|
|
|
COMMENTARY HOME
WHO SAID LOOKS SHOULD BE EVERYTHING?
By Caryl Rivers. Caryl Rivers is a professor of
journalism at Boston
University and the author of "Camelot," to be...
September 10, 1998
Is there a double standard in the way the major players
in the presidential
scandal are dealt with by the press and the public?
The answer is yes. The faces and bodies of the women
involved in
"zippergate" are regarded as fair game for public
comment, while the
physical attributes of the men remain largely out of
bounds for public
discussion.
Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp, Paula Jones and Hillary
Clinton are the
targets of a barrage of printed and broadcast jokes
about their
appearance. On the night the president made his mea
culpa
speech, Arsenio Hall said in a TV interview that Monica
was fat and
Paula was ugly, sentiments often repeated. Paula Jones
got so tired of
remarks about her less-than-classic nose that she had
plastic surgery to
have it fixed.
Jay Leno, no sylph himself, refers to Linda Tripp as an
elephant.
Tripp has said she feels savaged by the constant
attacks on her
appearance. And when Hillary Clinton was photographed
in a bathing suit,
public comments about her thighs abounded.
In contrast, few comments are made in public about the
imperfections of
the bodies of the men involved. If Bill Clinton's nose
were on a woman, it
would be mentioned in a less than flattering way. And
while there have
been occasional mentions in the past about the
president's thighs, usually
the commander in chief is referred to as a handsome
man. No comments
are made about Ken Starr's abs, or lack of them.
Curiously, though
Webster Hubbell is far more overweight than Linda
Tripp, his size
is rarely remarked upon, but hers is constantly
mentioned.
This whole sordid story reveals that there remains a
double standard for
men and women, allowing men much more latitude in
appearance and
natural aging, while women are judged by much harsher
standards.
What philosopher Susan Sontag refers to the "double
standard of
aging" is certainly clear in regard to Tripp. While
most women regard her
as a weasel ratting out a friend, they still recoil at
the constant attacks on
her looks. In fact, she's an average-looking
middle-aged woman,
not much different than many other mid-level government
workers. In
that regard she's similar to Kenneth Starr. Neither
would turn heads as
they walked down Pennsylvania Avenue. But she's a joke
and he's
not.
Hillary Clinton is, in fact a very good-looking woman
at 50, who is fit
and dresses with style. If she's hasn't got the thighs
of a supermodel,
who does after 25?
Monica Lewinsky, as the Vanity Fair pictures show, is a
beautiful young
woman built along the lines of 50s sex goddess Jane
Russell. But today,
"Jane," and her co-star Marilyn Monroe, would be
marched off to a
fat farm. Like most women endowed with ample chests,
they also had
hips. The ideal beauty today is an artificial creature;
a woman with the
legs, hips and stomach of an 11-year-old boy, but with
outsized
breasts created by surgery. The average model in l950
was a size 12;
today she's a size four. Monica Lewinsky may have been
a pudgy
teenager, but today she's fat only by a standard that
renders real female
bodies unacceptable.
In fact, the modern media appear in a crusade to make
real women
invisible, and to imply that for women, aging is the
worst sin. As
Sontag points out, there are two standards of beauty
for males--the
boy and the man. The boy has a slim waist, smooth skin
and abundant
hair. But the man can be considered handsome with a
thick waist, wrinkles
and a receding hairline. Sean Connery, looking every
one his 60
years, was declared to be the "sexiest man alive."
There is only one standard of beauty for women
however--the girl.
This double standard has the effect of silencing women.
How many men
would put themselves forward in the public arena if
they knew their body
parts were going to be under constant discussion?
Massachusetts
gubernatorial candidate Evelyn Murphy had to suffer
comments
about her body after an unflattering picture of her was
taken. Few males
suffer this indignity. And while Janet Reno's
appearance is made sport of,
the same did not happen with Ed Meese, Ronald Reagan's
attorney
general.
The unreachable perfection for young women, combined
with the double
standard of aging, has the effect of making women less
powerful.
