By Mayim Bialik is the former child star of the 80’s show “Blossom.” Mayim was often the most sensible and mature character portrayed on that sitcom. At the time that “Blossom” was on the air, Bialik stood out in that she was not what society deems to be classically beautiful and was not overly fixated on her appearance or boys.
When “Blossom” ended, Bialik did not become another child star disaster. She pursued an undergraduate degree in neuroscience, Hebrew and Jewish Studies at UCLA. When we consider the fact that so many child stars like Corey Haim and Todd Bridges end up with either serious addiction problems or legal issues, the fact that Mayim was able to avoid the traditional traps paints a picture of a woman who is true to herself and does not base her self-esteem on the opinions of others.
Today she is the mother of two and has a PhD in neuroscience, and yet when Clinton Kelly from TLC’s What Not To Wear had to sum her up, she was reduced to “all quirk and no cute.” In the eyes of Stacey London and Clinton Kelley, she had totally “let herself go” because her priorities have been education and raising her family. In a world in which appearance is deemed most important for women, Mayim’s achievements are devalued.
Though What Not to Wear has had male participants, I have yet to see a male neuroscientist or professional told that his fashion choices would negatively impact his career. Fathers are never told to be conscious of their appearance when they wear an old pair of jeans or a t-shirt that has seen better days to play at the park with their kids, and yet a mother whose shoes do not match her purse has apparently stopped caring about herself. Nothing sexist about the disparity in the commentary at all, is there?
As Mayim roamed from fitting room to fitting room, her biggest concern was that she was not going to “feel like herself,” whereas Clinton felt that it was far more imperative for her “to find something figure friendly”. If clothing is supposed to be a reflection of who we are and functional for the lives that we lead, why were Mayim’s concerns so easily cast aside? Oops! Silly me, “real women” are meant to spend their lives attempting to be pretty as a peach and any diversion is an abdication of duty. If her appearance is not about pleasing herself, clearly it is to satisfy the male gaze
To complete the transformation, each new person on the show is given a haircut and makeup tips from Carmindy. According to Clinton, the tips that Mayim received from their resident makeup artist would “give this hippy mom a natural look.” How is applying makeup to your face more natural than the way that you look without it? It implies that there is something wrong with her, no matter what her comfort level with her appearance may be. This is exactly the tactic that the beauty industry uses against women, guilting us into spending our hard-earned money on products that make wild claims and yet produce little to no results.
After spending two days shopping to find more appropriate clothing, what would any makeover show be without the big reveal? Clinton declared we spent “one week transforming a baffled and confused Blossom into a fresh bouquet.” Unfortunately, Bialik’s previous accomplishments appeared cast aside. It seemed as though her biggest claim to fame should be that she stood in front of their famous 360 degree mirror and allowed herself to be shamed into admitting that she did not conform to artificial appearance standards, that she was not a good, subservient capitalist.
“Now you have presence; before not so much. It says, I’m hot, look at me”, declared Clinton as he marvelled on his supposedly transformative work. From the moment a little girl is born, this is the message that is continually reified. Femininity is only understood in terms of how our bodies can be appealing to males.
What Not to Wear is one of the hottest shows on TLC. Week after week, women submit to shaming because they are not appropriately performing femininity. The dreaded 360 mirror is used to ensure that every supposed fault is magnified and duly acknowledged as an abdication of the roles that we are born to play.
While it is completely understandable that some women focus more on appearance than others, publicly shaming the ones that refuse to keep up is nothing more than a genderized assault. From start to finish, the basis of this show is conformity. At a time when women are taking on more responsibilities it is decidedly anti-woman.
15 Comments
I’ve only watched part of a couple of episodes of this show, but that was enough to make me hate it forever. The hosts are so MEAN and so dismissive of anyone who dares to have their own opinion about their own clothes. I’ve had daydreams of going on that show and staying firm on my clothing choices, but I’m sure that will never happen because my friends all know better than to nominate me.
I’m happy to see what Bialik has accomplished – I enjoyed her show, and after it ended I’m glad she accomplished something she wanted to do and appeared to be happy. I wish she had never agreed to be on this show.
I hate What Not To Wear. It should be renamed “What Not To Watch”. Hideous show promoting hideous stereotypes, hosted by people that are fake and shallow. Gag.
I’ve always hated how they take women’s unique looks and force them to wear what Stacy feels is appropriate. I mean, come on, look at the gross pointy shoes she wears…
“While it is completely understandable that some women focus more on appearance than others, publicly shaming the ones that refuse to keep up is nothing more than a genderized assault.”
What a great summary. Thanks for your commentary.
I’ve watched the show a few times out of a kind of morbid curiosity and it’s just unbelievably bad. The women who get picked for the show seem to get bullied into doing things they don’t want to do but end up feeling grateful and happy afterwards.
In one episode the male host actually said something like, “That’s meant for someone who has a penis!” about an item in a woman’s closet that was identified as men’s clothing. Talk about you rigid gender roles…
I’d love to see a TV show that celebrated all the women who were nominated by friends and family as a candidate for “What Not To Wear” but who said “No!” when they were surprised by the hosts. There must be at least a few women who said No, right?
“Now you have presence; before not so much. It says, I’m hot, look at me”, declared Clinton as he marvelled on his supposedly transformative work.
Well, what could be more important in a neuroscientist? I know that whenever I want to see what’s up in brain research, I look for journal articles written by the cutest scientists.
I used to feel similarly about What Not to Wear, that the hosts were so mean and shallow that it wasn’t worth watching. But over time, and a number of episodes, I’ve come to change my tune. After the initial “accosting”, the women do have a choice of whether to go on the show or not. I bet there’s a number of women who pass on the national publicity but choose to update their look on their own–and feel better about themselves for doing so!
