make up and 6yo DD - what to do?

I have an interest in destroying the feminine corvee for women and ending the oppression of beauty standards. Yes. I am invested. I think those are good things.

Actually I think personalising it is boring. Everybody seems to have a story and it often misses the point of the thread, especially when personal experience is being used to attempt to counter feminist analysis. "But I like it/someone I know likes it, you're telling me I'm not a feminist" isn't actually an argument. All it is is merailing. Dworkin doesn't personalise it either

You brought up Dworkin to try to undermine the OP. Dworkin actually does the opposite, that's why I quoted her. You certainly don't seem to want to engage with her now - despite the fact that she's talking about women's freedom. It's weird to tell the OP to read (and I assume engage with) Dworkin and then refuse to do the same yourself.

"a voice of her time; of the time she was writing; and certainly of her personal circumstances."

What's changed? Women's faces are still expected to be painted, corsets are worn, eyelashes are false or curled. Nothing has changed since she wrote it. In fact it's gone back in time. The natural look (product of the feminist movement) was very popular in the seventies. 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.

Did you really use the word "strident" to describe a feminist position?

I used to be an English teacher. I know what strident means. I'd say you are being unnecessarily strident too. But it's about your personal style, rather than about feminism. As it happens I don't go around calling myself a feminist. I don't particularly identify with the label. I am just who I am, as a result of who and where I've been over the years.People have called me that, though. But i'm not bothered if they don't. My identity does not depend on it.

I've had enough of this thread now - so won't respond again. I've wasted enough time on it. I came to Mumsnet, just recently, for discussion of the Trans issue specifically. Should really never have posted on this thread. Never mind. We live and learn.

Surely feminism is about being free to be the type of girl or woman you want to be, not the type someone else thinks you should be, whatever that may be.

Yep. Absolutely this.

Personally I would just let her use it. She's 6, she'll soon bore of it. I can't see it's a huge issue.

Sorry for the cardinal sin of not reading the whole thread, but given the age of your DD I thought I'd post my and my DD's experience.

I don't wear make up, so there was never any in the house. When DD was about 5 or so she and a few of her friends got interested in make up. The friends all have mothers who wear make up and were able to give them some leftover or out of favour items to play with. I couldn't do that for DD, so for Christmas that year Santa brought her her own make up case and make up (just cheap stuff from Bodycare and the like) so she could join in. She loved it, there were a few parties during the next couple of years she did her make up for and she had a blast. Luckily the DM of one of the friends trained as a beauty therapist so taught her DD about make up and that DD taught the others. :) This lasted until she was 9 or so, and she hasn't touched it since.

Let your DD have fun. Let her experiment. Maybe she'll continue to wear make up when she's older, maybe she won't. But that's her decision to make. And the younger she makes her make up mistakes the better, surely, rather than as a self-conscious teenager. :)

Surely feminism is about being free to be the type of girl or woman you want to be, not the type someone else thinks you should be, whatever that may be.

Apparently not though. It doesn't seem to be old-hat in the slightest and some women are clearly very invested in defending make-up from any analysis. Quite why, I can't make out. I checked the thread though, to see whether the OP was rude, and she wasn't

Personally, I first responded in good faith - it was a new thread so I took a look and commented early on. First page. What I'm more invested in than make-up ( have nothing much invested in make-up at all, as it happens) is being respectful. What riles me most is unnecessary rudeness and provocation. I'd say you seem to have far more invested in attacking make-up - than I have in defending it. I'm not defending make-up. What I'm defending is people who responded in good faith, in the spirit of the question.

I Personally don't wear lots of make-up, and don't wear high heels etc. I have my own style which i'm comfortable with. Many would say it's quite 'natural'; which suits me fine. I like to be comfortable first and foremost.

While i've mentioned quite about about myself - you've mentioned nothing of your self. Do you have daughters? If so, how did you negotiate all of the 'girly' stuff? Have you ever worn make-up? If so, when did you stop? That would be more interesting & engaging to me than posting long extracts from Andrea Dworkin.

I am a big admirer of Andrea Dworkin's writings, though. However, just reading through those extracts again, does suggest to me, that she was not just a voice for all time ( she was), but also very specifically a voice of her time; of the time she was writing; and certainly of her personal circumstances.