Young women have the sexual power of youth, but if the
media sets up an
impossible-to-achieve standard of beauty, even Marilyn
Monroe can't
reach it. Columnist Linda Chavez reports going into a
video store that
featured the famous picture of Monroe with a subway
blast blowing
her dress up. Two pre-teen boys recoiled. "Isn't she
fat! " one
remarked. Already they had been programmed to see a
normal female
body as obscene.
With aging comes wisdom, and often, power. But if
middle-aged
women are mocked in the media unless they've had face
lifts and
liposuction, they are de-legitimized, at the age when
they in fact have the
most to offer in the public arena.
Either way, young or old, women lose.
Send the text of this story to someone's email address
Browse the Tribune archive for other articles
69 responses total.
I'm really not all that sure that any of this "suffering" is more than women who are sensitive about their looks and body finding new ways to wallow in self-pity. I don't think Janet Reno gives any thought or concern to what Jay Leno says about her breasts. Women who are shallow, intellectually running on empty, and who are unhappy with their breasts get to feel indignant and blame their failures on "society's double standards". Meanwhile, smart women are ignoring the clowns, taking responsibility for their own decisions, and reaching their goals.
But it still does have an effect on the person-in-the-street. I mean, sure Janet Reno might not care, personally, but what about Jane Smith who looks about the same and who has to deal with perspectives that have been shaped by Leno's jokes?
I thought this might be controversial. ;) (Sindi asked me to post this here...I'm curious about what she wants to add to the debate...
Having been in all-male settings dominated by the "less than polite" set any number of times, I tend to view this sort of stuff as a simple reflection on the source. However regrettable or unpleasant, it's just natural for the outhouse to stink. Untiring diligence & zeal with the lime can do quite a bit to improve things, but the outhouse can't be cured. In a somewhat-higher-class all-male setting, my feeling is that this sort of raw sexist criticism of women is - for the most part - basically confined to women who's sexual identity is seen as a large part of their identity. Monica, Madonna, various British Royals - all fair targets. Janet Reno, Maggie Thatcher, Barbara Bush - you'd think that they were guys from the contexts in conversations. Judging from the covers & headlines I've seen on grocery-checkout-lane magazines that appear to be aimed at all-female readerships, women are perhaps even more inclined that men to judge women by Madison-Avenue- supermodel physical criteria. How much of a problem is this?
Huge.
I asked you to enter it because i thought other people would be interested. I don't particularly care what I look like or what other people think of my looks, I must be some sort of exception. Nor do I recall what other people are wearing, including glasses. People are more interested in the appearance of women than of men because it is women who have to be healthy and strong enough to have babies, men only need to have access to resources to support them.
Re: 101 Almost no problem at all.
101? Gosh, mary, looks like you have your Chrystal Ball tuned up tonight. ;)
was that re item 101?
(re resp:4, I imagine.)
(But isn't 101 binary 5?) Erica Jong has an interesting essay about women attacking women, somewhere on the web. I'll look it up.
This response has been erased.
Symmetry is often considered beautiful, in that lack of symmetry can indicate poorer health or genetic problems.
I've read of studies with computer-generated faces - average 20 so-so-looking people's facial features in the computer, give the average near-perfect symmetry, and the resulting face gets a definite beautiful/handsome rating.
Yep. For women the wide eyes, narrow cheekbones and defined chin are what's defined as ideal symmetry. Also, larger pupils are supposed to be more attractive. Supposedly, the pupils dilate slightly when you are aroused.
Wide eyes and a high forehead have often been considered attractive on women, along with a small pouting mouth and puffy cheeks, which is the same set of features found in babies. It makes the women look young and helpless. There have been times when women plucked off hair from their forehead (Mona Lisa), or shaved their eyebrows, to look babyish. Larger pupils, as achieved by belladona (also used in eye exams for the same purpose), are found during sexual arousal and make women look sexier. Belladonna probably interfered with vision, but since when was health more important than beauty. When most people worked outside, pale skins were attractive (take arsenic regularly to make sure you have less red blood), when most people worked inside tans were attractive. Same for fat when most people were thin, and vice versa.
