Why does Bell Hooks always criticise dressing up, using makeup?

c-poy:

killdrugs:

bedpartymakeover:

1857-m-deactivated20150228:

Technically, it exposes the onus of being physically pleasing, upon women. I’ve seen people on this website try to turn makeup into a political gesture of empowerment and it still does not work. Whether cis women do it or trans women do it, makeup is essentially a social practice that demands a woman perform and display herself a certain way to be appealing to the public gaze. There’s someone on this website, I don’t remember their URL, but they have dyed hair (is all I remember) and they attempted to provide a more pro-woman stance on makeup which sounds superficially tempting but ultimately, makeup is self-defeating and bell hooks exposes that negation of true self in one simple quote of hers: “Think of all the women you know who will not allow themselves to be seen without makeup. I often wonder how they feel about themselves at night when they are climbing into bed with intimate partners. Are they overwhelmed with secret shame that someone sees them as they really are? Or do they sleep with rage that who they really are can be celebrated or cared for only in secret?”

She stands decidedly against the politics of glamorous power. Glamorous power is not the kind of power we ought to be teaching our young girls or adult women for that matter. Glamorous power enthralls, it captivates, it intrigues, it seduces patriarchal gaze but does it reclaim space, bodies, autonomy and does it crush patriarchal control over our bodies, our naked, exploitable, fuckable female bodies? No.

What is extremely important to remember whenever we read hooks is that this is an argument between neoliberal individualism/the bourgeois self-help movement against radical political struggles that wish to undo the damage of colonial, capitalist, imperial control over our bodies. hooks is entirely against choice feminism. So am I. So is anyone who realizes how utterly self-defeating and narrow choice feminism is when it comes to understanding the political and social subject of womanhood.

The same argument against dressing up and makeup can be seen through Lorde who insists that the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. Her statement is so rich with radical roots that it can be applied to a plethora of political struggles against hegemony. This is the beauty of their work.

bell hooks criticizes this and a lot more (bless her a million times) because bell hooks is completely against popular feminism. Popular feminism centers its politic of empowerment upon desire; it upholds the dominant structures of patriarchal control while turning political positions into aesthetic choices. And there is nothing more fascist than such a dishonest approach to women and autonomy. So, in other simpler words, makeup isn’t empowering anyone. It has its temporary rush (and I admit it too as someone who’s recently tried it at the age 25) but at the end of the day, will my wearing bronzer and mascara undo the patriarchal sociology of a man? Highly doubt it.

She also doesn’t like women presenting themselves provocatively. I don’t really agree with that or her opposition to makeup, but what do I know.

i think this post minimizes the economic undermining of the patriarchy that is possible, using makeup as a tool. when i say that, what i mean is: feminists, start your own makeup companies. employ other feminists. only buy makeup from feminist sellers. do not put money into the patriarchy’s hands.

anything is a tool tbh

Nope. That is similar to the argument that “feminist porn” is anti-patriarchy. Which is hilarious because it ignores entirely the mode of production in these industries. It ignores the division of labor, the disproportionate division of wages, the division of geographic inequality between the global north (mostly consumers) and the global south (mostly underpaid producers), it ignores a whole lot under the banner “Buy Feminist!” Under monopoly white supremacist capitalism, there is no such thing as ethical and empowered choices. It sounds pessimistic, sure, but it is a lot better than fooling yourself into believing such a postmodern idea that “anything is a tool” and can be used to liberate. Patriarchy will stop existing (among other results) when there is no more pressure on women to utilize cosmetic means to appear beautiful. Women will simply not have to consider the exhausting task of displaying themselves according to certain criteria. It will be a non-thing.

So no, “feminist makeup” is not feminist. You’re still teaching young girls to perform womanhood in a certain way that places a burden on them to appear pleasant to the eye. I will suggest you read these words on moving beyond the politics of desirability.