make up and 6yo DD - what to do?

Erythronium

I've already said that I think the beauty industry, like the fashion industry, is corrupt and sexualises women in a terrible way. I wouldn't, then, try and porvide evidence that it doesn't.

Dworkin however, when I read her, sees things from a very extreme point of view, where you could easily conclude that even basic attempts to look presentable that are common to both men and women are, in women, responses to patriarchal pressures.

She takes what could be very deep insights and I think made them much less plausible to people because she couldn't step back to look at it from a different perspective, and ask if her insights applied in every case in the same way.
That inability to step back is always a problem with a psychological or political writer, whatever the cause. And if you look at her writing and her life, I think the reasons was because of her life experiences, she was an a significant way terribly hurt. Sometimes people who are hurt struggle with seeing things as harmless or different in other contexts. I'm not even sure how that is debatable, or how it's then unreasonable to see that in her writing. I don't actually give a shit if no one says that about any male writers, though I don't see that as true. But even if it is I think it was true of her.

In any case, just copying a bunch of quotes by one writer doesn't really refute anything, if people disagree with her.

I wouldn't have allowed her to accept it and tell her make up is for grown ups, like lingerie and other things.. It's just sexualisation of children and making them precocious before their time.

What personal baggage of Dworkin's can you point to that contradicts the fact that women are under massive social pressure to conform to male beauty standards? Her "personal baggage" doesn't negate the existence of the beauty industry, the diet industry, the fashion industry, the cosmetic surgery industry - all overwhelmingly directed at women, marketed at us to make us feel "not good enough", so we'll hate ourselves and buy their products to change our bodies. Those industries have expanded exponentially since she wrote Woman Hating. As Mary Daly called her "the prophet Andrea Dworkin" - she saw what harmed women and recognised what was coming down the line for us. Her theory has been proved to be right.

If you don't think women are under massive social pressure to conform to male beauty standards why are even six year old girls (six year old girls!) being given make up sets so they can look in the mirror, paint their faces and try to look "pretty"? It's pretty obvious except to those who refuse to see and then analyse.

Male writers e.g. novelists might speak from their personal experience, and in discussion of their work that point might reasonably be made. However male political thinkers, like female (feminist) political thinkers, are writing about and analysing wider cultural, social and economic trends, and no, male political theory is not dismissed as "personal baggage" in the way Andrea Dworkin's has been on this thread. The phrase "personal baggage" means the opposite of the political, it's dealt with in the therapist's office not by political movements or analysis. Women's suffering, including the demand we adhere to male beauty standards, is political however. Dworkin knew this and made theory out of it. To dismiss her insight into the situation of women as something only personal to her is simply wrong and yes, sexist. Her work on male violence has created the anti-pornography movement, the anti-prostitution movement and led to a deep understanding of the way male violence especially controls and limits women.

Another male example, Martin Luther King, was directly affected by white supremacy as Dworkin was directly affected by male supremacy but again, his call for freedom for black Americans was never dismissed as "personal baggage". That's an insult that's left for women theorists in particular the radical ones. (See also "strident" and "harpy" that have appeared on this thread too).

Male political thinkers don't get accused of seeing things in a particular way because of their "personal baggage".

This isn't true, I don't know why you would even say that. Male writers, like all other writers, speak from their personal perspective. Sometimes very intimately. And sometimes they do have personal baggage that is part of that.

I'm here wondering has the kid forgotten it yet?

Which will wear off quickest?
The novelty for the child or the angst of the parent?

My mum wears make up everyday, always has.

I barely wore any as a kid - save for a bit of eyeshadow when I started going clubbing.

I wore full make up at work from 21-35 and now I've lost interest and barely wear any.

I've never been into nail polish or false eyelashes etc.

Mum always told me I was beautiful, and I believed her.

My 6 year old has play make up (bought with pocket money). She used it a bit at first but has barely touched it in months.

