Why are so many women hellbent on acting against their own interest?

[thedankness]

From TWAW, pro "sex-work", "kinky sex" and porn, plastic surgery, accepting low standards in relationships with men, being anti-abortion to more trivial things such as wearing heels, and yes, shaving, and so much more, so many women will defend these things to the hilt. They refuse/are unable to see how these things are bad for themselves and/or women generally, even after presented with arguments. Obviously some people will disagree with points made in an argument, but I just don't see men subjugating themselves en masse like I do women.

I feel sad. Why can't we as women just love ourselves and look out for ourselves? I feel like we are groomed into self-hate. Is the notion of female self-acceptance and worth truly so radical that a significant number can't even fathom it as a possibility for themselves?

Why is it so common for women to act against their interest? And can or should we do anything about it?

This is a bit poorly-worded, have thoughts but am interested to hear others' opinions.

It was concern about fertility, not the appearance. At the same time, men were warning women not to drive cars because the speed of the car would displace their womb and would cause the loss of a baby if pregnant or infertility if not pregnant.

@thedankness except men are not "accepted in their natural form" - I have heard people mocking particularly hairy men. Men are socially "allowed" a bit more hair than women, but a man with hair on his back will get as many sneers as woman with hairy armpits. its up to him whether he cares though

if a man chose to wear speedos his pubes would be exposed too, just buy tankini z shorts, every sportswear store sells them...

You literally have a choice and seem annoyed that others have the same choice and pick a different option to you

Things you've listed your employer or family would either not know about (sex life) or not pay attention to (leg hair).

I work in the most corporate of corporate environments and I am 100% that not all women wear make-up or heels. it may have been an issue in the past, but its much less so now because there isn't an expectation for women to want to look pretty at work

so at worst people will think you're ugly IF they will even consider your appearance for long enough to come to that conclusion

Teeth straightening usually isn’t cosmetic, it’s to foster healthy teeth and gums so you don’t lose teeth by age 30 and be in dentures by age 40.

I also think that people engaging in dangerous (potentially) sexual practices is not social issue. A woman with a dangerous kink does not pose a risk to you no more than a smoker who smokes only at their own home.

Sure. you can argue "normalisation" but despite fetishes existing since forever, they are still not "normalised". Vast majority of people will hear about strangulation and think it's weird at best.

@PaintedEgg You're right about hairy backs on men. However men really are allowed much more hair than women. How many fully grown out armpits on women have you seen compared to men?

In my experience speedos are way less popular than swim shorts. And I very rarely see any swim shorts/hipsters/skirts on women.

I'm not annoyed that others pick a different choice. I'm annoyed about having so many of these choices that men don't seem to have, where as a woman it's a bit damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Fair enough. Maybe the topics were too wide ranging. I do find it interesting most of the debate on here has been about beauty practices and especially make-up, which I didn't even mention in the post. I appreciate the posters making interesting points about why they disagree, rather than baseless accusations that I want to control everyone (I don't), although most of my list has not actually been discussed.

I think you are being way too extreme in your analysis op and it means it doesn't ring true.

Like the bathing suit. You happen to live in a place where men wear trunks, go to France and you will see a lot more male crotch hair. And some men will remove it.

And there is actually quite a wide variety of female bathing suit styles that are fashionable.Lots of options with shorts.

Now the super-sexed up bathing suits in things like Sports Illustrated are not like that, but why would anyone expect them to be? The whole point of them is to be highly sexualized, so by definition they aren't modest, thy push all the boundaries. If you go to a beach those kinds of suits aren't typically the majority and no one thinks, gee, why isn't that middle aged plump woman wearing a skimpy bikini? I don't think anyone expects most women to look like pin-up models. Just like we don't expect most men to look like Chris Pine. Lots of women and men might like to look like that, but we all know that's not realistic.

A few people have mentioned that girls in particular go through a phase of trying a lot of the more sexualised fashions on, and feel pressure to do so. That's true, and it would not be a bad thing if that pressure were lesser, but to some extent I think it's natural that young women are trying to get a handle on their sexuality, which is new to them. They don't understand all the social implications yet, they don't really know who they are, and their hormones are also ramped right up. And the element of female social hierarchies is huge there, teen boys are not the ones driving the bus on these things, overall.

It's also the case that teens in general have a hugely elevated sense of being watched and judged compared to adults, this is a well recognized psychological aspect of teen development, and it means they feel a lot more pressure, in many cases, than is really there.

Teen boys social hierarchies exist too, but they are structured around different things, and they are a lot simpler.

Schools and parents typically try and help teen girls through all this by not allowing them to go all out in certain settings like school, and by playing down the importance of trends, and just being adult and reasonable. Tbh I am not sure that feminism has always been helpful in this area.

I'm not so sure this is true, there has over the past decades been significant changes in expectations of sexual behaviour due to social pressures.

Choking is a much more common thing than you seem to realize, polls suggest that lots of women now have men trying to do this to them quite unexpectedly, without treating it as an unusual kink. It's also become a thing very quickly, 25 years ago it really was unusual, now it's seen as just a usual thing.

You could say the same about oral sex for that matter. It was unusual enough before the sexual revolution that not wanting to do it would have been seen as pretty standard, and even up into the 1970s it wasn't ubiquitous. And that lasted longer depending on where you lived, a good friend of mine who grew up in the Caribbean told me that when he came to the UK as a young man in the early 80s, he was a bit shocked, because where he was from women didn't want men to do that, and often weren't willing to do it themselves.

You don't have to think that it's a problematic practice to see that what was once considered a matter for unusual tastes is now considered something that, if you weren't willing to do it in a sexual relationship, you must be a prude, a bad lover, and actually could well be a deal breaker in a relationship (imagine the AIBU.)

Sure, someone can try and find a partner who doesn't mind. But where that once would have been easy and not represented a limit, now it would be hugely limiting. That isn't insignificant.

“While we can all choose how much to care about social norms, it is the human condition to do so. Most people want social approval; we want friends, families and jobs and it’s not a “me” problem if I don’t want particularly want to jeopardise that. To not give a shit is to take a risk (which may only be perceived) but nevertheless it is a decision that men will not have to make.”

Men have the same decision, it’s very strange you are denying the existence of social norms for men. You can’t have social norms for women, without social norms for men.

Men get to be attractive in their natural state; women do not.
🤣 no they do not!

Men have different choices because the social norms for them are different but I doubt they are any fewer. Hairiness is more tolerated in men than in women, but being a skinny weed is less tolerated in men than in women. Naturally clear skin is more pushed for men than for women, because we are allowed to use makeup to conceal blemishes without being mocked.

The accusations weren’t really baseless as you did say can or should we do something about women who are doing things that harm themselves or women as a whole. This question only gives to options can or should, you didn’t write or perhaps we should do nothing and let women be. So the accusations were picking up on the bias in your loaded question.

@TempestTost I agree with the majority of your post, I don't think I've really said much that contradicts it? I like your points about teens and if I had daughters I would not be heavy handed at all about make-up or shaving or clothes as it just wouldn't be helpful and I would want them to make their own choices. I would want them to be aware of some of the arguments for and against these things (including feminist arguments, but also any arguments such as animal cruelty or ethical manufacturing or artistic expression) so that they are able to critically analyse and come to their own conclusion about why they make the choices they do.

I know speedos are much common in France but as a woman living in the UK I am talking about the experience of my culture. Like I said, shaving isn't an inherently feminist issue, it's the difference between men and women which makes it so, which is cultural. Men used to have much more pressure to shave their faces and beards were considered unprofessional.

Your previous post about female social hierarchy makes me wonder if the female and male social hierarchies are independent of each other i.e. the benefit of being at the top of your own sex class hierarchy is social/resource/power advantages, or entirely related i.e. the primary benefit to being at the top means it gives you access to the "best" of the opposite sex for procreation, as the species' main purpose? And therefore are female social hierarchies are about competition for males to mate with or would they exist even if males did not exist at all or if high quality sperm was freely available?

Social hierarchies are about getting the best of everything and yes this includes access to the best mate for producing offspring, regardless of whether you are male or female, heterosexual or not. Best of everything means your offspring get the best of everything and so are more likely to stay at the top of the social hierarchy.

Not at all. I recognise those social influences and I still remove most of my body hair.

It's not a case of 'once you've seen it, you're no longer susceptible to those influences'. I see them. And I'm as susceptible as the next person.

I'm not quite sure where the implication of 'this makes you less strong-minded than those who forcefully reject every such influence' comes from. We are all of us, without exception, affected by what we see around us.

What's designated 'masculine' and what's labelled 'feminine' are purely arbitrary distinctions. These have always been made in human societies which are primarily set up to benefit the interests of men. It might be more interesting and beneficial to dismantle those oppositions, rather than merely noting that the things women 'like' are of less value than those favoured by men. Who is the final arbiter?

In sum, gender stereotypes are regressive and harmful to everyone: male, female, conformists and non-conformists alike.

I don't deny there are social norms for men. I think men are bucking some of them e.g. that they must never show emotion. I think men are increasingly under pressure to change their bodies, particularly via the gym, steroid use, hair transplants etc. and there is increasing body dysmorphia in men ("bigorexia") but capitalism profiting off our body insecurities doesn't seem like a step forward just because it's becoming more equal between the sexes.

It makes you wonder if the notion that men value a woman's beauty and women value a man's resources is as biological and essential as the reproductive roles. A lot of social norms stem from this.

“It makes you wonder if the notion that men value a woman's beauty and women value a man's resources is as biological and essential as the reproductive roles.”

I don’t wonder at all, because it’s nothing to do with biology and purely based on a quickly becoming antiquated society.

@TempestTost and yet consent was never before so widely spoken about as it is now, and shaming sexual practices (including being a prude) is increasingly frowned upon. It really works both ways

However, I also think its a good think thay sexual compatibility is a thing. Because it also benefits women - yes, getting dumped over not wanting to do something may be unpleasant, but you can also get dumped over not being into hiking or whether you want children

The importance of sexual compatibility and consent also means that it is, for the very first time in recent history, a socially accepted attitude that men have to try and please their female partners. Previously it was all about man's pleasure and no man would consider whether his wife actually enjoyed any of it. Some men even honestly believed that women simply don't like sex at all by nature.

I'd much prefer to have more limited but more tailored choice of lovers than endure lots of ceiling staring like our grandmothers may have done

The thing about the speedos is that you have to be careful putting things down to patriachy (or whatever) just because you see a particular thing in, say, England. Some things happen a certain way for other reasons. The reasons French and English men wear different kinds of suits is a bit of a cultural accident, and what that suggests is that they, and also women's trends in suits may not be as simple or one dimensional as you are suggesting.

I absolutely think there is a lot of independence between male and female social hierarchies. It's lesser where you have a very integrated society or sub-section of society, and comes out more where one sex dominates or the sexes tend to naturally segregate. I was in the army for many years, and it was very male dominated, and male hierarchies really ruled. As a woman, I was somewhat integrated into those, but also a little outside of them - there was no female hierarchy as such. I've seen the opposite in my current, female dominated workplace - the few men tend to be in some ways outside the main hierarchy although accommodated within it to some extent.

I think these kinds of hierarchies can partly be about access to desirable males but it's also a lot wider than that. It's probably fair to call it access to resources, but that includes power over others, the ability to set the agenda. If we lived in the right kind of society it might directly include access to the best food and shelter. I think male hierarchies are more often about access to women as a primary element. Female hierarchies are a lot more complex, in my experience, especially when you are talking about young people. And in a lot of cases more brutal. Men can be pricks, but usually not within what is supposed to be their "friend" group. Girls hierarchies are commonly brutal even among friends.

I've always been puzzled by the idea of wearing makeup "for myself." Makeup goes on your face, and you can't see your face. If you are looking at someone else wearing makeup, that may be an aesthetic experience, but if it's on your own face, the only internal experience you're having is a sensation of something touching your skin, if anything, right? I assume that sensation is not what women mean when they say they wear makeup for themselves (if I'm wrong and there are people here who really love the sensation of having goo on your skin, please respond, I have questions!). I suppose you could enjoy looking in a mirror while putting on your makeup, but unless you take it off again before you walk away from the mirror, you're left with the sensation of makeup on your face as the only experience you're personally having as you go about your day.

Otherwise, if it's not about your own internal sensations, then "wearing makeup for myself" must really translate to "wearing makeup to change how other people treat me," which is pretty much exactly what feminists mean when we talk about how women wear makeup "for" other people. It doesn't mean you're being altruistic and just giving other people a pleasant experience, it means your choice to wear or not wear makeup is made because of how other people react to you when you do or don't.

I often wear makeup when working from home and I do not have video calls etc. I just like the enhancement. Nothing again to do with society and all to do about me. What makes ME as a woman feel good. It is a ridiculous argument this it really is.

@Plzdontaskmyname for me its about vanity, i love looking at myself in a mirror and I love putting makeup on...even though I work from home, never really show myself on video calls (not sure why, most people seem to avoid it if they can) and now I'm on maternity so I rarely leave the house except for a walk (either with my baby in a pram or by myself to a nearby store). I'm playing peek-a-boo, changing nappies, getting puked on and contact napping with a winged eyeliner on.

I always loved a certain look on myself and I will be dead before anyone can take that away from me.

Even more so now that I have a baby and there was almost a social expectation for me to "let myself go" (I hate that term, btw) or to tone down my appearance, yet at the same time I would have been expected to feel bad about it.

So in a way now is the first time where I am acutely aware of others paying attention to how I look - my weight, clothes and makeup were commented on by near -strangers. Both positively and negatively. If anything, this causes me to dig my high heels in even more.

@Plzdontaskmyname I've come to the conclusion that people's brains work differently. You have perfectly described my brain in that I have no strong mental image of myself. I don't look in mirrors much and I care more about how my body feels than how it looks.
I suspect that other people's brains keep more of an image so that how they look matters more to that person's sense of who they are.

I agree with this point.

Women are conditioned to the be 'the observed' and not the observers. Subject of the male gaze and the critical female gaze, encouraged by advertising which is deliberately designed to brainwash and mesmerise people into feeling inadequate and 'less than'.

This makes people self obsessed and self conscious and essentially trapped in the victimhood of caring about what they look like in all circumstances over and above than how they're being, what they're doing, and what they want from their life. People can become performative and unreal.

For those of us who don't watch TV, don't watch adverts, don't buy glossy magazines or engage in that side of life whatsoever we are probably a little less brainwashed.

I push back against this stuff as I'm a feminist and also have spiritual beliefs and all of my interests and curiosities and goals and desires exist outside me and beyond the end of my own nose. People who find themselves fascinating terrify me and sadly there's a lot of people these days who care more about their eyebrows and what other people think about their eyebrows than what's going on in the world.

@LittleMissSunshiner I'd say that as a spiritual person you probably should refrain from calling anyone brainwashed...you may be upset if people were to talk about you the way you talk about them