No Mr Sunderland Then? Oh.

It seems that beauty pageants are back. Until relatively recently, they appeared to me to be consigned to the history books: a quaint and ludicrous reminder of a time when being pretty and coming across as a sweet, nice person were considered the most important attributes a woman could possess and the display of such qualities was even showcased in a ritual that resembled a kind of spectator sport. Indeed, I remember there being a very low response to the yearly call-out for Carnival Queen in the town I lived in the mid-nineties, with most girls scoffing with disdain at the idea of partaking in something so old-fashioned. Clamouring to be crowned the prettiest girl in town? Not cool.

It seemed so over to me that it was almost charmingly retro and camp.

That feeling continued and was partly why -even relatively recently- I took the view that there was no problem with “Miss World” style competitions popping up every once in a while. I figured if some people want to use their looks (and obviously what can be considered attractive is subjective anyway), that’s okay.

In principle, I still think that. Or, rather, I would in an ideal world. The trouble is that not only are we living in a time where looks are arguably oppressively important for everyone (just look at how conventionally attractive children’s TV presenters are at the moment) but we still don’t have an equal playing field in terms of turn-taking when it comes to which gender is framed, and thereby facillitated, as generally doing the looking and which one gets to be objectified. That’s why I was pleased to recently get an opportunity to take part in a BBC Radio Newcastle discussion (scroll to an hour and 53 minutes into the programme) with the organiser and co-host of Miss Sunderland, Simon Robertson.

I still maintain that a little bit of objectification (provided the definition allows some level of mutability) isn’t harmful and that, just as we women absolutely need to pull away from being swallowed up by it, men will benefit from being genuinely cherished in such a way more regularly. However, it seems that current fashion is intent on keeping the sexes in their places and, unfortunately, I think that’s why we’re seeing a resurgence of beauty contests. As Catherine recently indicated, even women who are successful and in the public eye for something that has nothing to do with their looks are under pressure to be seen as sexy but men are generally more likely to be shown looking rough and thereby allowed to just let their specialisms shine through. Overall, our culture is saturated with messages that being pretty is still top of the list of important attributes for a woman. Sadly, it seems to be the case that we are “sleazed over while we are young and pretty”, “ignored if we are old or unattractive” and “told we are ugly and jealous when we question this.”

As far as I can tell from a quick look around on the web, it isn’t as if the equivalent contests for men are doing anything to challenge gender stereotypes. We’ve got “Mr Gay UK” (good in some ways but not exactly framed to obviously include female spectators as well as male ones). “Mr Universe” appears to, as ever, be focussed on bodybuilding. “Mr World” is described as “a three week festival of physical endurance and dynamic entertainment” and “a competition of strength, stamina, camaraderie and personal style.” Mr World contestants are “leaders”, “men of dignity”, “caring and conscientious” and “ambassadors of good will”. The words “beauty pageant” are not mentioned. Meanwhile, the rules for “Miss world” contestants are that they must be childless, unmarried and no older than 24. The current Mr World is 26.

And yet, despite this, there still seems to be an impression, for some, that all is equal. As Alfie Joey, one of the presenters of the show on BBC Radio Newcastle, asked in his closing comment on the feature: “are you a feminist who feels affronted or, girls, do you like a good ogle?” I realise this was probably just a light throwaway remark to get people texting in and I guess he could have been asking the question in the given context (i.e do we like looking at pretty women?) but something about that comment jarred a little for me. Was Alfie fleetingly referring to an increasing (but overdue and still inadequate) general acceptance that women can be visually stimulated too and are not just completely passive? If so, I couldn’t help wondering if he was, in turn, using this as some kind of excuse for continuing to uphold a culture that usually frames women as the ones being looked at; a gentle “don’t be hypocrites now, girls!”

Excuse me but did I miss something? Maybe an array of lovely men in a beauty pageant in a town near me, donning charming outfits for the audience’s pleasure and delight?

Your Comments

Jennifer Drew said:

Equality? What equality. When we have male beauty pageants wherein men are paraded in tight skimpy panties all avidly declaring they are 'nurturing, caring and only want to do good,' then I will believe equality has arrrived. Now before anyone claims 'you hate beautiful women' - since when is it 'empowering' to reduce all women to a narrow male-centered definition, wherein a narrow definition of beauty supposedly supercedes intelligence and diversity. Beauty does not last because we all age but men not women are allowed to age and men not women are portrayed as diverse individuals wherein intelligence and diversity are far more important than whether or not a middle-aged man is overweight. The fact is increasing numbers of women and girls are monitoring their appearance and bodies because of the internalised 'male gaze.' Propaganda is very subtle but very effective because if we are constantly shown a computer enhanced image of what women are supposed to look like then eventually this will be internalised by many women and girls.

As it is the rise of female beauty pageants is on a continuum with the backlash against women achieving a tiny amount of rights. Time and again whenever women gain a smidgen of their rights there is a huge backlash and it is all about putting women firmly back in their place - as inferiors to men.