I treat it as face paint. She can't wear it at school but can wear a little bit to a party. Mainly she never mentions it.

She can't avoid make up. I think taking it away makes it desirable. So let her get bored, you can always then move it to a less obvious place.

I understand your concerns, but surely there is a balance

You can completely disagree with something but err on the side of caution wether banning it makes more appealing and "forbidden fruit" kinda thing. Banning something outright or give promises of "when you're x age" xan make something exciting, longed for and a rite of passage.

Way way back in the thread you totally missed my point. Which was that if you believe so strongly that make up is harmful to your child, you would have removed it immediately. Instead you chose to ask the "opinions" of strangers on mumsnet. You didn't really want advice. You wanted a debate. Which is fine. But don't be disingenuous.

Male political thinkers don't get accused of seeing things in a particular way because of their "personal baggage". Was Karl Marx accused of having "baggage"? How about Nietszche? They didn't. More sexism on the FWR board.

Every woman lives under the oppression of the patriarchy, we can't escape that. Analysing and writing about our oppression isn't "personal baggage". It's a step to freedom.

At the risk of being told I'm rude - they're nice but dim!
Sorry OP, but this comment has just made you show your true colours.
Now you're coming across as superior, you think you're better than your cousins because of what? A belief that girls playing about with make up will turn them into subservient women? Do you also subscribe to the equally ridiculous view that letting boys dress up in a princess dress will somehow make him gay?

If you get a haircut that is something meant to look attractive on you, is that too much, or should we all be having a bowl cut or an at home bob?

The logical conclusion if one thinks women are oppressed by social considerations of what is attractive is that anything chosen other than on grounds of sheer utility supports that oppression.

Personally I think that is nonsense but if one is punting the OP's radical feminist views logically line will be a line too far.

Look, every writer is speaking from their particular personal circumstances, we all are. Dworkin can be very insightful, but she also has a tendency to see things through a lens that I think relates to her personal baggage, and often from a very narrow perspective. Personal grooming is a lot like a good diet, you can't easily draw a line that clearly delineates this is too little, this is too much.

Probably everyone here agrees that hair-brushing is on the fine side and breast implants are on the other side. If you get a haircut that is something meant to look attractive on you, is that too much, or should we all be having a bowl cut or an at home bob? That would likely be considered extreme by most, but is wearing eyeliner and a tinted moisturiser really all that different than a feminine haircut? What if its an expensive haircut? What if it is an expensive but ugly haircut?

Proportionality is important.

Fwiw @stroopwaffel99 I completely agree with your comparison to men and body building to women and wearing makeup.
Albeit it hasn't got the same "historical misogyny" but it is similar in all other aspects in light of this day and age.
My DH used to work as a personal trainer and in his years working in different gyms, the amount of "juice" being taken by the younger males was on the rise, that was back in 2016 so I can imagine now it could be considerably higher.

Ok, well apologies if I've derailed the discussion. I know that this was about women not men, but I read it as implying that it was an issue faced only by women (to be fair, most people don't really consider the bodybuilding aspect as many view it as a hobby, when in reality it's often fuelled by body insecurity which is further exacerbated by male stereotypes in the media).

I'm actually more than willing to discuss it and accept the negative impact just not on this particular thread ( possibly not this board).

Yeah,except for women some of those things if not all can start as young as 20.

The majority of your post is classic whataboutery and derailing with "but..but..but...the men!".

I'm not interested in a competition over 'who has it worse', but many men start bodybuilding in their late teens, usually to address an insecurity about being 'weedy'. It's a massive industry (protein shakes, nutrition, etc) and one which bombards young men with idealistic images in much the same way as the beauty industry does to girls. Action film stars (Arnold Schwarzenegger, Vin Diesel, Tom Hardy) all reinforce this ideal and the many women who lust over Tom Hardy further strengthen these stereotypes as do the men who idolise supermodels.

