastic surgery, make-up, fetishism, and the mainstreaming of pornography in today's culture, ring all too true. I also agree that feminism has been too quiet and become too accepting of practices that cause women pain and, in some cases, disfigurement.

[M. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was more than I was expecting in many senses. I do not agree with her interpretations of Christianity, but I do sure agree that many beauty practices directed towards women are influenced by prostitution and pornography, and she's quick to criticize the liberal movement for it. This is sure some level of awareness worth mentioning in the Left. Especially relevant for its callout of Bill Clinton's positive attitude towards the sex industry (and women in the US were supposed to vote for his wife, in order to advance the cause of women's rights).

A lot of information here is very shocking in terms of what women have to go through as a result of labiaplasty, feet surgery, feet binding, breast implants, prostitution and pornography industries, and the rise of the transvestite / transsexual fetish championed as a human right.

Do not expect a simply "quit wearing makeup because the patriarchy", but also a good study of how the modeling and the makeup industry have close ties to pedophiles. Maybe, many of you will think that we didn't need a radical feminist to tell us this, and maybe you're right, but for some reason she's only one of the few who's speaking against this instead of calling it "warpaint" and "empowerment" if it's "chosen".

As any radical feminist, she's pro-abortion, but her dismantling of the choice discourse could prove useful to dismantle the abortion myths mantained by the contradictions of her position. Studying radical feminst thought remains an interesting pursuit, partly because of honest books like this.

[Caro Vega Salmerón · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even though this book is refering to the 00's beauty practices, it's applicable to today's (in my opinion, it's much worst nowadays).
A very interesting read, sometimes it sticks with so many references, but i understand Sheila was trying to demonstrate with facts how harmful these practices are. Some chapters were very sickening and sad, but that's how reality is.
i would recomend to every women. I'm glad to see women writing about this topic and not being blinded by the 'personal choice' mantra.

[Kimberly · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just amazing. Sheila Jeffreys is never afraid to name the truth. Clear and concise

[Keiko SHIKITA Yasushima · Rating 1 out of 5]

なんとなく違和感を持ちつつも読み進めていたら、トランス差別を煽るような論調になってきて、読むのを途中でやめた。

[Wenjing Fan · Rating 5 out of 5]

在看The lesbian revolution的间隙随意翻完了，每个部分都讲挺好的，应该很难有西方的作品讲服美役讲得比这本更深刻完整了吧。无论是戴头巾还是化妆，都是指向男性的性欲或需求，这不是女性的自由，而是对女性的贬低。有些地方觉得自己也被骂到了。另外听闻The Beauty Myth在中国再版了，本书许多地方都是对应这本进行批判和深入的（包括对Naomi），希望读完那本的朋友也可以来试试这本。

[Kirstie Tilbury · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great but not great for women. Great as in great for my essays. Greatly sorry for womankind.

[Ila · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars

[Ellie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sheila Jeffries is a very extreme militant kind of feminist, and so she gets alot of bad press. HOWEVER....IF you put that aside, and read this book, some of the points about plastic surgery, make up, sex industries, and fashion, are extremely thought provoking and interesting.

While I do not buy Jeffreys' idea that as a women, you cannot be a feminist if you sleep with men, I do think she makes some excellent observations about society, and the roles and perceptions of women within the west especially.

I definately think this is worth reading, you just have to take some of it with a pinch of salt...Its rather like being at a fervent sermon or being shouted at at times, but there are important and interesteing messages within, that I think should be heard by all!

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm just not able to finish this. There are some interesting ideas in this book, although I think the whole take on homosexuality and transgender is a bit simplified and, to be honest, strange. For the subject matter I'd love to finish it, but this would need some editing... On the other hand this doesn't really give me a lot of new ideas, so decided to lem it. If you want to feel sick all over, read the chapter about labiaplasty...

[Alisha · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really appreciated a lot of what this book had to say and calling out the harmful industries targeting women. It's hard to rate this as I agreed with half of it and completely disagreed with the other half (I skipped the terf chapter, I do not support that crap).

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

scary , insightful, clever, "ballsy" ;) feminism with hammers.

[Sarah Hamilton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent critique of normalised beauty practices.

