Objectify This

So, there’s this thing that I put on my face in the evenings these days, before I go out to shake my thang or down some burrs.

The fact that many women feel dependent on this stuff - I have heard countless women explain that they feel incomplete or “naked” without their lipstickeyeshadowmascarafoundationconcealerblush while most (ok, not all) men do not face this kind of pressure is interesting.

From a gender theory perspective, it seems fairly straightforward that the use of makeup in females indicates an additional or exaggerated cultural preoccupation with the female exterior as opposed to interior (relative to men). Of course, this could also be interpreted as a lack of preoccupation with the male exterior, but being one of those hippie dippy types who thinks that people are who they are on the inside, I don’t think we should be judging any book by its cover. And we should save the whales. . . hush now.

Ok, enough tree hugging. The question is, how much of this sexual difference is cultural? And more importantly, how much of it is negative?

Well, for one, there’s this video, which is from collegecandy.com and intended to “make you feel better”: a video (no longer available, unfortunately) of celebrities without makeup on. But I found a substitute: the Dove ‘evolution’ film. If you are a man, imagine that you are competing in the sexual marketplace with the individual in the movie, or at least comparing your inner self to an outer self that is as corporately sponsored as the female in the movie. If you’re a woman, go have a burr or eat a cupcake and congratulate yourself on your three dimensional beauty. Airbrushed bitches have nothing on you. When Puff Daddy asks, “Mase, you gonna stop smokin’ lala?,” you can reply “Puff, I’m a thug; I’mma die high,” with natty pride and sincerity. Why? Because you’re real.

The idea that seeing celebrities without makeup would make the average (female) consumer feel better is based on the assumption that seeing these stars in their full plastic airbrushed majesty is oppressive to the average female consumer.The idea that the average female consumer is oppressed by the objectification of women is pretty widely accepted. In an article published in the Journal of Sex Research, Alan McKee writes that “Good, healthy erotica is one thing… but the sex depicted in standard porn is wholly devoid of intimacy and affection. Women are uniformly portrayed as the passive objects of men’s sexual urges (p. 11).

“Of particular concern to many commentators is the degree of objectification seen in pornography (e.g., Rantzen, 2004). Some worry that porn causes its viewers to act violently toward women (Krome, 2003) or that it turns them into sexual abusers (Hamilton, 2004) or even murderers (Coffman, 2004).”

Thus the objectification, or disempowerment, of women, is linked to their power relationship with men, who are more likely to be abusive because they are in power, and power is famously corruptive -in the same way that large amounts of money are- because power can often be used for personal gain with lessened personal risk.

How then, do I justify the use of makeup? Is wearing makeup perpetuating the objectification of other women, who feel oppressed upon seeing yet another hyperbolized person? Philosophically, I seem to be trapped here. I know that the makeup industry is pretty much making money by selling women images of other women they are pimping and airbrushing, so that our culture’s standards mascara, and perhaps some lipgloss and tinted moisturizer and omg, you don’t get regular pedicures?

I could try to make a legit argument about this but I’m not sure I have one. I can try. Part of it is about the accentuation of myself with makeup; the reaction to these artificially heightened standards of beauty as the nod to the artificial ideals of this culture and my ability, as a girl who’s in her early 20’s and good health, to meet these standards. Another part of me sees it as a way to make myself into a cartoon character, a la Fafi.

Makeup is also very much a costume. When I wear retro red lipstick, I am retro as much as my overalls and pigtails with wire once made me Pippi Longstocking.

The manipulation of my own visual identity occurs within a context of manipulated and culturally created identities, and in some ways, it could be argued that makeup empowers me to choose the colors of my face, and if interpreted broadly (so to speak) or figuratively (so to speak) my hair, as well. By choosing these colors, I can make myself hot or elderly; seductive, innocent, or less-tired looking. I can also get myself psychically ready for an evening of flirting or dancing. The act of putting makeup on, regardless of the results, makes me feel prepared to party.

But what of the sex differences? Why do men get to keep the hair on their legs and in their armpits, skip painful bikini line and eyebrow plucking and waxing, be released from pressure to overexercise and undereat, be free of the fear of rape and many moral judgements about masturbation and sexuality in general, and be considered hot without makeup?

It’s merely the icing on the cake. Men are at an undeniable advantage in this society. Not only are they far more likely to grow up to be president, but they are more likely to grow up to be CEOs, managers, professors, businessmen, scientists, lawyers, and pretty much every kind of higher level profession. Women wear makeup to appear more beautiful to counteract men and their theoretical capacity for leadership. It’s a middle-school, playground style move. But we want some attention, too, if only for the most fictional, transient and subjective parts of ourselves.