Those are very good points Goosefoot

It's a problem when it is practices, and expectations, that are really unhealthy, or really time-consuming, or really expensive

On the other hand, if it's not dangerous, time consuming, or very expensive, it's got to be less of a problem

Humans are always going to do things that they think make them more attractive. You are never going to change that. What is the alternative? Practical boiler suits and home cut pudding bowl haircuts for everyone?

OP I agree with you completely and thank you for giving me some new thoughts on feminism too re choice.

Surprised at some of the answers you're getting, and disappointed too especially given it's the FWR board.

I'm also supportive of the general sense that women's appearance has demands upon it that men's doesn't, and this is a problem.

But I am less inclined to categorise individual elements of that as only good or bad. I don't think that a particular thing, say earrings, or the colour pink, is conventionally male or female, makes it a problem. I don't think that stuff is very important.
What is important is when something begins to present much more of a burden than it ought to. Human beings will always put a certain amount of effort into grooming, to some extent it is part of being healthy. It's also always going to have a social element, it's not going to be a wholly individual choice - people are influenced by the popular perception, even pressured.
It's a problem when it is practices, and expectations, that are really unhealthy, or really time-consuming, or really expensive. And that is true even if they are things men and women do. That applies to clothing, hair removal, make-up, body modification, whatever.
On the other hand, if it's not dangerous, time consuming, or very expensive, it's got to be less of a problem.
Make-up doesn't necessarily qualify as those things. So it becomes a matter of preference to me. And the kind of make-up that is fairly inexpensive and quick also isn't usually so far out that it significantly affects our beauty standards. People can go without if they want and not look way out of the norm.
In my experience coming down on something that is not extreme as if it is extreme tends to be counterproductive.

I find the Dworkin quote such a huge exaggeration.

the most immediate physical and psychological reality of being a woman

Really?

I appreciate your point but I think you’re overreacting. Plenty of feminists wear make up on a daily basis (their choice and what they feel comfortable with). It makes you no less a feminist to wear make up if you’re raising her in a supportive way with feminist values this will have far more impact on her views and opinions than wearing a bit of make up at home aged 6

If she'd not been so patronising and difficult , I would have agreed with a lot of what she said. But after that, I think I have a right to be put out by her!

ethronium read the full thread and you'll see my point. I was asked to pull up a chair whilst she explained feminism to me...

Telling anyone to pull up a chair and learn, when they already know what happens, is patronising.

I am 100% with you OP. I have absolutely no problem with women who choose to wear make-up (most do), and I am not suggesting it should be banned. But I view the make-up “system” as one that is profoundly damaging to women as a class. It supports and perpetuates the idea that we as women (more than men) have some sort of obligation (however mild) to make ourselves look younger/more attractive/more conventional. Sadly make-up in general is not about “playing with colour” - it is more often about removing blemishes, making our lips and eyelashes look more conventionally “beautiful” etc etc. It is indeed on a spectrum with lots of other things I am not keen on (including Brazilian waxing, hair straightening and ear-piercing). I don’t know exactly where “the line” is -and I definitely stray over it myself sometimes- but make-up for young girls is definitely the wrong side of it in my book.

So I would not allow make-up as a toy in my house. Same as I don’t allow toy guns, barbies, or, indeed, golliwogs. Not because makeup is just like golliwogs (it isn’t) but because both are toys that don’t fit into my moral system.

I would wait till it hasn’t been played with for a couple of days then lose it.

"If anyone still doesn't agree with OP, pull up a chair and she'll mansplain it to you"

Actually what she said was this:

"Do you recognise that sexism, on a macro level, kills millions of girls and women?

If not, I guess you are new to feminism. Pull up a chair, where shall we start..."

Women and girls die or are never given the chance to live because of global sexism and misogyny. It is literally life and death for all of us.

Don't her actual words and arguments get in the way of having a go at her though. Bloody disgraceful.

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? Both men and women were keen on that.

The contention for some arose in the way in which the thread was started - with openness and solicitation of views & advice on the issue - but then by the way those views were dismissed as somehow being unworthy. And in quite rude ways, too. Personally surprised to see a thread about make-up in the first place really. I'd have thought it better suited to another board - since it is all pretty old hat, standard stuff, which most of us dealt with and ruminated upon years ago.