[Tegan · Rating 1 out of 5]

poor example of feminist philosophy - very hateful and uninspired

[Tash · Rating 3 out of 5]

Honestly regardless of the ideology this was such an amazing reading experience. I was googling things (if anyone is tracing my internet usage and history I'm sorry for the ... alarming searches), having a perpetual internal debate and pacing around my room thinking about this book and my own opinions

I really adored that the writing style for this book was so simple and straightforward which allows your time and focus to be devoted to the actual content, rather than having to google obscure jargon- yet as an academic work it still cited sources frequently and correctly

Soo, this is a work of radical feminism so naturally there were tonnes of things I agreed with... and tonnes that I.. did not agree with

The book focuses around beauty practices in the West (obviously). Jeffreys asserts that beauty practices in the West (and more or less everywhere else) all stem from male oppression. Beauty practices are used to create and assert sexual differences between men and women (also look I feel like Jeffreys was perpetually conflating sex and gender but whatever). This is done to 'other' women, to identify them and mould them into a submissive sex (gender). Beauty practices are not only used to subdue women but also to reduce them to sexual objects. So beauty practices are driven by male sexuality and male fetishes. This is seen through the impact that prostitution has upon beauty standards and practices. Beauty practices have become evermore extreme and constraining as women continue to obtain 'more' rights. The beauty practices are used to reassure men of their ever dominant status over women. Jeffreys equates beauty practices in the West to what the UN defines as harmful cultural practices. These harmful beauty practices in the West have been exacerbated by the free market, capitalism, postmodernism, the sexual revolution/liberation and the West's continual refusal to acknowledge its own culture, and that it in fact does possess culture. Postmodern ideologies and liberal feminists have asserted that it is a woman's right to be able to choose to engage in sexual (gendered) practices, as these practices are no longer or never were innately linked to male dominance. Jeffreys argues that the practices that these women 'choose' to engage in are innately damaging and patriarchal and in fact women do not possess the freedom to choose these practices. Western culture of male dominance compels them to perform these harmful acts of femininity. So Jeffreys calls for the UN to ban western beauty practices, for women to stop performing them and for sexual difference (gender) to be abolished.

Ok so this is the watered down gist of what is a very extreme and opinionated book.. I haven't touched upon chapter three which discusses trans people and as Jeffreys wants to abolish sex (gender) .. it's not a very trans inclusive chapter. So I mean.. there are lots of #problematic aspects to this book. Although I think those aspects were part of what made it such an interesting reading experience for me, as there were things that I agreed with, and things that I did not. When the things that I disagreed with were logical extensions of what I did agree with I had to stop and seriously think if Jeffreys' logic was wrong, or if I actually did agree or disagree with her. So I think I'll be doing a lot of soul searching for a while (esp. about the concept of choice)

[Rachel Jackson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read online here: https://www.feministes-radicales.org/...

Beauty and Misogyny is an absolutely enraging book. If you haven’t already been forcibly made aware of the ways that patriarchy puts immense pressures, demands, pain and violence onto women’s bodies, you need to stop what you’re doing and read this book right now. Sheila Jeffreys, unbeknownst to me until after finishing the book, is a very outspoken radical feminist who frequently has ruffled feathers among women’s groups and feminist activists. Over the years as I’ve read more feminist theory and feminist authors, I’ve been increasing my outrage at patriarchal standards, and I already knew most of what Jeffreys discusses in this book about beauty standards, practices and customs in the “Western” cultural world. But seeing it in writing and not just having thoughts whirl around my own solitary head gives voice to a special kind of outrage on behalf of myself and women the world over.

I can’t seem to write a succinct review without getting viscerally, physically angry deep within my very core as I try to articulate how I feel about this book. There wasn’t a whole lot of new information as far as cultural practices and impossible standards for women, but every reminder that Jeffreys touches on was just more proof that women can never be good enough for men, can never suffer enough for men, can never satisfy men enough in any way. We must constantly change ourselves, capitulate to their demands, mutilate our bodies, poison our bodies, just to be seen as adequate in the eyes of men. If you see women wearing layers of makeup and inches-tall high-heel shoes and don’t question why they feel the need to do so; if you think breast implants and labiaplasties are choices that women make on their own to become more confident or look prettier; if you choose to be willfully ignorant to the struggle of girls and women around the world, and you can’t see how fucked up this whole patriarchal society is? I can’t help you.

I think the majority of this book should be required reading for men. Anything that is deemed as “women’s issues” will always be ignored unless it becomes a man’s issue too, much to my chagrin. And this book touches on all of those things that men are responsible for in the plight and struggle that modern women face in the western world. The last few pages seemed to devolve from the point a little, as Jeffreys almost exclusively talked about gay male culture and created quite an extensive list of foot fetish websites and body modification options without diving much into an analysis on how those things relate back to the oppression of women. In that sense, the ending of the book wasn’t as hard-hitting as I would have hoped to see what Jeffreys proposes to make changes or to create discussions around these issues—plus she seemed insistent on asking states and governments to pass legislation and enact policies to fix these problems of sexism and misogyny, when that’s a laughably inadequate response to how widespread in our culture these issues are.

[Eunice · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mainly reviewing the chapter on Fashion.

The same minute you begin to doubt the health of beauty practices - makeup, your mom getting subtle fillers - you are refuted by one who claims they do it because it makes them feel better about themselves. Finding it reasonable, you expel your doubt and cease to ever try doubting it again.

But this book thankfully revealed to me that rare, much much more accurate, considered response to my suspicion that there is some oppression going on whenever you feel pressure to wear a dash of lipstick for a facetime call with a boy, to constantly check that your hair is positioned well in the small screen your face appears. You feel pressured to look good - and this should be uncomfortable enough to arise suspicion.

In my life, I had initially and still continue to use my looks to gain worth. It feels like a wonderful free commodity of attention discovered following puberty. With this current standing, taking away my looks would mean I would lose worth... and hence the pressure to maintain appearance and hide my true fluctuating self. Unaware of this dynamic that was constructed over time, as a woman I've always acted unconsciously as if I've had to look good to deserve any worth as a woman.

It may be natural for humans to tend towards beautiful people, and on this natural scale it cannot be helped. But for every woman to shape themselves towards this ideal of beauty sounds like an unhealthy, extreme inflation of the evil effects of beauty. Tendency towards beauty is natural but within the genders, women are identified with beauty much more than men. The pressure on women can be deflated when society finally begins to stop portraying, reinforcing, and ultimately, viewing women in this way.

[Liz · Rating 4 out of 5]

theres a lot of controversial stuff in here regarding transgenderism but i really think this is so essential for women.
i've been having a lot of trouble recently with the idea in popular feminism right now that turns makeup, heels, and hypersexualisation into some kind of empowering tool. jeffreys critiques the ways these things restrict and harm women, maintaining inequality, and details all the toxicity and damage which products, fashion, and cosmetic surgery result in which is largely ignored in favour of male dominance and economic gain for the industries in the west and relates then to similar practices around the world which have been condemned as breaching human rights.
i had issues with some of the more extreme points made here, but it's certainly convinced me to rethink my own beauty practices.

[Juliana Santos · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quem tem medo do feminismo radical ?
Não resta pedra sobre pedra após a leitura atenta deste que é um divisor de águas para a interpretação de tradições culturais de beleza no ocidente escrito pela feminista Sheila Jeffreys. No livro, ela expõe a hipocrisia de feministas ocidentais em taxar práticas de beleza direcionadas exclusivamente a mulheres como “escolha” e “capacidade de exercer agencia” quando na cultura ocidental e taxar práticas similares das culturas orientais como “opressivas”. ( ex footbinding na China x saltos altos)
No primeiro capítulo, Jeffrey começa a questionar todo o conceito de escolha que está implicado nas análises feministas feitas sobre as práticas de beleza. A pergunta colocada por ela as feministas não estruturalistas é porque mulheres “escolhem” as práticas de beleza e homens não fazem o mesmo? Essa pergunta que mudaria toda a discussão em torno da beleza não é feita por correntes feministas que vivem em paralelo a Jeffrey. Ela então critica o livre The Beauty Myth (O mito da beleza) por não fazer essa pergunta e aponta que é esta pergunta não feita que o torna um livro de feminismo liberal. Embora eu ache que o livro em questão seja poderoso, realmente ele não questiona as estruturas patriarcais que levam mulheres a praticas de beleza (tradução livre).
No segundo capítulo, ela propõe que todas as práticas de um sexo devem ser examinadas para o propósito político de manter o sistema vigente de dominância masculina. Esta reflexão seria a que nos levaria a questionar as práticas de beleza oriundas de mulheres. As contínuas práticas de beleza são feitas por mulheres para que a diferença entre homens e mulheres seja acentuada com o propósito de apaziguar o sentimento de perda de dominação sentido por homens que convivem com mulheres no seu meio de trabalho. Por isso, mulheres dentro da forçada de trabalho são assediadas moralmente a usar sapatos de salto. Toda essa análise é feita no capítulo 7 onde ela também aborda o fetichismo ao redor dos saltos altos na imaginação masculina tanto hetero quanto homossexual.
No terceiro capítulo, Jeffrey fala a divergência entre a transfeminilidade da feminilidade impostas as mulheres, sendo a ultima parte do status inferior de cidadão de segunda classe que mulheres possuem em uma sociedade patriarcal. Jeffrey também explicita que existe uma “arrogância em homens que acham que seu interesse sexual em subordinação os faz mulheres” ( MTL). E ela conclui demonstrando que apesar da realidade nua crua da dominação masculina é claramente revelada dentro da transfeminilidade, muitos autores queer a proclamam transgressora.
Já no quarto capítulo a autora mostra como pornografia entrou dentro da cultura pop e foi normalizada através de cantoras como Madonna, e estilistas gays que projetam sua idéia de feminilidade em corpos femininos. Aqui a autora faz a pergunta que deve ser reproduzida dentro de toda a indústria da moda:
“ The question of why gay men should be so interested in creating clothes for women, who are not their sexual partners, or, probably, the focus of their erotic imaginations, is an important one.” A pergunta de porque homens gays estão tão interessados em criar roupas para aqueles que não são seus parceiros sexuais ou, provavelmente, o foco de suas imaginações eróticas, é importante. Jeffreys não pouca ninguém de sua critica, e parte daí para explicitar a misoginia dentro da cultura fashion gay.
O livro também demonstra como praticas de beleza hoje normalizadas como depilação íntima e implantes de seios tem suas raízes na normalização de imagens pornográficas no imaginário masculino, uma vez que essas práticas não são feitas para satisfazer o prazer sexual feminino.
Aqui também cai por terra a idéia falaciosa de que uma vez que essas práticas são passadas de mãe para filha elas seriam menos agressivas e se agressivas total responsabilidade de mulheres. Tirar a dominância masculina da cultura e ver o fenômeno somente como algo somente feminino é recusar a existência da sociedade patriarcal.
O livro é essencial para um primeiro entendimento de criticas de feministas radicais a praticas de beleza, mas Jeffrey não é perfeita, ela cita uma única vez a situação de mulheres negras dentro da força de trabalho e embora ela muito corretamente mostre que beleza está completamente associada a supremacia branca ela não dedica um capítulo de sua obra a essa discussão. Ela também está em ponto de vista que a permite concluir que a recusa total de usos de símbolos de feminilidade poderiam levar a criação de uma resistência maior, assim, ela ignora o assédio que muitas mulheres sofrem no dia a dia por essa recusa. Em suma, ainda que poderoso, o livro ainda é sobre feministas brancas de classe média que estão criticando uma sistema de dominância que não as coloca no mesmo patamar que seus pares do sexo oposto, mas de mesma raça. Recomendo a sua leitura atenta, porém aliado a leitura de livros de feministas negras.

[Astir · Rating 5 out of 5]

What starts off as a comparative critique of western beauty practices becomes a slow descent into hell. I hadn't prioritised this book in my feminist readings as I had assumed it to be a topic that was somewhat more self-evident and of less complexity that other areas - Jeffreys clearly and unforgettably illustrates how foundational and deeply culturally ingrained this topic is - and does so in a manner that steadily builds upon itself until the reader is forced to see the full harrowing canvas: the human cost of beauty as it exists under male supremacy being measured in women's suffereing, subordination, mutilation and lives.

[Leah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was introduced to Jeffreys in a college Women’s Studies course. It radicalized me against make up and I could count on one hand the amount of times I’ve worn makeup since reading that excerpt some handful of years ago. This year, I found out that the excerpt I read in college is from this textbook so I of course ordered it right away. Certainly there are some things I disagree with Jeffreys on (like her stance on homosexuality for example) but otherwise, this book is vital for those who want to understand the HORRIBLE ways makeup, high heeled shoes, fashion, pornography, and plastic surgery oppress women.

[Faria Basher · Rating 4 out of 5]

“What would a world without harmful beauty practices look like? In such a world the creation of sexual difference/deference through appearance would become obsolete. Women would not be required to perform their sexual corvée. The practices of physical care that they exercised on their bodies would not be directed to servicing men's sexual interests. They would not need to engage in any of the practices of femininity that cause women so much physical pain, expense and expenditure of mental and temporal energies.”