Can any clever mumsnetters educate me on beauty privilege?

[ovlovo]

Hi all. Is this even a thing? The background to this is that I have noticed lately that many of the most high profile young-ish female writers and cultural commentators of the sort of millennial generation (a bit above and a bit below) are also often unusually attractive. I don't want to mention names as I don't want it to be that kind of thread but it does seem to me that there is some sort of beauty privilege going on here. But having said that it feels as though it is probably deeply anti-feminist and a bit woman-hatey to say so. Maybe I am noticing something that isn't there, or basing this on a small sample of people, and/or I have some weird latent idea that clever woman shouldn't also be very attractive or ... I don't know. Or maybe I'm jealous! Can anybody put me right? Is beauty privilege a thing? Thanks in advance!

@Pluckedpencil

This is a thing. We already know that large company CEOs are an average of 6 feet, while the average male is 5ft10.5. This is an extension of that in women.

Interesting. But I wonder if other factors were controlled - nutrition, (better due to wealth) would make a difference to both height and say, education and social connections.

OP this is quite a noticeable thing. Marketing depts like a pretty face as it's more sellable, to put it in crude terms. I do agree that it often hinders women, not least because sometimes young and beautiful artists/writers get too much exposure and success too young due to them being pushed as an appealing product, as much as on the quality of their work.

This has undoubtedly increased in the past 10-20 years as authors/artists/writers are encouraged to become a brand as much as produce work. We didn't used to know much about the authors behind works - now creative industries expect social media presence and self marketing, in various senses.

Privilege in this context is not the same as privileged overall in life.

A beautiful woman is not privileged. She still suffers the same patriarchal oppression as all women.
So do white women (but they have white privilege that WOC don’t), able-bodied women (but they have able privilege that disabled women don’t), straight women (but they have straight privilege that lesbians don’t) etc etc etc. White working-class boys fare worse educationally in the U.K. than any other race/sex group, many would not be considered privileged, they still benefit from white and male privileges in their lives though.

Just because she doesn’t have male privilege, doesn’t mean a beautiful woman doesn’t have beauty privilege. That’s a logic fail.

I can see the points being made about there being some sexism at play due to a gendered interpretation of the term beauty, which didn’t initially occur to me. Perhaps attractiveness privilege is a less gendered term, clearly the phenomenon affects males as well. But I don’t think that not having male privilege negates the existence of beauty privilege any more than it negates race, class, sexuality etc or any other privilege bias(?) that can intersect with sex. This what the term intersectional was originally coined to describe.

I think it's quite dangerous to dilute the meaning of privilege to mean just any advantage. Privilege is a term about society, the groups people belong to and the way that group uses the privilege in a way that is detrimental to those is a less privileged group.

People do have advantages over others by belonging to these groups, but to try and tackle this at an individual level, or to dismiss people based on their belonging to these groups is counter productive - it needs to be tackled at a population/society level.

Being attractive/beautiful does confer some advantages, but people considered attractive are presenting themselves to fit the social standards, they are not altering social norms to fit themselves. That, imo, is why it is different to privilege (in social science terms).

Also, a lot of what is considered attractive is under our control - in that way it is different to skin colour, sex etc. We can all change our hair, clothing, weight, etc.

It's one of those supposed privileges that's entirely dependent on where you're standing.

For me, with one foot firmly in 'hideous troll' territory, it sometimes looks like conventionally beautiful women sail through life. This is because I am watching from the outside, and these beautiful women are mostly not detailing the trials and tribulations their faces have brought down upon them - and when they do, it's always couched as first world problems, not to be taken seriously, they should be counting their blessings etc etc.

Is having to preface every complaint with "People think I'm pretty so my problems aren't really very important" really a privilege? Or is it a means of ensuring those women whose faces fit well enough for them to achieve success are divided from their plainer sisters and encouraged to shut up and not rock the boat?

It's perhaps more useful to compare the experiences of women at both ends of the conventional beauty spectrum. Both are liable to be treated badly - the one as subhuman and the other as a decorative object. If anyone's privileged on this scale, it's the women in the middle, who are willing and able to play the game well enough to blend in.

But of course, those women in the middle still get fucked over too.

I'm reminded of what people say about playground bullies. Bullies gonna bully, and they'll always find something to latch onto. Is it a privilege to have fewer obvious points of attack than the poor sod standing next to you? Or are we all disadvantaged and oppressed by the presence of bullies who call the shots and get to make arbitrary and whimsical decisions about who's getting a kicking today?

Hi all. Thanks so much for this interesting discussion, I've really enjoyed the responses. I think in a sense my question was a bit more narrow than the fascinating answers on here. So I think that being considered attractive generally has both advantages and disadvantages, and I agree that the advantages are perhaps greatest towards the middle of the spectrum. I definitely don't think that beautiful or attractive women don't have problems or are not in some other ways oppressed.

I am struggling to articulate this but I think what I'm getting at is that there's a bunch of younger women (for me, that's 30s/early 40s) who are writing books and doing podcasts and using social media profiles especially on Insta to build a following and help to sell that content and I guess build a brand. They seem on average to be very attractive and I can only assume that this is helpful as they seek to build that following. (Often, actually, they are privileged in class background terms too).

