The media has been in an uproar. “This sets the movement back 50 years,” women all over the internet are screaming at the recent actions of two blonde bombshells. These women online claim that Sabrina Carpenter and Sydney Sweeney have completely missed the mark and are deteriorating the path that feminists have been paving for decades. I, however, disagree. This conversation is first and foremost about feminism and empowerment. Hence, I think those who have missed the mark are those who think that women shouldn’t be able to do what they want with their bodies.
Sydney Sweeney has been labelled a sex icon after starring in “Euphoria”. AS she just so happens to fall into the strict guidelines that society places on women to fit modern beauty standards. And good for her! After becoming popular, the starlet has managed to procure herself numerous brand deals, the most controversial being her recent deal with Dr. Squatch, a soap and personal hygiene brand advertised to a mainly male audience. The brand and Sweeney have collaborated before, and their most recent collaboration stars a limited edition “bath water bar”, a bar of soap advertised to include water that Sweeney has bathed in. The controversy arose as women online “called out” Sweeney, saying she was selling herself out, causing harm to the image of feminism, “setting us back”, and allowing herself to be objectified by appealing to the male gaze and her male audience.
More recently Sabrina Carpenter, a popular actress and singer among Gen-Z, who much like Sweeney is young, blonde, curvy and therefore conventionally attractive, has teased her newest album “Man’s Best Friend” after releasing a new single “Manchild”. The cover art for this new album has also struck outrage among women online. It includes an image of Sabrina on her hands and knees being pulled by her hair by a man whose upper body and face are out of frame. The women criticizing this image state that it is derogatory and glamourizing abuse. Sabrina has also been accused of objectifying herself to appeal to men on more occasions than just this one. This fosters tension among women online who, understandably, want to see the end of women being objectified and oppressed.
This all boils down to a fight between choice feminism and stricter forms of feminism. I’ll try not to overgeneralize, as there exists nuance in everyone’s interpretation of feminism, and most forms of feminism are valid and well-intentioned. Choice feminism expresses the value of all women being afforded the opportunity to experience life in any way of their choosing as a form of liberation from the patriarchy. Stricter forms of feminism more closely align with radical feminism and hold views that women should adamantly oppose societal constructs and “stick it to the man” to be liberated as the only way to effectively deconstruct a patriarchal society. There are arguments for and against both, and I have no authority to determine which is better or more effective, but for the sake of argument, I align more with choice feminism as the pros outweigh the cons in my opinion.
My take on the online controversies brought up by Carpenter and Sweeney has been echoed by some creators online. Ultimately, my belief is that these starlets should be granted the right to do whatever they’d like with their art and their bodies. The message of feminism is liberty for women and liberty from the shackles of societal pressures and gender norms. Sydney and Sabrina are, in my opinion, taking advantage of the system we live in to profit off of being sexualized, given that it will be done to them anyway due to the state of the society we exist in, and in a way this is a sign of freedom and liberation, as they are afforded the opportunity to choose what it is they’d like to do.
Sweeney has said before that she knows she’s seen as a sex object and that, whether she likes it or not, she will be drooled over by desperate men. She’s struggled with coming to terms with this in the past, and according to her it’s harmed her self-image. Sweeney has come to the realization that if she can’t prevent it, she can take ownership of it and control her image by playing into it. This is a coping mechanism for Sweeney, much like it is for many other women who experience being objectified. Additionally, Carpenter has been very out in the open about her sexuality and being “freaky on main” with her playful “Nonsense” outros and her “Juno” positions on stage. Her recent works have also played into mid-century themes and fashion styles, seen as an inspiration in her cover art that is a recreation of a magazine clipping from the era. And in my opinion, she is making commentary on the treatment of women rather than romanticizing being taken advantage of as it highlights being embarrassed by men. Much like in her most recent song, “Manchild”, she plays into her very poor taste in men, that being embarrassing for her, and comments on how men need women to survive. Carpenter eagerly displays her disdain for men juxtaposed with her attraction to them in her music videos, where male characters are consistently “offed” (for lack of better words). This, to me, shows that she does not take interest in being treated poorly by men, but rather understands where society has placed her due to her looks and gender. She then chooses to capitalize on the circumstances, which I am all for and in support of, since without drastic societal change women are still stuck.
This also fails to bring up the point that kink plays a factor in this whole discussion, if a woman wants to display how “freaky” she is or if she likes her hair pulled, so be it. Although whether or not either of the women are interested in forms of kink that play into being objectified is moot. Their representation of their own sexuality, even on the public stage, should not be a point of contention among people discussing the subversiveness of their creative choices. This isn’t to say that commentary on the actions of public figures should be avoided. Rather, if we are to comment on their actions it’s far more effective to not take everything on surface level and to actually do some digging.
Upon reviewing this article, and in the time it took between starting to write it and the current date, Sabrina has released an alternate album cover for “Man’s best friend”. This new album cover is a recreation of an iconic photo of Marilyn Monroe with her then husband, Arthur Miller. The new version of the album cover is a clap back to the commentary she received from the original cover art. The new image includes details, such as a colour story that makes her the highlight of her art and not men. Along with her face being the only one facing the camera, compared to Marilyn’s version where Arthur’s face can also be seen. The comparisons to Monroe are not something new to Carpenter, whether it be their looks or their outwardly ditsy personality with levels of intelligence that are not to be underestimated, the women are very similar. In her time, Monroe was very heavily criticized for her display of her sexuality, and unfortunately not much has changed since then.
This is why I claim that choice feminism is useful. If we are to attack and police other women for expressing themselves, even if we don’t agree with the actions or find them to agree with the system, we don’t make strides forward. We need to acknowledge that the structures of the patriarchy currently exist and confine us and then engage in our actions while being mindful of the state of society. Choice feminism can at times be misrepresented as just women doing what they want. But choice feminism has a goal and that is to get to a place in society where everyone is able to make the personal choice to do what they want with their bodies, lifestyles, art and so on. Reaching a point where women can express themselves freely, thus, no constraints on their actions placed by the society we exist in. Choice feminism doesn’t claim we’re there yet, it claims that we need to start yesterday in order to get there. In that journey there will be those who face criticism by those who don’t see it, and no one can help that. But those who care about women’s liberation should take the minute it takes to think about it. Is it more oppressive to have a personal want to be submissive to a man, or to partake in telling women how the choices they’ve made are harming society?
The moral of my story is that choosing to appeal to the male gaze should not be condemned; the liberation of women’s bodies should include the ability to display and represent yourself in whatever way makes you comfortable without backlash from men and women alike. Choice feminism empowers women to take charge of their image, ideally regardless of their current place in the social hierarchy. Women have and will profit from the wants and needs of men if the opportunity arises because of the systemic lack of opportunity we experience elsewhere. It is my opinion that taking advantage of a system that oppresses you is courageous, valid, and should be done more often. I, myself, have taken advantage of being considered conventionally attractive to make money. If men are desperate and society isn’t changing fast enough, giving women the choice to do as they want with their bodies is the only way to not continue to oppress women. If feminists want to liberate women from the constraints of societal expectations and policing of women’s bodies, they should then in turn not police women’s bodies. Appreciating the female form when it is consensual and being curated by women is not objectification; it is art and should be seen as such.