just once I want to see a good post critiquing makeup culture that doesn’t turn out to be made by some janky radfem blog
oh hey!! I’m not a janky radfem I can do it myself!
makeup culture is wack and normalizes a ludicrously high bar as the bare minimum women can do. I saw a “lazy"makeup tutorial the other day that listed 22 separate goddamn products. you’re supposed to buy and know how to use 22 different things on your face just for the privilege of being considered lazy and that’s uuuuuuh what’s the word? bullshit.
Really, five products could work, even 3. Just frame the face, eyes, lips, and you’re done.
0 products also works great
because I’m gonna be real here, the idea that 22 products is a minimum sucks but it’s really upsetting that any amount of makeup is the bare minimum at all
I would really just suggest some powder foundation, concealer, mascara and lipgloss/lipstick, or tbh just mascara works too, but that’s up to you
I’m sorry if I didn’t express this clearly enough in the original post but I’m not really looking for more concise makeup regiments. my intention was to point out how it’s Bad that makeup is considered a bare minimum at all, regardless of individual feelings on the matter
no face should be “required” to have “a minimum” of makeup. makeup has no health benefits and does nothing but fill the pockets of companies that prey on women and our insecurities.
makeup should not be seen as hygiene because it isnt. get that shit out of your head.
this post: makeup culture is ridiculous and 22 products should not be considered a minimum requirement for someones face. no one should have to do that
the notes: so like……. what youre saying is……. we need to make the minimum about 5 or 6 instead… i gotcha
Really the only makeup you need is eyeliner but that’s just my personal opinion
Actually, I’d argue that while OP is close to the right answer, that’s not quite it. I think it’s less about the children’s media as much as it is the fact that the refuse to engage with “problematic media” - which does, indeed, lead to people only engaging with children’s media in many cases, as it’s more likely to be “clean” and free of complications.
Problematic media is deemed morally evil regardless of the actual lesson behind it. I mean, you’ve got people on here refusing to read 1984 because “it’s misogynistic”, completely disregarding what role that plays in the story, and dismissing every other detail of the book, because this one detail is so deeply offensive, the rest of the story contains nothing of value. And then there’s the “Why do we have to read old sad stuffy books?” crowd to make things worse.
My point isn’t that the only way to learn is to read classics - many of the classics we have were determined by chishet white guys. There’s sometimes very uncomfortable parts, and I understand why people can’t always sit through them. But the solution to this would be to read more books by people of color, by women, by queer people, and that’s…not happening. Even asking young queer people to read queer history can be like pulling teeth, because it’s easier to get your information off of tiktok or tumblr in nice digestible posts and short, snappy videos. And why read something that might make you question your view of the world, or at least get you thinking, when you could read that mindless enemies to lovers coffee shop au that makes you feel happy instead?
I’m all for fanfic! I’m all for comfort stories! I’m all for protesting the classics that have been determined by cishet white guys, and I’m all for finding discomfort in things like casual sexism and racism in books! But I don’t think the solution is ‘this story is inherently problematic regardless of whatever the greater message is, and I refuse to read anything but my fluffy fanfics.’
But now you’ve got a generation of kids that want a clean cut story with a nice, well defined message. The second you get into complicated issues like homophobia - even if you’re a queer author - your story becomes problematic. Better to engage with something affirming that makes you feel good, with morals that align with your world view. This is the generation of “Maybe the curtains are just blue!”, of rejecting literary analysis because it’s “ridiculous, the author didn’t have a deeper meaning.” So you’ve got kids who lack reading comprehension because they’re refusing to engage with anything that has any element to it that isn’t pre-approved. They’re not approaching anything with an open mind, they’re not going into something that might be complex, because it might conflict with their morals, and in their mind, engaging with something problematic is a reflection of your personal morals, and prove that you are a bad person.
So what you’re left with is children’s media, which often challenges greater issues at a comfortable distance, with defined “good” and “bad.” The good guys win, the bad guys learn, the message is obvious. Children’s media is the least likely to be offensive, and the least likely to be problematic. But that’s a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.
