In Naomi Wolfís ìThe Beauty Mythî she describes a psychological and political debasement of women based on the societyís concept of beauty. But is this accurate? Are women as helpless victims as she depicts them and is the concept of beauty unique to the post feminist era?
   Wolf explains that the affluent and educated women of the first world are plagued by a near obsessive concern with beauty but this is the result of society trying to limit their freedom rather than a problem of their own neuroses. This begs the question, why is it the affluent that are concerned with this?What about women from poorer, less educated backgrounds? After all, if something is being dictated by society why does the ability to actually purchase beautifying products determine the extent to  who is affected by it? Oppression, social expectations and concepts of attractive things donít know luxury. And something that is truly the fault of a culture affects our subconscious on a very visceral level. Why then does Wolf make the correlation between the well to do and this obsession? And where are we to sympathize, when she speaks of wealthy women who are torn apart about the fact that they donít fit a size six, especially when even in first world countries, there is a disturbingly high number of  women who worry themselves senseless over how to feed their own children?
   Wolf says, in The Beauty Myth ìThe More  legal and material hindrances women have broken through, the more strictly  and heavily cruel images of female beauty have come to weigh heavily upon us.î  what are these cruel images of which she speaks? Is it the image of the slender woman? The expensive clothes and hairstyles on the American Express commercials? The constantly changing hairstyles of fashion magazines? Are these even images of beauty, in the way that beauty has always been sought to be captured by artists, or is she just confusing it with fad? Follow the fashion magazines: one year a waif like body is all the rage and the next, itís curvy and bodacious. But these are mere fads. Can we really be told it is our responsibility to sympathize with the complexes of certain insecure individuals for not keeping up with these? I have no more sympathy for a woman who revolves her life around these than for someone in credit card debt because they have to have the latest, most expensive clothing styles or the tech wanna be who foolishly buys every piece of technical equipment regardless of real need or practicality because the Gateway 2000 commercial tells them to. Slavery to a fad is the jurisdiction of adolescents. Adult women, especially those who have had a wealth of opportunities and advantages in society, should not pretend itís anything more than that.
   Wolf saysî During the past decade, women breached the power structure; meanwhile, eating disorders rose exponentiallyî. However, eating disorders are called ìdisordersî for a reason. They are not a normal product of society, nor is there any logical argument to say that they are the result of some intentional attempt to keep women down. Anorexia and bulimia are  psychological  disorders, hence why it is listed in the DSM4, which is the standard guidebook for psychological disorders. Furthermore it is far from a womanís disease. Almost four out of every five deaths from anorexia nervosa are people over the age of forty five. If, as Wolf argues, the beauty myth is designed to make women feel they must duplicate the image of the model, wouldnít this be more prevalent among women model aged? For that matter, 25 % of the victims are male. This calls to question whether this beauty myth for women is really a cause of eating disorders at all or if thereís actually a much deeper psychological cause.
     Wolf picks a conveniently abstract point for her argument. How society makes us feel
But her weakness comes in how she relates it and her argument that this is an intentional way for men to impair the feminist movement. She actually saysîMore women have more money and power and scope than legal recognition than we have ever had before; but in terms of how we feel about ourselves physically, we may actually be worse off than our unliberated grandmothers.î  This is a comment that belies the luxury of Wolfís existence. She has never had to worry about money, or she wouldnít be so quick to shrug off the value of womenís financial independence and all the doors open to her in the career world. She also has most likely never been in an abusive relationship, or she would not be so quick to shrug off such changes such as womensí ability to file for divorce. There have been a whole wealth of advances that  Wolfís grandmother did not have yet she so flippantly dismisses them because of what can only be vanity.
   While one can say that the image of women in the mass media makes them feel a pressure to strive for that, they cannot realistically depict it(as Wolf does) as an overt form of oppression.  The problem with this, is what about the women who really aren't bothered by this? It operates on a premise that it is too subtle and insidious to be backed up with facts.
If you happen to be female and donít particularly feel that you have to look like the cast of Melrose Place, or if you happen to look that way out of choice, you are simply unaware of the ìtruthî of this oppression. But arenít these simply cult tactics? Demonizing one group(men) while sainting another(women), claiming an absolute truth that is far too subtle to be proven?
  Wolf , in trying to relate ideas of beauty to an attempt to limit the feminist movement, makes a very large assumption. She assumes that women and women only are the victims of image and gender roles. However, is it really so black and white? Recently, Fox ran a program calledî Who Wants to Marry a Billionaire?î, where young women lined up to be chosen by a man they would not even lay eyes on until after the competition. This was a new low for society. However, as much pressure as there was on these young women to fulfill  some idea of perfection they were equally guilty. After all, they blatantly did not care who this man was. All they cared about was that he was a rich old guy that they would most likely outlive. Do you think this has no psychological effect on men? Do you think there is no impact on men that they cannot profess a greater interest in drama than football without severe mockery and perhaps even physical assaults on the part of their peers? Can anyone truly be said to win in this situation? Women are judged by their physical appearance. This is true. Men are judged by their machismo, their aggressiveness and their annual salary. What woman if given a choice between a man who has a respectable job and takes her to swank restaurants and a man who is unemployed or underemployed and lives off of Budweiser and Beef jerky would choose the latter?  The real problem is that society as a whole has grown more superficial and materialistic. Wolf wrote her essay in the early 90s. This was written at the start of the technological revolution . Society was becoming more concerned with making as much money as possible and this has only increased over time. Could the answer be as simple as mere capitalism? Expensive makeup and plastic surgery and fancy diets became more widely promoted not as a reaction to women gaining power but because families were becoming smaller and the annual income higher and people simply had more money to burn?
   Letís allow Wolf in her point that women are constrained by ideals of femininity. there is only so much you can blame on society and the media. Doesnít the ultimate responsibility lie in your ability to have faith in yourself in spite of opposition? Does the mere fact that thereís a generalized expectation to do these things rest entirely on societyís shoulders or is there some individual responsibility to believe in oneself? Where does she provide proof that this is not just a rich womanís neuroses? That itís not simply the jurisdiction of women who have too much time on their hands? That it isn't just a convenient excuse to not grow up?
   Wolf saysîThis isnít a conspiracy theory. It doesnít have to be.î  Isnít it? She says that thereís a group of people attempting to keep down or oppress another group of people. But there is no actual proof that connects the situation with the specific source.  What is a conspiracy theory but a list of allegations that canít be defended? And what is a conspiracy but various people who are plotting against a specific individual or group? No, Iím afraid this is very much a conspiracy theory no different than theories about government proof of space aliens or who was behind the Kennedy assassination.
   Wolf goes on to bemoan the way feminists are perceived.îThe caricature of the Ugly Feminist was resurrected to dog the steps of the womenís movement.î If that is true then, she is at the heart of such splintering and repression. By blaming society for womenís standard of beauty she automatically alienates those who might prefer to look that way. By contrasting between how ìnormalî women look and how women who just might happen to fit a certain image of attractiveness look, she automatically alienates a big fraction of the population: women who actually enjoy buying makeup, not because they feel they have to but because they simply like it, or women who look in the manner she says is ìoppressiveî or women who simply really could care less about whoís on the cover of Vogue and donít feel particularly held back by it. Why are there so few women embracing the feminist movement? Could it be that sheís right and the heavy pressure of physical beauty has driven women to such an intense neurosis that they can only think about looking pretty and perfect? Or could it simply be that women today really canít relate to her arguments?
   Wolf closes the essay by sayingîa generation ago, women turned their backs on the consumer heaven of the isolated multi-applianced home;but where women are trapped today there is no door to slamî No door to slam? What about opening the door of individual thought, where simply because one feels pressure to look a certain way they donít succumb to it, hook line and sinker? That maybe we women are not all helpless to how the magazines and television and New York models appear? That just because it isnít easy to question values doesnít make it impossible? That every group of people who have questioned the status quo must first stand up by example, and gone more on their convictions  than the mores of the time?
   Wolfís arguments are flimsy at best. Much of her defense is simple rhetoric with little ability to state in a manner that convinces anyone other than those who already agree with her.

 pontifications