make up and 6yo DD - what to do?

[resisterpersister]

Please help me deal with this situation!

DD's cousins came to visit yesterday, and gave 6yo DD a make up set. The cousins rarely visit and I didn't feel up to souring the visit by rejecting the gift in front of them. So she spent yesterday with her cousins, covering themselves with make up. She bloody loves it. First thing she did this morning? Put more make up on.

Lots of DD's classmates are allowed to play with make up, but she knows I won't buy it for her. I don't wear it myself. I talk to her in an age appropriate way about why I don't like make up and don't wear it.

If it was up to me, this would never have come in the house! But it's here now. I could just take it away, but I'm worried that'll make it into a huge thing, I'm not sure if that'll achieve anything other than make her want it more and feel she's been treated unjustly (and, oh, do I remember the times I felt my parents were being unjust to me!)

I suppose I could let her play with it for a few days till she forgets about it and then quietly "lose" it. (Is that cowardly?)

I could impose boundaries around it (what?). She's already said she wants to wear it to school every day and I've said errr... no!

We've been talking a bit about why adults wear make up, and I've told her about how if you wear make up every day, it's a bit like it casts a spell on you and you feel you can't go outside without wearing it, and we talked about how much of a pain that would be if her friend came round to ask her to play, but she missed out because she couldn't just leave the house.

What do I do, oh wise FWR women? I want to just throw the bloody thing away, but I'm worried about creating a bigger deal out of it and making it an even greater object of desire!

The age on the box say 5+ . Who makes this stuff FFS?

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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!".

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.

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

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).

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.