Where only the beautiful dare tread.....

I actually thought this was a joke at first. According to a piece on the Mail Online, and on their own website, the people who brought you 'beautiful dating' are now offering a service for employers and employees on the basis of looks! The Mail explores it from the angle of which countries are getting the most rejections. The UK apparently rates highly in terms of number of rejections.

So, I decided to check out the site. It is a microsite off of the main Beautiful People site that focuses on recruitment for members of Beautiful People. This presumably means you must be a member of the Beautiful People site before you can be considered for the listings/access to recruiters.

Now before anyone labels me a miserable unattractive spinster-esque figure who is only complaining because;

• they are not attractive enough to be on the site
• they have been rejected by the site

Let me assure you that I have never, and nor would I ever, apply/submit my details to something as shallow as this. And, I simply don't care whether anyone finds me attractive or not. I am sure I am some people's cup of tea/beverage of choice just as I am sure there are others that would not find me physically attractive. Now that we have got that out of the way, we can get to the serious issues!
1. This is not the way to encourage business, nor is it the way to get the best candidates. The tagline for the recruitment site is 'An attractive face is always a great first impression for any business', source: Beautiful People.com Recuitment. Now I don't know what readers think but I think that is rubbish! The best first impression for me is and has always been related to manners and professionalism. I don't judge people on their looks, nor do I think someone might be better at their job because of the way they look.
2. How patronising a message, if you consider what is being said. The best way to succeed in business and do well in life is to look good. What kind of message is that for young people, particularly at a time of high unemployment? It amounts to little more than suggesting education, experience and competence mean nothing when competing with a 'looker'.
3. Whatever happened to beauty is in the eye of the beholder? This has the potential to open up complaints of discrimination on many different levels. I appreciate the note on the Beautiful People dating site, that can be found at the bottom of the page in section titled How beautifulpeople.com works that states they are not defining the notion of beauty. They are merely representing what society thinks is beautiful through the voting system. However, only those who are members can vote, and presumably those who are members think they are beautiful (or why else would they be there?!) and have a definition of beauty that probably looks similar to them. Therefore could it be reasoned that people who do not conform to this identikit version of accepted beauty are less likely to be accepted by the current members? It is interesting when you consider it like that rather than seeing it as a democratic vote-in.
4. Professionalism? I also think that I would not want to do business with a company if I knew this was how they recruited their staff. I really hope this site is a spoof or a short lived venture.
5. Body image: this is such a negative and shallow focus. The idea of the body beautiful and that there is one definition of body beautiful is such a bizarre notion. Sadly it is one that seems to be accepted by many. Take our clothes for example; always modelled on tall, thin and often angular women. Anyone who dares be slightly larger is termed a plus-sized model and seen perhaps as niche rather than the norm.
6. The sad trend: this idea of body beautiful as being all important in the workplace is disgusting. There was a piece several years ago that suggested that employers did not want to employ overweight people because they would be lazy. This was covered by the Mail online and was discussing the result of a poll of 200 bosses. This is a disgraceful attitude to take and shows once again that sadly people in society seem to place important on looks over competence.

It is about time we started to challenge that and fight back. Body image is not a tool or means to judge people, there are no excepted rules about beauty and physical image should not be the most important aspect about someone.

The rise of the 'Sugar Daddy'

I was vaguely aware of the notion (and seemingly rising phenomenon) of a sugar daddy. My understanding of a sugar daddy was a wealthy, older man who wanted to provide for a younger woman in return for companionship and possibly in some cases a sexual relationship. The website (that has irritated me this morning) Sugar Daddy describes it in a much more crude and blunt way. They suggest the following

"a sugardaddy is a man who engages in a relationship with a younger woman, where he is seen to be taking on economic benefits in return for the physical benefits a younger woman can provide"

This is such a shallow basis for any relationship and it saddens me to think that there are women out there who feel their only worth is their body or their looks. The website reasons that why would a woman want to work for her life when she can be spoiled by a man. Well there are several reasons why a woman might want to work/be financially independent and not relying on a 'sugar daddy'

• Financial independence is hugely important: it enables a woman to leave a relationship without feeling bound or trapped to the partner
• Financial independence also gives a woman equality within the relationship
• Engaging in a relationship such as this 'sugar daddy'-type relies on your looks being deemed attractive enough, as you age will you be replaced by the next younger model?
• Relying on a sugar daddy means appeasing them in return for money, this does not have to be sexual.