I think the OP thought that too - that make-up and beauty standards for women are sexist and misogynistic and that most feminists are on board with that. She just needed help in how to approach the subject with her young daughter in a feminist and positive way. Apparently not though. It doesn't seem to be old-hat in the slightest and some women are clearly very invested in defending make-up from any analysis. Quite why, I can't make out. I checked the thread though, to see whether the OP was rude, and she wasn't. She disagreed with what was being said to her, the minimisation of a feminist issue. On the other hand the OP was told she was a harpy and that she wasn't a feminist. I can see where the rudeness was coming from and it wasn't the OP. There was also that crack about teddy bears picnics. As Mumsnet might say "not in the spirit".

As it happens, I think most of us who have had children, especially girls, have been through the same process. I certainly have - but like many others have come to a far less strident position and view. I'm far more relaxed now I have a granddaughter. My daughter has not turned out to be a simpering idiot - so I think I've done o.k there. Sometimes first children bear the brunt of parental anxiety and inexperience.

Did you really use the word "strident" to describe a feminist position? We've been dealing with misogynistic criticisms like that for years from people who don't like their patriarchal practices analysed. I really don't expect to see it on FWR, but there you go.

I don't think women who wear make-up are simpering idiots, the question is whether they are oppressed and whether patriarchal beauty standards serve to further that oppression.

If anyone still doesn't agree with OP, pull up a chair and she'll mansplain it to you 🙄

Where do you draw the line though?

I draw the line when women feel they don’t have a choice.

Women who don’t feel they can leave the house or open the door with no make up. Women who always say they look “better” with make up on, that they look tired or ill without it. Women who say they have to use make up so they don’t scare children/dogs/horses.

Bottom line is women look perfectly fine without make up. We are just indoctrinated into thinking glossy lips and underlined eyes is more beautiful. Hairless bodies like a barbie doll.

I also draw the line at women extending make up into artificial. Lip fillers, tattooed eyebrows, contouring, false eyelashes, beyond looking better and into cariacture. I saw one teen yesterday who looked like her fashion inspiration was robbie rotten.

Then you go so far over the line and into cosmetic surgery.

The fact that our natural selves are deemed ugly and unattractive and we have to paint masks on our faces to make them acceptable

We know all of this.....and not everyone wears a touch of make-up because they feel ugly and unworthy.

Anyhow, it seems like a good idea to quote Dworkin on this. I don't see her saying anywhere that a woman who wears makeup is a "bad feminist" or can't be a feminist. Her argument is that the beauty standards that are forced upon us mean that women aren't free:

"Standards of beauty describe in precise terms the relationship that an individual will have to her own body. They prescribe her mobility, spontaneity, posture, gait, the uses to which she can put her body. They define precisely the dimensions of her physical freedom. And, of course, the relationship between physical freedom and psychological development, intellectual possibility, and creative potential is an umbilical one.

"In our culture not one part of a woman's body is left untouched, unaltered,. No feature or extremity is spared the art, or pain of improvement. Hair is dyed, lacquered, straightened, permanented; eyebrows are plucked, penciled, dyed; eyes are lined, mascared, shadowed; lashes are curled or false - from head to toe, every feature of a woman's face, every section of her body, is subject to modification, alteration. This alteration is an ongoing repetitive process. It is vital to the economy, the major substance of male-female role differentiation, the most immediate physical and psychological reality of being a woman. From the age of 11 or 12 until she dies, a woman will spend a large part of her time and money, and energy of binding, plucking, painting and deoderizing herself.

"....Pain is an essential part of the grooming process, and that is not accidental. Plucking the eyebrows, shaving under the arms, wearing a girdle, learning to walk in high-heeled shoes, having one's nose fixed, straightening or curling one's hair - these things hurt. The pain, of course, teaches an important lesson: no price is too great, no process to repulsive no operation too painful for the woman who would be beautiful. The tolerance of pain and the romanticisation of that tolerance begins here, in preadolescence, in socialization, and serves to prepare women for lives of childbearing, self-abnegation and husband-pleasing.

"....Men of course like a woman who "takes care of herself'. The male response to the woman who is made-up and bound is a learned fetish, societal in its dimensions. One need only refer to the male idealization of the bound foot and say that the same dynamic is operating here. Romance based on role differentiation, superiority based on a culturally determined and rigidly enforced inferiority, shame and guilt and fear of women and sex itself: all necessitate the perpetuation of these oppressive grooming imperatives.