Erica Jong's essay about women attacking women is on http://www.ericajong.com/nyobserver980713.htm
I think my husband is one of those that escaped this damaging stereotype, which btw gay men also suffer from. However, he is (and admits it) notoriously hard on himself. Whenever I suggest that I am fat he is immendiately militant in telling me that I am beautiful and sexy and that I don't need to lose annny weight. When his mother suggested to me that I ought to lose some weight, he got so upset I had a real difficult time stopping him from going to tell his mother off. He, on the other hand, accepts her criticism of his weight with a pain that is very visible. Every time she and her parents (much worse than her) mention his weight, I just want to strangle them. They have him considering diuretics and other harmful things. It's a wonder that he hasn't gotten some kind of eating disorder or something.
I'd never realized how difficult a topic weight is to discus until I re-read this item. When I'm giving a physical description of a friend, there are only two terms that I can think of that I feel uncomfortable using: "black" and "overweight". I had taken it for granted that the word "black" could be awkward to use, since it has a huge range of meaning (appearance, culture, parents, identity, used as a compliment, used as an insult, etc...) and it's pretty heavily politicized. But I hadn't expected "overweight" to be just as awkward until, after reading this again, I noticed myself hesitating to use it just as much.
I've noticed that more and more myself. I constantly refer to Jon as my teddybear and "cuddly". Chubby people are more fun because there's more to hug. Never thought I'd be a fat activist, but thinking about all the folks that get down on other people because of weight problems just makes me burn!
People are the most eager to do discretionary spending when they're dissatisfied with themselves and trying to "fix it". The "pushing inflatomatic junk food at you everywhere" then tell you "thin is the only way to be in" things is just another part of capitalism's Dark Side.
Sounds about right.
ref #19, 20: Assuming you have no problem describing someone as "thin", what makes you hesitate to use the word "fat"? "Overweight" sounds, to me, like the person has made a mistake or done something wrong - gone over. Same with "weight problem". Some people are thin, some are fat, short, tall, blonde, etc. We will all be a lot better off by working on changing our thinking a bit, maybe starting with the words we use. By the way, I'm fat. And gorgeous. 8^)
But you could be "fat" without really being "overweight". Or could you? How is "overweight" defined? I tend to look to the viewpoint about where the amount of body fat becomes a health risk. That is definitely overweight. I dunno. I sometimes wonder how people with, say, 40% (a guess) or greater body fat can stand to haul all that stuff around. But then I've learned (my first bonafide "wisdom") that the worst/dumbest assumption you can make about other people is that they share the same tastes as yourself. So maybe my own strange (possibly hereditary) compulsion to exercise often would be worse than just being fat?
I've seen TONS of people who I would call underweight most definitely. It's a pity skinny is in. I wonder if people would feel the same if someone they knew was in the hospital for anorexia nervosa.
Re#23: Exactly - it's not a rational response, any more than it's rational to call someone "white" and then feel squeamish about calling someone else "black". That's why I think it's so interesting that I do respond that way.
A friend of mine was indeed hospitalized for anorexia. As in, feeding tube. It was a horrible thing to witness. I'm at the point where I just don't care anymore. No, I don't want to binge on Twinkies in the name of apathy. It's more that the whole body obsession thing no longer means much to me. I still want to take care of myself and eat well. Yes, I could stand to lose some, how many couldn't? I'm beautiful and that's all there is to it, thankyouverymuch. :) If you are clinically obese (or overfat or whatever you wish to call it) and are happy with it, great. More power to you. But when I see someone profoundly overweight, it does make me wonder how it feels to carry all that around. It looks uncomfortable.
... or as they say on AbFab, "I'm thin and gorgeous!!" :)
As I would reply, "Well, I'm relatively average and I'm still gorgeous!!"
Julie has a lovely smile. I would like to gain 5 pounds but am too busy to eat often. Average for the USA is not average for the world, or what I would consider normal or healthy. That includes not only weight but diet (percentage of meat and fat and sugar) and as a result also cholesterol and blood pressure. A cholesterol count of 200 is considered normal (average) here, but 125 is healthier and is normal for China. The human body has not evolved to carry around large amounts of fat for long periods - it is hard on the joints as well as the circulatory system. And hot in the summer.
ref #24: "Overweight" seems to imply that there is a proper weight which one has gone over. Remember the life insurance height/weight charts of years ago? Society and medical science seem slow to realize that different bodies are made to carry different amounts of weight, and that differing percentages of that weight will be made up of adipose tissue. Yes, too much fat will cause health problems, as will too little. My personal guideline: if a person's girth is the first thing one notices, that person is probably not at a healthy weight. (high or low) I said earlier that I am fat. I mean that as opposed to being thin, which I am not designed to be. Eating sensibly and exercising have made me healthy. I truly believe that anyone who isn't willing to do that much for themselves has *far* bigger problems than the size of their butt.