The next charming little section that I would like to consider is the 'How to find a Sugar Daddy' advice section. As you can perhaps expect the advice is often shallow. Although before going into that, there is one little snippet that I would like to focus on first. The last piece of advice relates to setting boundaries. I found this section worrying and questioned the possibility of some women ending up in situations beyond that which they would want. The section advises women that the men may be looking for sex, friendship or something totally different. They reason that there are lots of men looking to spoil beautiful women so you do not need to put up with anything uncomfortable. However, by the time a woman finds herself in an uncomfortable situation (potential here for any context/situation) it could be too late to back out easily.

Most of the advice takes the more obvious form of, if you want a rich man you have to look pretty like a Christmas bauble, there merely for decoration and enjoyment. Apparently to bag a man you need to look the part, this does not mean (they say) being as skinny as Kate Moss but you should spend time on your looks. They suggest a great perfume as men like this sort of thing. (I've always worn perfume because *I* like the smell of it). They argue that your clothing, hair, make-up and nails should be perfect, as you want to stand out *and* allegedly this will boost your confidence. I would reason that rather than boosting your confidence, a focus on having to look a certain way to please a man and working hard to maintain this look, will in fact leave many women self-conscious and unhappy. The brilliant Body Image Project encourages people to submit their stories about body image problems/stresses or upset that they have suffered. This project shows the impact that this notion of having to be perfect can have on self-esteem and body-confidence. I don't think encouraging women to look a certain way to attract a man helps this.

The next area of advice is about keeping this man once he has been attracted to you. Women are told to give him attention, listen to him, give him intellectual conversation, the site does mention some men may want sex, so that he wants to keep you around. There is no mention of any mutual respect for the woman, she seems to be expected to fawn over him, simply because he is wealthy. I appreciate I do seem to have missed one of the key 'selling-points' of the site in not getting this. Finally, the women are advised to spend time with their man on his terms. They suggest that he should be the sole focus for the women when out.

I really dislike these sites and this whole idea of sugar daddies because there is far too much focus on women having to conform to a fixed idea of beauty, total focus on only one partner in the relationship and the advice suggests an unequal relationship by solely focusing on his needs. I am sure people will criticise me and argue that these women are free to choose to be part of this. What I don't like is the fact that as a society we think it is ok, in the 21st century, to promote this type of relationship. The woman is not an equal in this, even if she believes that her beauty/body controls or enthrals the man, at the end of the day he controls the wallet and that gives power.

Women as portrayed by TV

This is just a briefish post (I promise!) because I want to add a couple of longer posts that focus on specific TV shows in the near future. I find myself watching a lot of random TV shows on DVD and on the iplayer etc (none of them live I might add!). Increasingly I have noticed some frustrating cliches and stereotypes that are not only boring and tired but offensive.

I'd like to start with a show that I had enjoyed as a child: Jonathan Creek. As a child I remember watching it and enjoying the puzzle solving, always a small competition between me and my dad as to who could solve it first (frustratingly for him I normally won!). Re-watching it as an adult I was disappointed to see the often sexist bit-part portrayal of so many of the female characters. Take the first episode for example: The Wrestler's Tomb, not wishing to spoil it for anyone it starts with an artist who has made his living painting nudes. Now there is nothing wrong with painting the female form, however, the comment was made that he was then sleeping with or had slept with a large number of his models. The women are characterised as falling madly for him and being almost in awe. It is assumed that the wife must have killed him out of jealousy, this is focused upon for a considerable part of the episode.

