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!

I do think it's a shame and sexist if female writers that are more visually appealing are the ones getting published, as writing isn't about looks

I think it is extremely unlikely that a book is being published just because the author is pretty (celeb autobiographies aside)

I think the book came first and the fact its author isn't bad looking for the purposes of promoting it is just a bonus.

And as a couple of other posters and I have said good grooming, styling etc will help enormously. Most young people "scrub up well" by virtue of being young.

I think the OP is projecting her own bias.

I think it is extremely unlikely that a book is being published just because the author is pretty (celeb autobiographies aside)

No, the content of the book comes first. But there is an avalanche of manuscripts by writers eager to be published, and I've no doubt that, given two manuscripts of equal quality, the one with the more marketable author will be picked. Publishers have a huge choice, and why not, all other things being equal. It's about brand creation, social media, visibility, marketability. The author is a part of the packet these days.
Back in the day the author was a silent invisible factor; the only way to contact him/her was by writing to the publisher, or agent if that is known. These days the author is the "face" of the book and chatting with readers as if they were pals.

It seems to me this whole set up actually benefits men the most. If I write a book it's highly unlikely I'd suffer the same requirements on my personal appearance. In fact I'd be free to dedicate more time to just improving my writing. We could take any hypothetical female writer who starts out technically better than I am, but having to commit the time, effort and resources to creating her "brand" in order to even get her foot in the door, and even have the opportunity. Meanwhile I just get to spend the time just writing and building a better profile solely on the merits of my own writing.

In fact it gets more insidious than that, the moment a woman's appearance becomes part of the conversation then it sows the seeds of doubt in people's minds in that is she there because of talent or looks? In the worst instances that very doubt might creep into her own mind.

If you are going to have this conversation I believe it less fruitful to be comparing beautiful women writer vs every other woman writer, than to compare the pressures on women writers relative to male writers.

Riot lady’s experiences mirrored my own. Yes I got advantages - got a very coveted job in my twenties the only candidates not Oxford/Cambridge/Harvard were me and one other girl we both looked similar 🙄.

But I hated the hassle the leering and the weird anger and resentment so many men display towards attractive women. Such a relief being mid 40s.

Interested to see this. I’ve recently read a few very successful & well-known books that I thought were surprisingly mediocre & disappointing. I’ve noticed their authors are very heavily promoted through the media (including social media) and that the authors are beautiful young (by my standards!) women.

We live in a commercial world obsessed with looks & promotion. Did the authors I’m thinking of owe some of their success to their looks? I think this is likely - their looks must make commercial promotion easier. So that makes them a more attractive sign up option, I assume.

I don’t think this makes them privileged - in fact it’s a very invidious position to be in, because what happens when they get older & fatter? The analogy about master’s favourite dog is a good one (though rather unpleasant).

But it is a sad reminder of the way women are judged by our looks- whether we have the right face for social media. And it depresses me that it almost certainly means that more talented women are languishing in obscurity because their looks don’t fit. Would George Eliot be a success in book promotion driven by social media? I doubt it.

I’m not a writer, btw!

I think it applies to both men and women. It's the reason male prime ministers always have a full head of hair.

@NiceGerbil good points

Churchill wasn't much of a looker :/

!!!

William Hague? He wasn't too long ago.

Thanks muser :)

@NeedToKnow101

I do think it's a shame and sexist if female writers that are more visually appealing are the ones getting published, as writing isn't about looks. (Unless that's what you're writing about).

I sometimes think that female athletes are getting more and more attractive, and wonder if that's me being a jealous older bint, (as most young women are attractive anyway), or if the prettier girls are offered more training opportunities than the plainer girls to start with (see also classical music).

As others have said, being very attractive doesn't mean you will lead a charmed life, and it can be a hindrance too, but in some ways the world may smile down on you a bit more.

I'm not sure it's the athletes overall, but it affects who gets sponsorships in a big way.

In some ways I think it is completely understandable that on television, you get nice looking people. Even actors who aren't conventionally nice looking or are seen as a bit ugly often do so in a way that is very photogenic. I remember seeing an interview with an older actor and one of the things he said you just couldn't do much about was whether the camera liked you, and he didn't mean that you were conventionally attractive.
You rarely see things filmed in a way where you see the normal things like pussy pimples, or flakey skin, etc because that stuff is kind of unpleasant to watch (especially on high resolution close ups.) Even people who put little stock in good looks tend to want to watch "nice" looking people on tv, and if they have that you can manage the rest with make up and such.

I went to a university with a small journalism school, and it was interesting, there was a real physical type that tended to go into tv media.

Anyway - where so many things now are on tv - sports has to make money that way, you get a sponsorship based on ads, you get interviews on the best shows, etc, it makes sense that we see more people who have a certain look in other sectors too.

