The difficulty I find in this is that, for instance, Michelle Obama is a beautiful woman. In a way it’s unfair to equally intelligent women who are not drop-dead gorgeous, but what is she to do? Wear sackcloth and ashes?
There are still an awful lot of things we need to work out before we can really begin to call ourselves an egalitarian society, and one is our approach to and understanding of physical attractiveness. In parts of Europe it is possible for women who are not conventionally beautiful to rise to the top job - May, Sturgeon, Merkel. Does Marine Le Pen’s appearance play a part in her success despite her obnoxious ideas? Ditto (for a time) Palin. How do we progress? And is the “celebritisation” of society resulting in the same pressures on male politicians - Berlusconi and Trump both being testimonies to the make up artist. If so, we’re going backwards.
It is quite a hard question for a five year old, though. At least, we had difficulty conveying it when our eldest was five. Who is now a lawyer…too much empathy is bad for lawyers.
Or training. People can be taught good behaviour. If they are shown that it has advantages, they are quite likely to adopt it. But a lack of empathy in men should not be an excuse for bad behaviour.
I’m the “token male” on the board of an organisation. I expect that in the past I’ve done my share of talking over and mansplaining. I’m aware of it, I try not to do it. In psychological tests I score around average for empathy. If I had a higher score I might feel worse if I unintentionally talk over a woman, but I doubt my behaviour would be any different. (And I get told, there is that.)
I’m not on the fence about this. Insults about looks always seem to be one of the first things out of the toolbox when criticising women but you almost never see it with men. It’s wrong and we shouldn’t tolerate it just because it’s being used against the other side.
Michelle was pretty consistently attacked for her looks. The “ape in heels” jab from that one white woman was just the most popular one. Then again I live in the south. Shit’s uglier here.
Looks have always played a low-key part in politics. Lincoln was a famous example. Kennedy won the election against Nixon because Nixon looked so godawful during the televised debate.
America has an obsession with looks. It’s worse for women in politics because as a general rule, women are more scrutinized for their appearances, and it’s worse x100 in right-wing and far-right circles because conservatives are… “repressed”.
How do we progress? I’m not sure. At this rate, I’m just hoping we last out until machines gain sentience and take the reins from us.
Not to be argumentative, but what I’m on the fence about is this: When can one consider a looks-based insult socially ‘acceptable’? Never?
Is it okay to say that Hitler was ugly?
Is it okay to say that Trump is ugly?
Is it okay to say that Conway is ugly?
Comment and rationale are welcome.
PS: The basic ‘meat’ of my previous post is that perceived personality tends to fuel opinion on – for example – looks. It’s human nature. If Conway was ‘our’ kind of gal (i.e., liberal, honest, non-divisive, kind, etc.) we here wouldn’t be calling her (or thinking her to be) ugly; instead the right-wing would… and we here and elsewhere would be defending her, countering the right by describing her as ‘attractive’ or even ‘beautiful’. And let’s not forget that here and elsewhere Trump’s comb-over has been continually ridiculed with little or no counter argument; was that okay? Why so? Granted, looks should in every practical sense have no impact on how people should be judged (in spite of the fact that that is not the case in the real world), but if the subject of opinion was horrible in meaningful ways, well, you get the picture.
Men are not judged on their looks in the same way. Calling Trump ugly doesn’t have the same connotations as calling any woman ugly. Ugly women are stupid, slow, lazy, unsuccessful, often “old” too. “Ugly” men can make up for their “ugliness” with success, power, money, young beautiful wives, they compensate for the “ugliness” in a way women cannot.
Calling a successful woman ugly is to strip her of her achievements. It is an attempt to reduce to her less than nothing. A thing you wouldn’t even want to fuck. Not even with someone else’s dick. Because thats all women are, a vessel for male sexual attraction right? (#notallmen) Calling a successful man ugly… meh, usually gets shrugged off as jealousy.
Its part of the sexist power structure that we live in called society. The first step to tearing it down is to recognize that it exists.
Q: Is this person’s appearance relevant to their job performance?
If the answer is “no” (which it is for all your examples), then insults are inappropriate. Restrict yourself to describing qualifications, behavior and performance.
If the answer is “yes” (it will almost never be yes), then insults are still inappropriate. Restrict yourself to describing qualifications, behavior, and performance.
I think it’s generally OK to turn the critique back on people who publicly shame others for their looks, but even then I try to limit myself to critiquing the aspects of their appearance that they actually have some control over.
For example, I have no problem critiquing Trump’s appearance because
He has spent countless hours publicly shaming other people (mostly women) for their looks
Holy crap he painted his skin that color and styled his hair that way on purpose?
Ok but… are they insults or factual observations?
Cuz the dude is fucking orange and has a bad toupee.
Comments about women are always about their fuckability, their attractiveness, aka: their worthiness.
Comments about Trump are about his unnatural orange hue.
Thats not an insult, its just true.
I find them juvenile and unhelpful to the issue. There’s plenty to criticize him about without dragging in his attractiveness.
There is room for nuance, as many cartoonists have successfully used satire related to his appearance. But appearance is not the same as attractiveness.
But honestly – HONESTLY NOW – would you be as hard over on criticizing Trump’s appearance if he was the complete opposite of what he apparently is… a vile, dishonest, lying, greedy, self-serving creep? Do you see the point I’m trying to make?
I’d rather not be included in that “always”, because I don’t think in the terms that you spelled out. For me, a women HAS to be intelligent and have a strong sense of humor; that other stuff you mentioned?.. doesn’t last.
I think of an exchange that David Letterman had with Rush Limbaugh back in the 90s. Limbaugh made some kind of sexist comment likening Hillary Clinton’s face to a Pontiac hood ornament. After a sidelong glance at the audience Letterman replied “…and you can say this because you are the greatest physical specimen on the planet.”
BAM. The audience erupted and Limbaugh was righteously humiliated. Not because it’s cool to fat-shame people, but because a bully got called out for shaming the appearance of a woman who was, by any reasonable standard, more attractive than the bully voicing the criticism. Letterman wasn’t calling him out for being ugly, he was calling him out for being a disgusting hypocrite.