Claims beauty pageants are empowering to women etc etc. are false promises but when it is constantly promoted and any meaningful critiques are either silenced or else the writer/speaker is subjected to misogynistic claims they are women-haters or else sexually insulted, then it is not surprising so many women and girls accept these misogynistic beliefs concerning the female body.

Mr. Universe too, reinforces the narrow masculine definition wherein supposedly to be a man means having over developed muscles, shows physical endurance and of course demonstrates that over-used word 'courage.' As if all men are a one-size fits all - but this is what the backlash is about - claiming women and men are from different planets with women's and girls' sole role to provide 'eye candy' for men and boys.

I wonder when Alfie Joey is going to enter a male beauty pageant so that we women can rightly engage in visually 'eyeing the men.' But commonly viewing men as 'sexualised objects' is forbidden - because men unlike women are not turned into dehumanised sexualised objects. Men, unlike women retain their agency and subjectivity. Take a look at how male models in mainstream advertising are posed. They do not engage in sexually submissive poses, neither do they have the sexually submissive pout. Women however are constantly represented as sexually submissive and of course 'sexually available to men.'

Neither must we forget that capitalism is now the bedfellow of patriarchy and what better way of making huge profits than by having beauty pageants all with the tag-line 'because you're worth it' or claims 'it is empowering to women.'

Not forgetting too how popular science is constantly used to reinforce the claim 'biology is destiny.' Women and girls love any colour as long as it is pink, plus apparently women's brains are totally different to men's brains. During the 19th century it was women's reproductive system which was used to claim 'women are feeble' now it is brains which are supposedly divided into either feminine or masculine. Same old story which is simply repackaged and sold as 'science.'

Posted on 28 May 2009 at 10:24 AM

Have your say

In order to keep this blog as a feminist and friendly space, comments will be subject to some rules. We do not seek to censor debate: the beauty of the internet is that anyone can set up their own blog or website to express their views.

  1. This blog is a safe and friendly space for feminists and feminist allies. Debate and critique are welcome where it is constructive and deepens analysis or understanding. Anti-feminist comments will not be approved. We get to decide what's anti-feminist.
  2. All comments must be approved by one of the bloggers. For this reason, there may be a delay before your comment appears.
  3. No sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, classist, ablist comments, comments which make personal attacks on any blogger or commenter, or comments that are otherwise deemed offensive by us will be posted.
  4. Trolls will be banned from commenting. We get to decide who is a troll.
  5. No anonymous comments - please feel free to use your real name or make one up, though.
  6. Be nice.

Please note that your email address will not be displayed on this website. All comments are checked, prior to being published on this site.

top ^

Latest Posts
Another round-up
Parental Leave and "Choice"
Report from the Yarl's Wood hunger strike
Important questions from Gita Sahgal
Same garbage, different continents
Pope Benedict XVI
Say NO to nuclear weapons
Asylum seeker mothers fight to be reunited with their children
Rape Victims Blamed Again
New review - Girldrive: Criss-Crossing America, Redefining Feminism
More posts
Latest Comments
Laura Woodhouse on Parental Leave and "Choice"
Joseph Wilson on Report from the Yarl's Wood hunger strike
Amy Clare on Parental Leave and "Choice"
I Chirawu on Report from the Yarl's Wood hunger strike
Amy Clare on Pope Benedict XVI
sianmarie on Another round-up
Troon on Parental Leave and "Choice"
Shea on Pope Benedict XVI
FeminaErecta on Same garbage, different continents
Claire on Parental Leave and "Choice"
More feminist bloggers
There are plenty of fantastic UK feminist bloggers around. For a fantastic introduction to feminist blogging, go to the Carnival of Feminists website, which showcases the finest feminist posts from around the blogsphere, including many from UK blogs.
How to contribute to The F-Word
Got something to say? Something to review? News to discuss? Well we want to hear from you! Click here for more info
Events
Check out our events listings for info on some of the fantastic feminist events going on up and down the country. Please get in touch to tell us about events we've not listed yet.
Small Print
All blog posts are the views of the individual post author, and not those of The F-Word.

Inside this section

Blog Home
Archives by Month
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
More Archives
Archives by Author
Abby O'Reilly
Anne Onne
Barbara Felix
Bill Savage
Carrie Dunn
Catherine Redfern
Grace Fletcher-Hackwood
Guest Blogger
Helen G
Holly Combe
Jess McCabe
Joanna Whitehead
Jolene Tan
Kate Smurthwaite
Kit Roskelly
Laura Woodhouse
Lola Adesioye
Louise Livesey
Lynne Miles
Milly Shaw
Philippa Willitts
Samara Ginsberg
Sokari Ekine
Sunny Hundal
Suzi FemAcadem
Syma Tariq
Yvonne Howard
zohra moosa
News prior to April 2005
XML feed Feeds
Latest Blog Posts
Latest Comments

Contact Us

This webpage lives at: http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2009/05/post_5