"...A first step in the process of liberation (women from their oppression, men from the unfreedom of their fetishism) is the radical redefining of the relationship between women and their bodies. The body must be freed, liberated quite literally: from paint and girdles and all varieties of crap. Women must stop mutilating their bodies and start living in them. Perhaps the notion of beauty which will then organically emerge will be truly democratic and demonstrate a respect for human life in its infinite, and most honorable, variety."

"

It's good that the OP is thinking about it and wants to help her daughter avoid the trap that so many of us fall into

Yes, it's good and necessary. Nobody has disputed that. The contention for some arose in the way in which the thread was started - with openness and solicitation of views & advice on the issue - but then by the way those views were dismissed as somehow being unworthy. And in quite rude ways, too. Personally surprised to see a thread about make-up in the first place really. I'd have thought it better suited to another board - since it is all pretty old hat, standard stuff, which most of us dealt with and ruminated upon years ago.

As it happens, I think most of us who have had children, especially girls, have been through the same process. I certainly have - but like many others have come to a far less strident position and view. I'm far more relaxed now I have a granddaughter. My daughter has not turned out to be a simpering idiot - so I think I've done o.k there. Sometimes first children bear the brunt of parental anxiety and inexperience.

I decide what my point is, and how I choose to express it. I prefer a more conversational style. I think when people share something of themselves and their life, in the spirit of openness, it is just good practice to show a little modicum of respect, and maybe even try to address directly some of the points. I'm not trying to make out I'm better than anyone in the decisions I make, or have made in my life, and i certainly don't need to be told how to do 'feminism'

The fact that our natural selves are deemed ugly and unattractive and we have to paint masks on our faces to make them acceptable is a feminist issue and one that matters.

Where do you draw the line though? Are clothes and jewellery also anti-feminist? Many men and women enjoy expressing themselves through their appearance. Is this somehow less valid because it's something that is associated with being feminine?

It's not that Andrea Dworkin's opinion is wrong - she looked at this issue from a particular perspective. It's just that other perspectives are available.

But not all of us can or want to live on that edge, in that way - or have been exposed to the extremities of things in the way she was.

Does Andrea Dworkin's experience of male violence, which many, many women and girls have experienced in various hideous forms somehow make her analysis and political understanding of the beauty standards women face any less valid? I would argue that it doesn't. In fact I think it's irrelevant and a weak attempt to dismiss what she was saying.

You're kind of wandering off the point. You tried to use Dworkin as an example of a radical feminist who apparently had more important things to think about than the harms makeup and the beauty industry do to women. Except she didn't. In her very first book on feminism she wrote about it in detail, and came to the same conclusion as the OP. Radical feminists recognise female oppression in all its forms. The fact that our natural selves are deemed ugly and unattractive and we have to paint masks on our faces to make them acceptable is a feminist issue and one that matters. It's good that the OP is thinking about it and wants to help her daughter avoid the trap that so many of us fall into.

Society treats women better when they wear make-up

Does it? I suppose you need to define “better”. I suppose women in make up may be treated better than women who don’t from a male perspective- they’re more likely to be helpful, or chivalrous perhaps.

In the science world I’d say the opposite- women in full make up at work are more likely to be thought of as “girly”- and stereotyped as interested in pink and handbags- relegated to secondary roles like admin or technician.

I don’t feel like I am treated any better wearing make up. I do feel like I am treated less equally- it seems to signal i am a “girly girl” and should be treated as such.

Exactly this. Girls are being told they are to actively avoid anything deemed feminine, why is that?

Are they? I certainly don’t. As i said up thread make up is fine, but I emphasize the feminist angle that people, imo, don't look better, their natural faces are fine.

Growing up I hated the double standard. As a 70’s child I was told I could do anything boys could, be anything I wanted. Then every social occasion I’d be pressured into a frilly dress, jewellery, sandals and bags, and as I got older high heels and make up. If i tried to leave the house without make up i’d be told to “put a bit of lipstick on, give your face some colour”. But the boys were never told that, so how could we be equal when being female was clearly about looks over everything?