On the other hand, an older, less attractive female writer is never going to be rejected by a publisher on account of her looks and her age -- if she's got a good book. My first book was published when I was 49. And now, at 69, I'm still getting contracts.
And I know many older female writers in the same position.

As much as good looks, I think what what helps is attitude. I'm of the more traditional type, with a horror of "putting myself out there" and self-promotion. Well, maybe not exactly horror, but definite reluctance. Younger writers are quite used to it and do it well; many of them have no compunction to post about and talk about their books on social media, a thing I shy away from. And that's where good looks, as well as the ability to talk well, are really an asset. If you're camera-friendly as well as video-confident, that helps immensely.

Not being a good talker, like me, is definitely a setback, as I've experienced again and again...

I’ve read somewhere that athletes have a higher than average chance of being attractive because symmetry tends to be associated with better performance.

And OP is not projecting anything. A few years ago, when I was trying to break into novel writing, I read a great deal about how to get published. I can’t remember if it was in The Writers and Authors Yearbook, or the related book on how to get published, but one of the chapters namechecked Zadie Smith as someone who had highlightef this aspect when sending out submissions. So it is absolutely a thing.

That said, if you see a book by a middle-aged female author who had no contacts in the industry, but still managed to break in, you can bet there’s something pretty special about their writing, one way or another.

For me, a short and dumpy woman, in a male dominated industry, I've found it useful to be fairly plain. Men hit on me less (note, less, still plenty of inappropriate approaches!), I was allowed to be good at tech because I wasn't objectified in the way I saw other women being (in fact, they often barely noticed me there, I heard some awful stuff), and of course personally, because no-one ever really told me I was pretty, it wasn't part of my own feelings of self-worth, I built that on my own achievements and competence, rather than on the precarious whims of what other people liked about my looks - I think that stood me in good stead as I got older.

Having said that, it took until I was a good 30 to realise this, because society spent a lot of time trying to make me feel bad about being short and fat, and not good looking enough.

Yeh, there's another type of ''privilege'' (not the right word) in being juuuust attractive enough not to be labelled ugly and so mocked or undermined, but not so attractive you're objectified.

I think that social media works by creating a marketing frenzy around a person/product. So you need followers and you need the followers to engage with you to be successful and sell products. Engagement is about the audience feeling a personal connection with the influencer. It helps if your writing is autobiographical obviously. The audience need to feel like they know the influencer (writer), but also like their fashion style/lifestyle and to a certain extent want to BE like them. So women who consider themselves bright and funny, but also like fashion might follow one of these writers and the writer themselves or the team around the writer might know that they'll sell more books if they pose for photos that market the book, but also sell an outfit or a lifestyle and will generate questions that ask about the outfit and lead people to spend money on clothes, but also on the book too, because the book is part of the 'lifestyle'. That's why you might find influencers who do one thing I.e. writing, also mentioning where their dress or their shoes are from, or where they eat out. They'll get sponsored to do it. The commodification of literally everything means you have to sell yourself as much as your product to get achieve success, particularly if you choose to use social media as the springboard for that success. I haven't touched much upon beauty privilege but responded to a point you made later in the thread OP. Obviously it helps all of the above if you're beautiful.

It's just another advantage surely. Like class or privilege. But unlike the latter the former round out. Looks dont last but bring born with wealth does. When it comes to power those born into weather will ultimately have more than those born poor with looks. Lots of rich unattractive old birds end up rich.

Its worth noting that what pretty is seen as, and who is classed as unattractive can often be tied into other bits of privilege.
If you think of any thing that involves a make over... there are certain things they try and fix

Some of it can be money based eg those that can afford well fitting clothes, braces etc. Lots of things that are considered unattractive can be associated with looking "cheap or poor"

Some is disablity based, from the simple ditching glasses to any form of scar or obvious difference

Some can be race based. In the uk, you hear of afro hair being classed as unprofessional, lots of straightening out frizzy hair, reducing features that arent linked to minorities

Some can be homophobic as well. Being told you are Looking like a lesbian is undesirable , you'll hear people calling certain shoes in derogatory terms fearing looking like a lesbian. It tends to be about fitting gender and hetro norms (eg "manish" hair cuts, unfemine dress)

Aw bugger.

Lost a massive long post.

Short story.

Idea of beauty privilege pits women against each other. Is about looking at others and gauging looks. And feeling better looking or not so good looking.

Not good.

Also. Divide and rule. Women and girls who look different ways can't know what it is to look a different way. Poster upthread said the good looking girls got all the boys after them. Having all the boys after you is probably not fun!

Again. Male idea of what is good.

Also. Beauty standards. Racist. For a start.

Not good.

I really don't like these threads.

I think women and girls get shit whichever way they turn. And the idea that beautiful women have a great time is a media propagated myth. Also a favourite of incels.

I'll say again.

How is it a privilege having heterosexual men think you are a really fuckable object?