I think what I am wondering though is whether this very visual turn generated by social media, especially Instagram, in that generation offers some women special advantages - ie there may be many other equally talented writers who don't get to build the same profile, in the same way, and are relatively overlooked.

There's another aspect of it for me too because as they promote their books/outputs, they do so in a particular way where their looks are foregrounded. One author for example just released a book to lots of publicity accompanied by some very gorgeous pictures of herself.

I have a reaction to that, which I don't like in myself and I am trying to work out where it comes from. On the one hand .. of course, why not. Their looks should not detract from what they do and certainly no women should feel they need to hide or cover up their looks. It's obviously outrageous to police women's behaviour and appearance in that way.

But on the other, that seems to be completely at odds with the message many of them are selling, which is also based on non-comparison, self-acceptance, the idea that women SHOULD NOT be judged on their looks. It feels as though their looks become part of the product while they are also claiming that a woman's looks should be irrelevant.

Maybe this is part of the trap that patriarchy sets for women? Damned if they do, damned if they don't?

I ask this because it seems that this also relates to a wider trend in social media which baffles me slightly, where some people (I am sure men as well as women, I just happen to follow more of the latter) preach messages of self-acceptance etc, regularly interspersed with again, very lovely pictures, which seemingly have no purpose other then to showcase them looking really gorgeous.

The truth is, I don't really understand it all!

Gosh that was SO long - sorry!

Interesting @LetsSplashMummy, I have always understood privilege to be pretty much a synonym for ‘societally advantaged’. I’m not sure I immediately understand the concept of ‘using privilege’ that you’re describing seeing as I understood that one of the main qualities of privilege is that the holder is likely to be unaware of it unless it is pointed out to them and they take the time to observe & listen to others (and to use something surely one must be conscious of it?)

Am absolutely prepared to learn more about these theories though, sociology is not my own field.

And, there's a difference between beautiful and attractive. I am not beautiful but I am attractive to men because I am kind, funny and listen to people whoever they are. I also don't go for the archetypal handsome man. I choose kindness and honesty first

I definitely see where you’re coming from OP. I think I might know who you’re talking about. It is a weird feeling of hearing these women talk thoughtfully and intelligently and then you see the promotion or social media and it feels a bit like they’re saying “oh and don’t forget we’re beautiful too”. (I think that says a lot about me too btw, which probably needs examining.) Like you say it’s a bit damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

It has been scientifically prooven that we tend to look for certain ratios and those most perfect ratio as it wore is seen as most attractive and gets more attention. However looks aren,t everything.

@IDanielRadcliffe - Yes, it's probably fairly obvious who at least one of them is! I don't want to mention the name because I don't want to make it about one person especially because I think it's a wider trend too and there are others who appear regularly on what I call the podcast circuit and who appear to use a similar strategy, overall, I think. But maybe I am placing too much emphasis on this because a few women are especially visible at the moment. I don't know what the answer is and there is a real danger that this becomes divide and rule between women, as an earlier commentator said I think. It's not at all though that I don't think that you can be beautiful AND intelligent. Maybe there's something about our culture where women who are though are (still) treated as sort of special anomalies/curiosities? Anyway, I KNOW that my response to this is not right and am still working on what my problem is!

I don’t understand the issue to be honest, you can be fantastic at what you do, and also beautiful. So?

It does start to read op, and you’re not alone judging on a few of the responses, you feel they shouldn’t also be beautiful. It gives them an unfair advantage, or they should in some way hide it, to make it an even playing field.

This is no different to saying they should hide another element of who they are, because it’s advantageous, be it they are funny, philanthropic, successful other career, whatever.

Quite frankly if their books were shit, it doesn’t matter how good they are. In fact if their books were shit, their beauty would be something to beat them with. If you’re shit at what you do, looks will only carry you so far, with some rare exceptions,

I agree @bluntness100, that's why I am questioning myself. I guess what I am asking though is whether in our social media dominated world, beauty is becoming a commodity for female writers, perhaps in the way it has always been for actors, say. There's a difference maybe between saying somebody is talented AND excellent at what they do, compared to saying somebody's excellence is more likely to be recognised BECAUSE they are beautiful. Does that make sense?

There is that second issue of how it works on insta for people to preach self-acceptance, everybody is beautiful, etc etc, while posting pictures of themselves looking conventionally very beautiful in the very same breath. But that is a different issue.

Here’s an interesting take on it from JKR www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booknews/10790320/JK-Rowling-Why-I-had-to-tidy-myself-up-when-I-made-it-big.html

Let's face it, magazines, newspapers and tv companies (tv companies especially) deliberately hire attractive young women. Of course it's sexist but it's also true.

Yes, and the thing is I am almost certainly sexist too. The bottom-line though is that when I see young, beautiful authors selling her work using very glamorous and quite sexualised images it provokes a reaction in me. It would be quite unlikely that we would see a male writer doing the same, I think? I am not saying it makes their work less good but something about it worries me - maybe it disappoints me, if I'm honest. I think because it underlines that women are still seen as more valuable, whatever their achievements, when they are also in some sense decorative. I don't blame the individual for that of course, it's the system!