I have heard comments from thin people (as in Kate Moss types) that they're also tired of being labeled as freakish because of their thinness. Just as an overweight person would be tired of hearing "Your heart! Your joints! Your butt! Yeech!" a very thin person who is just genetically thin gets tired of "Ewww! You're too skinny! What's wrong with you?". Take for instance Calista Flockart (Ally McBeal) and Celine Dion. I'd wager that both these women are just naturally small-boned and thin. Celine has had to go so far as to eat M & M's in public to squelch the rumors that she starves herself.
When she was young, she was not so thin, and she was much more attractive. Many women who get really thin develop horse-like features of the face. I don't know what's up with that. Sarah Jessica Parker and Celine Dion are examples.
I've wondered about that, too. I think what happens is the horse bones were always under there, but you couldn't see them when they were covered with "baby fat."
Horse bones. Heheheee! Yeah Celine does have the horse effect, but I think that is also exacerbated by her stick-straight hair she's sporting now. Feh.
A message from the skinny department. All my life I have looked scrawny, skin to the bone. Which also resulted in a total lack of what people consider male beauty, physically (muscles, broad shoulders, thight butt <no butt at all in my case)>. The last couple of years that has grown worse with all the Chippendales shit and such. Finally I am beginning to understand what most women must have been going through, being forced to an ideal you can never accomplish. Now that I am well in my thirties, at least I have *some* butt and my shoulders are getting broader as well, to keep things in balance my hair is thinning.
Hmm... I'd always been short and scrawny. I know that this is genetic... I come from a long line of short, scrawny women. But it made me self-conscious, because so many people seemed to see "skinny" and "anorexic" as synonyms, and some made very rude comments. (I don't 'understand this; if you met someone who *was* anorexic, how exactly would you be helping them by insulting them?) I was healthy, just small. Very delighted to gain weight in college -- I now weigh somewhere around 125. I'm still self-conscious, although mostly I'm self-conscious about being short, oddly enough. Makes no sense. It scares me that among my generation, where women seem to be encouraging each other and themselves to like their bodies more and more, men seem to be doing the opposite. My female friends, on average, seem dissatisfied with their bodies but a bit happier than my aunts or my mother's friends. My male friends -- both fat *and* skinny -- generally feel quite self-conscious about ti. But maybe I've just got an atypical group of friends. <shrug> I think that our society encourages people of all ages, genders and body types to hate themselves. Some succumb more than others.
It's the ideal picture, the unreachable, super model type of beauty that pushes ordinary people (with common worries and joys) into the pit of bodily despair. I am not really dissatisfied with the way I look. I like my body to be tight (at least). No muscles, but no obesity either. As long as I feel physically fit, I am doing fine. Beauty is what you feel about yourself. When you feel pretty/handsome/gorgeous/sexy etc., you are pretty etc. because you will radiate this to the outside world, who will notcie it. Over the years I have come to terms with the fact that I am skinny, and that I no matter what excercise I put into it, no muscles will develop, no sixpack for a stomach. On a whole I feel good about myself. The hard part is the coming to terms with your own flaws when the media are all about beautiful people. Just take alook at the average soap or movie. That's why it's a good thing that a sitcom like Roseanne became so popular. The people pictured are much closer to reality than, let's say the Bold and the Beautiful, even though the characters in Roseanne are witty beyond reality.
As a result of a playground accident when she was 8, my 13-year-old daughter has a scar under her right eye. It's smallish -- about 1" -- but very distinct. Yesterday I caught her smiling into a mirror. When I asked her what she was doing, she said, "Just looking at my face. I *love* my scar." "You do?" "Yeah, it looks just like the Nike logo!"
|
|
|
- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss