How Not To Be Politically Correct About Beauty
I was two and a half years old when we moved to Japan. We didn’t stay there long, just for about six months, and I sure as hell don’t remember much of it. But I am told, in stories repeated time and time again that whenever we as much as just walked down the road, passers by would stop to stare at me. By the time we got back home, I would be armed with an armload of toys, generously bestowed upon me by those numerous passers by. Why? Because I had huge round large eyes (well, technically — has — since I still have them). This was a small town somewhere near Kyoto, called Numazu. And my typically large Indian were quite the anomaly that most people had rarely seen in their lives. This was a story that I enjoyed so many times when I was a kid. But the significance of it really struck me only much much later.
It was when I was writing my book (you can buy it here, by the way) that I noticed a pattern in older pageants. Eastern contestants (from East Asian countries, I mean), rarely won. Gloria Diaz in 1969 was the first to break that glass ceiling by winning the Miss Universe Crown. Great, I thought! And then I saw a photo of her. Sure, she looked Filipina. But she also looked equally Caucasian. But this was forty years ago, and so it is understandable, we could say. A lot has changed in the last forty years, we might say. Until we watch a little anime. Or a Korean soap opera.
How is it any different whether we refuse to accept our own reality or whether someone else does? Why is one acceptable and considered part of a culture while the other is seen as alienating? Are not both equally harmful to both an individual and a society? And let us not please blame mass media for this. Mass media is only a tool, a medium. It is us who consume it. We are equally responsible.
THE SIZE ARGUMENT
What is the ideal size of a female body? Actually, not just the female body. We subject the male body to this also. But perhaps not as much as the female body. Or perhaps we don’t talk about that as much. Either way, it does not fill our consciousness the way the female body does.
Now, I have nothing against the hourglass figure. The hourglass figure is what millenia of evolution has taught us to consider beautiful. Feels a bit sexist? Well, if it makes you feel any better, it is the same logic that goes for the male ‘V Shape’ of the torso. It’s purely about survival, and propagation of the race to the next generation at the very least. So, if you are a woman, the better your hip to waist ratio, the more toned your muscles along with the right amount of fat percentage, the more likely someone’s unconscious instincts are to find you attractive. If you are a man, the more lean muscle you have, the thinner your waist in contrast to your shoulders, the more body hair, the more likely someone’s unconscious instincts are to find you attractive. Fair? Perhaps not. But neither are disaster wrecking cyclones. Yet, they exist. That is simply how nature works. It is what it is. You or I might not care about it. But nature does. And so nature is going to condition us the way s/he wants. And like I mentioned earlier, it’s not personal. It’s just science. Nature loves health, survival and fertility so s/he’s going to reward it.
As a society, however, we don’t necessarily love the same things nature does. We don’t love health, survival and fertility the same way nature does. We don’t need to worry about being plagued by infertility. We have mechanisms in place for that. We don’t need to worry about not being agile enough to escape a man-eating tiger. The only time we are going to see a tiger is in the zoo, or on a safari, or even better, on TV. We don’t need to worry as much about our health either. We have miracle drugs that can increase our lifespan (on average) like no-one’s business. Have a headache? Pop an aspirin. A cold induced fever? A paracetamol will do the trick. A muscle twist? Paracetamol it is again. Instant cures. That is the world that we have made possible. And that is not necessarily an issue. Except that it takes us away from the problems that nature considers to be imperative and gives us other problems instead.
Problems of facing our inner demons. It is our egos we fight with, our insecurities, our little quirks, our self images. These are the things we face everyday. These are our demons. We run from them, the way we once ran from that sabre toothed tiger. And if anyone threatens to bring it up in front of our eyes again, we scream, we rant, we panic. And to avoid the pain of that panic, we build a common code. A code that binds us together by not uttering or bringing forth those things that pain us most.
The code we call Political Correctness.
Nothing wrong with that, right?
BUT WHAT ABOUT INCLUSIVITY?
It was two decades ago when a Sudanese Model Alek Wen was featured on the cover of Elle (November 1997). Quoting a story by the Nat Geo in February 2020, ‘Wek represented everything a traditional cover girl was not’. Ouch. But true. More than twenty years later, Halima Aden ‘broke barriers’ (National Geographic, February 2020), by appearing on the cover of British Vogue and Illustrated Sports Weekly 2019. Ouch again. But true. And no, I’m not referring to their appearance on the said covers when I say ‘Ouch’. I am referring to our reaction to the appearance with words such as ‘breaking barriers’. Because that makes you think. If Alek Wen, with her barrier breaking appearance on the cover of Elle did not break the barriers for Halima Aden, what barriers did Aden break? If the barriers need to be broken every time, what barriers are those that have already been broken?
Gut instinct, in fact, says that it is good. We need more Halima Adens, more Alek Wens, more Flaviana Matatas (Miss Tanzania 2007 who famously walked the ramps of Miss Universe devoid of hair, i.e. bald) in the beauty industry. It only leads to a more inclusive world, right?
Sure. But it is also equally true that these phenomena (for that is how they are described) are not the precursors to a world of inclusive beauty, but that they are symptoms of it. Or rather, since ‘symptom’ is a word with such a negative connotation to it, they are simply indicators of it. If the beauty industry, or the fashion industry had not made way for these women, they would not have reached the top. It is near impossible to make your way down a packed road where no one moves aside even the least for you. So for someone to become the next ‘revelation’ or ‘barrier breaking’ symbol of an entire industry, you must first have an industry that is mature and ready for the revelation. Otherwise, the revelation, will never find a voice.
So, with all due respect to the women who have actually swum against the tide to get where they are reached, it is unfair to acknowledge the role of an industry that ultimately, did make space for them, however grudgingly or not. And in a world whose culture is turning increasingly global, it will only get easier and easier for us to be more inclusive.
Beauty is only fruitful to oneself if it encourages accepting yourself as you are, after all, isn’t it? If you have dark skin, so be it. If you have vitiligo, so be it. If you wear the hijab, so be it. If you wear a bikini, so be it. Isn’t that the ideal of beauty we are trying to create in today’s world? Is that not why we find so many K-beauty standards cringeworthy? Is that not why we filed a lawsuit against Fair and Lovely and made them change the brand name that had become synonymous with beauty products not just in the Indian subcontinent but also in the Middle East and so much of Asia? Is that not why we clap our hands when we see a woman with a prosthetic leg walk down the ramp of Miss Italia 2018? Beauty in the 21st century has come to mean pretty much everything that that the 21st century prides itself on — tolerance, inclusiveness, accepting oneself, mindfulness.
But is it possible to take such inclusiveness too far in the name of being politically correct?
Possibly, yes. Like mentioned before, our idea of political correctness is too tied up with our insecurities, with what hurts us. Any mention of it, direct or indirect, opens the wound up. Mention a diet to a person who is overweight or an ice cream to one with an eating disorder. Mention a bikini to one who things we should cover up and a burkini to Cherlie Hepdo. We run, we should and we scream that the other should not exist. The mutual hate is surprising sometimes. Surprising that talking about beauty brings out such ugliness in us.
And the answer is really not to stop talking about it, as so many of us seem to suggest. No, the answer is to push through the ugliness. The answer is to talk more about it. Let us scream more. Let us shout more. Let us figure it out. Because as much as beauty is personal, as much as beauty is about oneself, beauty is also instinctual. And living as we do now, so removed from our instincts, we are likely to not want to agree with our instincts. And we are likely to not agree with our instinctual idea of beauty either. And for as long as the two ends are in conflict within us, we are likely to be scarred. We are likely to look for the answers we want, not the answers that are.