There's a difference maybe between saying somebody is talented AND excellent at what they do, compared to saying somebody's excellence is more likely to be recognised BECAUSE they are beautiful

they are just using every tool in their arsenal to get recognised. Good for them. Everyone does it, we all have something going for us. Doesn’t matter if it’s beauty or a previous successful career, or a famous family member, if you’ve something to help promote your work it’s best to use it, you’d be stupid not to.

I think because it underlines that women are still seen as more valuable, whatever their achievements, when they are also in some sense decorative

I don’t agree with this, it Simply means like men, in many areas of life they get more attention if attractive.

Are you a writer? Is there an element of envy here? That you feel they are getting ahead if you because of their looks, snd that that’s unfair? There is clearly something behind your feelings and why you’re focusing so heavily or writers.

I do write for (part of) my living but in a very different context where it would be seen as largely inappropriate to attach what I do to my appearance in any explicit way. And even if I could, it would probably undermine what I had to say. But I really don't think I'm envious in that sense, genuinely. I don't have any answers here, I am just curious. I am very much probing my own reaction and completely understand that it's problematic.

I object to the question which seems to be pandering to intelligence privilege.

In a sexist society, that primarily values women and girls for their looks, being naturally physically attractive is very much a double edged sword. In my opinion.

I think its old fashioned sexism too. Society still places a lot of a females value on what they are worth to men so something nice to look at, probably fertile. It doesnt mean you cant make progress if you arent attractive in that way or that they are only succesful brcause they are attractive, but they will have more 'value'and get pushed forward more.
There is also just general human attractiveness which confers benefits. We are supposed to be evenly featured and healthy looking.

whether in our social media dominated world, beauty is becoming a commodity for female writers

Yes, it is. The game is set up this way. The whole of society is set up to generally reward women for beauty, and sometimes punish women for not conforming to certain visual standards.

It's subtle, too, because everyone (well, okay, most of us) want to look nice and take a good photograph for our author shot - we don't necessarily consider the wider implications of a hierarchy of attractiveness and how the picture might colour our publicist's approach and the marketing of our work and which publications might feature an interview if it includes a sultry head shot, etc.

And to be honest, I don't think we should play into this game by worrying too much about it. Be beautiful, be unexceptional, be ugly. Just get on with writing your best work and submitting it and improving. Others will have many advantages at different times - wealth, connections, education, trends & whims of the market - it's a marathon, not a sprint, in general. Pointless to watch league tables, just observe, consider, and pour it into the work.

I know an ex-model with plenty of insight into how women's beauty is used both for and against them - she is also an amazingly brave and intelligent writer. Her stories often explore lots of these issues, they are unnerving, perceptive, difficult and - well, beautiful.

So to answer your question - yes, there is beauty privilege, but I wouldn't let it bother you. Enjoy other people, celebrate other people's successes, focus on the work - eh, maybe write an essay/story/poem on the subject.

Meh, I kinda get what you mean.
I don’t really agree that there’s any power or privilege, and if there is it’s very fleeting.

It’s not real power is it, let face it.
It’s what men allow them to have.

When young attractive women are taking the top spots from men, then I’ll believe it.

It’s also interesting reading that while young poor white bits are the least successful academically,, they still have white privilege.

Now I always understood white privilege (well any privilege actually) as, if all other things are equal, it’s something that you are not being held back by, while others are.

In this case, I really can’t see how these boys have privilege by being white.
When compared by others of their ilk (young, male, poor) they are the ones who do the worst, so where is the privilege they are receiving, or what is it holding the others back, that is not holding them back?

I remember when I was at school, the lowest achievers were poor Afro-carribean boys.
There were educational initiatives put into place to counter this which clearly worked.

I can’t see how these poor white boys are privileged compared to the poor Afro Caribbean boys. Does their white privilege counteract or overcome the classism they’ll face? I’m not talking about the odd working class boy come good. This is where the intersectionality comes into play.
I think there are certain types of privilege that are seen to be as ‘higher value’ than others, which I think being white is probably up there at the top in certain eyes.

But if we look at cases like the girls in Rotherham, it can clearly be seen that white privilege means absolute nothing in the face of sexism and classism that the girls were a victim of.

I think privilege concepts should only be used in a societal level, I don’t think the concept of privilege should ever really be applied to individuals, as there’s so many conflicts.
I’m trying to organise my thoughts, so this might be a bit muddled, so I hope I’m making sense.

I feel the same about this scenario. Any beauty privilege doesn’t overcome or counteract the other disadvantages.

I used to be considered attractive. I feel like it only brought negatives to my life. Some affected me very badly. I feel like a lot of this privilege stuff just gets used to pit people against each other anyway. We all have our problems and our advantages.

When my daughter was born because of my experiences, one thing I wished for her is that she would be average looking. Now I'm older and after a long battle with anorexia that has taken a toll on my appearance, I barely get looked at. I much prefer it that way and wish it had always been like that.