However, this is one episode and is perhaps not the worst of the show. One of the main recurring characters, Adam Klaus, the TV magician. He seems to permanently have scantily-clad women draped over his performances or he is portrayed as lusting after women. The women he lusts after seem to be portrayed as mere objects, in one episode he is pursuing a porn-star and is disappointed when her implant 'bursts', complaining that he has been cheated. Now I know that this is only *fiction*, but it is the fact that the writers felt this was an acceptable way to portray women and that it was necessary for the plot and episode. When actually the show would be fine with simply solving mysteries, murders and the rest. The fact that it seems almost automatic to have the female characters as 'entertainment' or the side-kick is frustrating.

Then there is the sheer number of shows devoted to beauty and conforming to an ideal. One particularly annoying example is 'Snog, Marry, Avoid?' in which women (and occasionally men) are rated by the public based solely upon their looks, they are then given a make-under. There are several flaws with this concept:

• Beauty in a person is something that can be judged, measured and rated
• Beauty is merely your appearance
• To be truly happy you should want to be desired by others, including people who you don't even know
• You should want to be married

Again, perhaps I am missing the point or being too *serious* here, but shows like this annoy me. They annoy me because they ask members of the public to judge someone based simply upon their looks; no consideration of achievements or personality and then they tell the individual that they need to change in order to be liked and desired. That is the first thing that annoys me about shows like this. The second is that there seems to be this goal of marriage presented for these entrants. You, yes you, want to be desired and married to someone who does not know you and is judging you solely on a photo shown by a TV crew with an agenda.
I also think it is dangerous for younger viewers to have this type of imagery and ideal presented as entertainment. An interesting piece by the National Association of Social Workers, based in Washington, looks at the role of body image for adolescent girls; considering the role of culture and media upon their self-image and esteem. So whilst these TV shows might be marketed as light entertainment they should be viewed as part of the cultural landscape that these young people are growing up in and trying to navigate.

I was going to look at The Apprentice and the contrasting way that women and men in business are often seen, described and portrayed. However, that is an entire blog post in itself. So I will finish with one more irritating example of casual sexism in TV fiction: Bad Education: Episode 4 School Trip: the bus driver amongst other misogynist little 'gems' reasons that he will never use sat-nav as he will not be told what to do by a woman. Again, I realise that this is *fiction* but it has been included for an attempt at comedy. It perpetuates the view that women are bossy and always moaning at these put upon men. Somewhere a writer decided that this an amusing little line for another show aimed at young people (BBC), it feeds into the society that sees women as a source of humour rather than part of the humour.

I appreciate that people might find this a little ranty or moany but I can't see a reason why TV can't be well written, respectful and still funny! We don't need to make cheap gags at the expense of a section of society. When adolescents grow up seeing women (in particular) as objects to assess based upon their beauty and as a source of amusement then is it any wonder that we still have street harassment and inequality? When our TV better reflects the world we should live in perhaps this will change.

Beauty Pageants and the young mind

Interesting piece today about a new beauty pageant coming to the UK. Called Miss Mini Princess UK. The site can be found here, as to be expected pink and super sparkly all the way.

What is perhaps more frustrating is the nature of this competition. Rounds that focus on clothing and appearance with just 90 seconds, yes 90 seconds, given to talent. A ratio of 3:1 in terms of appearance to skill. Press reports, as linked on the @NrthntsFeminist twitter page show that parents talk of it boosting confidence. But as a feminist I find it odd that you would believe that by having to parade and perform and be judged on your appearance, and your appearance conforming to a socially accepted norm of 'beauty', would boost a child's confidence. If you don't win your age group would you be forever wondering how you could look better or whether you should have worn a different outfit? Where then do you go next for the next pageant? Does it begin a cycle of possible body loathing or negative self-image? Do you feel the need to spend more on clothes, make-up, treatments etc?

If you don't win a tennis match or an art competition you know that you can brush up (no pun intended!) on your skills or work on your talent. There is something to practice and perfect. But if we are entering a competition based solely on our looks then what at the end are we left to work on? As a 'loser' are we left feeling we need to change something? As a 'winner' are we left with the knowledge that this is perfect and we must work to maintain this? Either way it doesn't sound like a fun mindset to be getting in to.

Will post in further depth about this topic later with greater research, just some musings while I remember them!