As feminism evolves and women break down societal constraints and archetypes meant to keep us contained, it’s time to dissolve one major compromise women in classrooms have to make: be pretty or be smart. Women are socialized to believe they have to pick between them. Would you rather be a Daphne or a Velma? Aphrodite or Athena?Â
Turns out, you can be both. Here’s how I know.
I was an ugly kid. There’s no sugarcoating it. I had really messed-up teeth, I hated washing my hair, and my grandma regularly dressed me in my older brother’s Spider-Man hand-me-down pajamas throughout elementary school. Despite not yet being 11 years old, I was well aware of the fact that I was not cute, but I was okay with it. Why? Because I told myself, “At least I’m smart.”
Massive cope.Â
I continued to cope throughout my formative years. Looking back, I’m embarrassed at how superficial I was. When I was old enough to dress myself for school, I went through an intense emo phase (that I’ll admit I’m still not out of), and prided myself on subverting stereotypical “girly” expectations. I pretended to hate Taylor Swift. I fixed my teeth, but still didn’t feel pretty, so I swung hard the “opposite” way. The world pretends that femininity and intellect cancel each other out, and I subscribed to that belief.
As I grew older, though, something shifted. Elle Woods graduated from Harvard Law, and Cady Heron was a Plastic Mathlete. And while this may be a very late realization, I started college and realized that there doesn’t have to be a trade-off. Every day, I am surrounded by girls who giggle and twirl their hair and talk political theory as they swipe their mascara. I also see girls who contribute cognitive, critical takes in class and then happily send you the link to the dress you said was pretty on them.
This shift isn’t just within me, either. A cursory scroll through TikTok will feature a girl with the most stunning eyeliner giving nuanced cultural breakdowns, or perhaps a girl with a glamorous blowout posting links to charities and relief funds. They reject the binary that forces women to justify their femininity in intellectual spaces, because here’s the truth: “bimbo” and “scholar” are two sides of the same defiance.
Feminism and femininity have always had a complicated relationship. Second-wave feminism in the 60s rejected symbols of womanhood that the patriarchy used to confine women. Beauty pageants were protested, and Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique, arguing that domestic life was degrading for women. Third-wave feminism in the 90s emphasized that women should have the choice to exist in the domestic or public sphere — failing to recognize that, first, many women don’t have that choice, and second, why should women have to choose at all?Â
Today’s feminism allows for intersectionality and nuance. But it still largely faces the same issues I had in elementary school and that feminism faced in its second and third waves. We still have trouble seeing women as multifaceted beings, capable of being feminine and having substance. Nara Smith was vilified for her “trad wife” aesthetic, and her career accomplishments were ignored. It’s painful how the obvious, purposeful irony of wearing couture while making sprinkles from scratch flew over our heads.Â
That’s why it’s such a victory to me to see girls on campus drawing molecular structures on rhinestone-covered iPads or taking economics notes with pink glitter pens. The future of feminism lies in how we show up, exist as women, and blend stuffy, patriarchal ideals of intellect with the frivolity of girliness.
A “bimbo” and a “scholar” Can do whatever they want, and that’s the smartest thing they can do.
Want to keep up with HCBU? Make sure to like us on Facebook, follow us on Instagram, check out our Pinterest board, watch us on TikTok, and read our latest Tweets!