Consumer Feminsim and it's Harmful Ways
Graphics by: Daija
On February 23rd a video titled “Be A Lady They Said.” started floating around, mainly on Instagram. Posted by Girls. Girls. Girls. Magazine. The video showcased the double standards women had to face in their everyday lives, and how it’s impossible to be perfect as a woman because what’s required of you is constantly changing. Sounds cool, right? It’s simple and gets the point across well, and people loved it. But their profile is one click away, and the content they provide contradicts the content of their popular video. The majority of the photos are of sexualized, skinny white women. Rich people in charge of big corporations have derived the conversation of feminism, hollowing it out to be more about what you say rather than what you do. Feminism has been co-opted by capitalism, and it’s slowing the movement down.
Cynthia Nixon in “Be a Lady They Said.” By Girls. Girls. Girls :https://vimeo.com/393253445
But feminism, just like any other social movement, is not supposed to be fun. It’s not the theme of a gala or part of a quirky one-liner in a film. Social movements are about life or death for many people, and to dilute the word, and with that, the movement is extremely harmful.
Capitalism and feminism are, at their cores, opposites. While feminism works for the empowerment of a collective, capitalism celebrates and encourages individualism- a type of “every man for himself”. Corporations have actively been trying to change this, and make feminism and capitalism seem like they actually belong together. This is where consumer-feminism comes in handy. When I say consumer-feminism, I mean the feminism that has been constructed to sell products. Quirky advertisements with bright colors and happy women encourage us to consume because with consumption we will look and be as happy as those women. According to them, feminism needs to be fun. But feminism, just like any other social movement, is not supposed to be fun. It’s not the theme of a gala or part of a quirky one-liner in a film. Social movements are about life or death for many people, and to dilute the word, and with that, the movement is extremely harmful.
One thing consumer-feminism has done is further cement the beauty standards of today. A few years back Kim Kardashian West posted about appetite suppressant lollipops on her Instagram, made by the same company that makes the flat tummy teas we often see on influencer-sites. There are heaps of articles and videos on these diet drinks, they are packed with laxatives that are extremely harmful to your body, suppressing hunger when it’s nothing more than your body asking for energy. With many of these products, they are promoted by people with a large woman-following- while having men in the CEO-positions. If you go into Flat Tummy Co’s website, their values are heavily adapted to attract a young female audience. They call themselves relatable (explained with: We get it. Sh*t happens. We’re all about giving into those #whoops moments as long as you get back on track tomorrow!), inclusive (explained with: Our women come in all shapes and sizes. Everything we do, and everything we’re about is also about feeling good, as well as looking it.) and empowering (explained with: Girl, it’s time to freaking OWN IT! We’re going to be that annoying best friend that isn’t going to let you give up. You’ve got this!), among other happy, encouraging adjectives. This is common with a lot of brands; playing with beauty standards and therefore women's insecurities and disguising it as empowering with positive adjectives. We are constantly being sold products meant to “fix” our problems: weight loss products, hair removal, stretch mark removals, products that reduce any sign of ageing while being told that in return, it’ll make us feel happy and empowered. The problem is that we can never settle, because if we do the companies lose their profits. They need to make you want to come back for more and do so by tearing you down until you feel the need to come back.
Corporations don’t need feminism that revolutionizes, they need feminism that sells.
But a company cannot force you to buy their products, which means that if you do, it’s because you wanted to. You chose that product; therefore, you’ve made a choice for yourself- and all choices are supposed to be celebrated. We are made to believe our consumer choices- since they are our choices- are always empowering. Andi Zeisler, sums this up well: “The idea that it matters less what you choose than that you have the right to choose is the crux of “choice-feminism”, who's rise we coincided with the rapid near-overwhelming expansion of consumer choice that began in the 1980’s”. Consumer choice is made to translate directly to liberation, so it doesn’t matter what choice you make, because the fact that you had the ability to choose is the most important aspect. This type of feminism attempts to be apolitical, or at least as apolitical as it can be. Corporations don’t need feminism that revolutionizes, they need feminism that sells. Cute slogans and overly happy beautiful women sell, actual revolutionary movements or statements don’t.
Another thing consumer-feminism does is cement class. The solution to billionaires is according to capitalist feminism more women billionaires, just like the solution to the huge amount of ultra-rich CEOs being predominantly male is more female CEOs. We are made to believe that the upper-class’ interests are universal interests and therefore celebrate women CEOs or women billionaires, even though they’re most likely doing the exact same thing as men in the same positions. Poor women, women of color or women in the lgbtq-community do not benefit from one woman getting richer because it’s not in the premises of feminism, it’s in the premises of capitalism. And as established, capitalism is not for the masses but for the individual. So how are they going to coexist, when neither benefits the other? If we want feminism for all women and not for a small group of women, we need to dismantle the individualism that comes with the branch of feminism we’re living with today, which means we need to dismantle capitalism.
If we instead want the individualism of today’s feminism, it comes with dismantling what feminism actually means; which is the notion of all women being equal, no matter what circumstances they come from. This sets the foundation for white feminism in modern times. White feminism is individualistic feminism, it separates us and puts us in a hierarchy with rich white (cis)women on top. Inclusion isn’t desired, it has never been desired in the frames of white feminism because inclusion means powerful women have to give up some of their power. This, while tearing down theories that speak for deeper discussions and inclusion like intersectionality, makes white feminism nothing more than another piece in the game of power for the people who already possess it. A few win, while others are forced to celebrate success that they won’t benefit from.
The way corporations paint feminism, as girl power t-shirts and pastel pink posters should concern us more than it does.
So, we need to be over charming videos about the double standards of beauty standards produced by the very magazines that continue to reproduce those same standards, we need to go further than pink hats and Hermione-quotes. The way corporations paint feminism, as girl power t-shirts and pastel pink posters should concern us more than it does. We need to channel the anger we feel- for real. Because as much as we keep seeing feminism as this fun thing to engage in sometimes- it isn’t. It’s revolutionary, meant to create cultural shifts and equality for all women, or at least it’s supposed to be.
By Nilo Khamani
(she/her)
Edited: Halima Jibril
Nilo is a First-Person and Opinions writer @ ASHAMED!
Read more about Nilo on OUR TEAM! page.