I'm in agreement with the premise of this thread but just pointing out that it works both ways - people just don't really apply the logic to men (when is steroid abuse ever discussed in the mainstream discourse?).

However, it's clear you don't want a two sided discussion so I'll leave you to it.

The other common user is the middle aged man who doesn't want to accept the aging process and in many ways I believe this is comparable to women who become obsessed with fillers, botox, surgery, etc.

Yeah,except for women some of those things if not all can start as young as 20.

The majority of your post is classic whataboutery and derailing with "but..but..but...the men!".

Also, whilst I agree that women are more expected by society to wear makeup and 'put in the effort', I do think it's generally harder for men to attain the ideological 'hunk' status represented by male idols like Tom Hardy, etc.

An attractive woman can meet beauty standards simply by being slim if she has the right genetic attributes, but men are also expected to be muscular which takes a lot more work - literally years as opposed to months. As you can't generally build significant muscle whilst losing fat (one requires a calorie deficit and the other a surplus), men have to do cycles of 'cutting' and 'bulking'. The issue is that you lose muscle whilst cutting and gain a little fat whilst bulking, so numerous cycles are required.

This explains the current steroid epidemic in young men which is largely disregarded and seemingly not common knowledge. The body often doesn't fully recover from this and said men are left with low testosterone and comparatively high oestrogen which can cause significant mood disturbance, depression, and permanent erectile dysfunction without hormonal treatment (i.e. steroids, which in turn usually make the man infertile). Many celebs and actors use steroids but they can afford top notch health care and regular blood work to identify any issues early - hemocrit, oestrogen problems, etc.

I'm on TRT for a completely unrelated hormonal issue so I've frequented a lot of the forums and witnessed the damage done by recreational steroid use. It's not pretty and almost always starts out with cosmetic intentions. The other common user is the middle aged man who doesn't want to accept the aging process and in many ways I believe this is comparable to women who become obsessed with fillers, botox, surgery, etc.

The things us humans do to look attractive never ceases to amaze me!

Why does it give people pleasure? It seems a simple statement, but I am interested in what makes people like make up.

I'm a guy so don't want to speak on behalf of womenkind as a whole, but for many of my female friends it seems to be the case that they like 'looking good' because of the positive male attention it garners. It's almost like a much less extreme version of the recent phenomenon of bum implants which IMO stands apart from simply 'staying in shape' which can alternatively be done for health or sport reasons.

Sometime make-up is just make-up. It gives some people a lot of pleasure

Why does it give people pleasure? It seems a simple statement, but I am interested in what makes people like make up.

I’m no psychologist but the obvious one is pretty much all the negative reasons for make up- we look like society’s version of prettier, we conform more so we know people will respond more positively. We like the way we look- conditioned that females should have glossy full lips, smooth blemish free skin and long eyelashes.

I can see how some people may enjoy it in the same way others enjoy drawing or painting, but even then artists don’t draw the same thing every day. The people who enjoy it for the art- surely they would be more into creating different looks and effects?

I don’t enjoy make up so maybe i’m missing something.

Sticking Dworkin in the past and pretending this is just somehow personal is a way of diminishing her. Nothing she says is wrong, either then or now

Dworkin strikes me as speaking for herself and her own experiences. That particular quote , struck me as exaggerated and bearing no resemblance to my life or that of my friends or colleagues. Her tone is strident , and no that word is not off limits just because it is being applied to a woman.

Where do you draw the line merrymouse? Is L'Oreal OK? How about Laura Mercier, high heels or lycra body shaping underwear (corsets) and of course actual corsets. How about foot binding?

I don’t think the next step after wearing lipstick is footbinding. Sometime make-up is just make-up. It gives some people a lot of pleasure.

PS Stop calling women with feminist opinions you don't like "strident". It's sexist.

You called yourself a radical feminist just upthread. Now you're saying you're not a feminist. Whatever.

Tone policing happens when people don't have an argument. There has been a huge amount of tone policing of the OP on this thread.