Market forces, modern imperialism and notions of beauty derived from the academic field of aesthetics for the past three centuries are shaping global constructions of gendered beauty norms. Feminist scholars and activists have analyzed beauty standards as oppressive, as limiting freedom, and conducive to an unhealthy rapport with one’s body. They have also showed that the discussion about beauty, and especially feminine beauty, requires a corresponding “rhetoric about feminine ugliness”(1), a feature which only reaffirms institutionalized or hegemonic aesthetics. Historians have shown how the philosophical discourse of aesthetic judgment – preoccupied with beauty, taste and what is beautiful in art – was influenced by Enlightenment notions of racial difference and hierarchy(2)

Beauty was not a central discussion issue in postwar European and American feminist thought(3). This changed in the 1990s, as evidenced by the “Beauty Myth” (1991) a bestseller by liberal, “third wave”, feminist journalist Naomi Wolf. The book argued that – what she terms – the “beauty myth” is partly responsible for women’s inability to achieve equality with men(4). Other commentators have claimed that representations created by the ever-expanding beauty industry, the media, and even institutions, do create hegemonic beauty standards which dominate and oppress. On the one hand, feminist thinkers and activists connecting “the personal to the political” pointed out that feminine beauty standards are often profoundly internalized. On the other hand, some recent analyses have tackled the concept of agency as exercised through previously criticized beauty rituals, suggesting that women participate with their bodies in the social construction of beauty in a way that can turn their bodies into sources of empowerment(5).

Internalized beauty standards are involved in the construction of body images and are based on heteronormative gender ideals (see heteronormativity). They offer narrow images of masculinity and femininity, with the latter constructed around notions of heterosexual male desire. Sexism and oppression created a need for women to control and discipline their own bodies (through diets, hair taming, body hair removal, etc). Some of the consequences of conforming to these standards are the cost of cosmetic maintenance, the risks to physical and mental health, the links to consumerism and perpetuation of a system rooted in inequalities and discriminations such as ageism, classism and racism. The “beauty myth” functions as a type of social pressure meant to keep women and non-normative bodies subordinate, since models of feminine beauty take time and energy that could be devoted to other forms of self-development(6).

Much of the feminist theorizing of “beauty” and “aesthetic standards” has had an implicit white, middle class bias(7). Questions of race, (dis)ability, fatness, and sexuality further complicate this discussion. Considering a modern history where being black was associated by dominant groups with being ugly, Anne Cheng summarizes the political dilemma: “between a feminist critique of feminine beauty and a racial denial of nonwhite beauty, where does this leave the woman of color? It is unclear whether assenting to the prospect of a ‘beautiful woman of color’ would be disruptive of racist discourse or complicit with gender stereotypes”(9). In addition, some gender queer (see LGBT) activists have disrupted beauty norms by addressing the way in which the global cosmetic industry constructs gender through beauty products addressed to either women or men – by for instance, pairing images of flawless feminine makeup with neatly-trimmed facial hair(10) (see Gender).

Beauty standards change throughout history, cultures, consumption patterns, and personal attitudes. The currently globally dominant standard has been constructed since the 19th century around ideals of European whiteness: tall, young, fair skin, able bodied, and possessing long silky hair are considered superior bodily features. The exportation of this beauty ideal – through colonialism, cultural imperialism, and the global market – touches Lebanon too: fairness, thinness, ultra-feminine features, make-up and disciplined body hair are unspoken rules for the appropriate (classed) performance of femininity(11).

In certain contexts, feminist activists have opposed diets arguing they are manifestations of patriarchy directed towards taming women’s bodies – for instance through the “riots, not diets!” activism campaign(12). They also rejected plastic surgery or other aesthetic modifications of natural bodies. In addition, new expressions of feminism have re-emerged recently that embrace symbols of femininity, fight against misogyny, and explore the cultural messages of make-up(13) and other potentially liberating aspects of beauty symbols. Lastly, the performance of normative beauty standards by bodies considered fat and/or non-normative can also have a subversive effect that directly challenges binary and oppressive standards of beauty(14)..