This last part, for me, is the kicker. For many women–and I would guess the vast majority–”letting ourselves go”, wearing unflattering or outdated clothing, is actually a sign of low-self-esteem, sometimes depression (not necessarily clinical), or excessive self-criticism (many of us–and the women on the show–think our bodies are worse than they actually are).
When a person, and perhaps especially a woman, feels like she looks her best, then she feels more powerful, she has a little more bounce in her step, and that’s a wonderful thing. At the end of that show, many of the women talk about feeling better not just about their looks but about their whole selves, about this being a turning point.
And as for Stacey & Clinton’s “mean” behavior as they go about it–it used to turn me off, and sometimes still does, but now I see how so many of these women are so entrenched in their self-defeating ways that they kindof need that, and they’re ultimately grateful for it.
I saw the Mayim episode, and she was laughing, and grateful that someone stepped up and said, OK, time to put yourself a little higher on your own list of priorities, girl. And they’re right: why shouldn’t she be a hot mama neuroscientist? Why shouldn’t she have a wardrobe that empowers her instead of hiding her like a burqua? Why should she have to replace her own beauty and sexuality with brains and mommyhood–why not have it all?
in closing, a funny video (also in “website” section above):
http://www.hulu.com/watch/10333/saturday-night-live-mom-jeans
I have to agree with deirdre a bit, in that a lot of the WNTW shows I’ve seen encourage moms not to push themselves to the bottom of their list of priorities because they’ve got a man and kids.
I agreee with the previous poster. More often than not, when we women dress sloppily in ill-fitting, mismatched clothing its because of our insecurities. We are hiding due fear of our bodies (be they wieght issues or the thought that we are not pretty enough to dress nicely), or we are in a bad place in our lives emotionally, or we care about ourselves least on our list priorities. None of which are very empowering viewpoints.
Making ourselves “pretty,” whatever our own personal definititions of that may be, is an expression of pride in ourselves as women, and as individuals. Showing pride in our accomplishments, intellect, and physical appearance, what’s more empowering than that?
Being an avid watcher of the show, I have seen that when women put a wall up initially about the new “conformist” looks (which are actually uniquely fit to the person based on their lifestyle, interest and shown tastes), they have a point where they break down and admit the reason for their tattered clothing choices: A lack of pride. It’s not about everyone dressing the same, it’s about showing on the outside how you *should* feel on the inside. It’s not about “the male gaze” unless YOU want it to be.
I just don’t see how addressing Miyam’s outward appearance discounted her accomplishments? Why can’t you be a “cute” neuroscientist?
BTW, they are equally as harsh on men, I have seen it.
I tend to agree with the two previous posters. It sort of reminds me of the play, The Doll’s house. You can’t take care of your children if you don’t take care of yourself first. I firmly believe that. You have to provide a model for your kids to look up to and being a doormat shouldn’t be that model.
Too many times women put everyone first before themselves and it eventually tears you down.
I also think Stacy and Clinton are hella funny so…
However, if you have a more compelling argument, I’m willing to be convinced.
“When a person, and perhaps especially a woman, feels like she looks her best, then she feels more powerful, she has a little more bounce in her step, and that’s a wonderful thing.”
Ignoring the “especially a woman” part (don’t you see how that immediately reinforces that how a woman looks is much more important than how a man looks?) I will agree that the women who appear on this TV show appear to have very low self-esteem and poor boundaries. I’m certainly in favor of raising self-esteem but I don’t think this television show is a good way to do so. It looks more like bullying and shaming to me. (Conflict on television seems to get good ratings!)
One issue for me is how they define fashion and makeup as so vital and important in life. Even if I had the good health, money and time to pass their standards (can you say upper middle class privilege?) I would never choose to follow the guidelines that this show promotes. I don’t think that I “need” makeup, hair dye, jewelry, a skirt, high heels, and accessories to “look my best.” I don’t begrudge others the choice to spend the time and energy on these things but why must I?
Another issue is how everything on the show is presented as either right or wrong. I’m fine with them having an opinion on fashion that differs from my own. What I find offensive is that any alternative opinions are presented as WRONG instead of just different. There’s not even a question that it is okay for a woman to skip the makeup, or not wear dresses, and so on. Let’s not even mention the idea that a woman not shave her legs. (gasp!)
To those of you who are trumpeting the “individual” looks created for each woman on the show – do you realize that they all still conform to a very narrow range of what is deemed “okay”? Any differences are quite small. Again, there’s nothing wrong with conforming to fashion standards but it’s not a matter of right vs. wrong or good vs. bad.
In short, the whole show is based on the idea that “this is the way you should look and if you don’t then you are wrong.” Period. Add to that the shaming and bullying and crying and you’ve got one heck of a messed up show.
Mayim Bialik may have a Phd, but she’s also an actress. She’s been getting back into acting recently and say whatever you will about the shallowness of hollywood but it’s a fact that in order to be successful in hollywood you have to look a certain way. That’s just the way it is, it may not be fair but it’s just a reality of that profession. If she’s really serious in continuing acting she’s gotta make some changes. If you wanna get cast in hollywood you have to conform to the type of look most parts will have. It’s a sad fact, but that’s what you have to put up with to be a successful actor or actress.
The one thing I’ll say that always bothered me about the show is that they have to bring in a “specialist” to work with “black hair.” I always found it horribly offensive that they wouldn’t have someone who is able to do all hair types for the hair “expert.”
To me, it would be the same if they brought in an expert to put eye makeup on Asian eyes because they look so much more different for everyone else’s.
It’s always a curious show when they have a black client, part black client semi-black client, LOL.
I will also say, I loved their 50K show where they took one woman who loved fashion so much she would spend exorbitant amount of her salary on her wardrobe. She was black, she was short and she was a size 12. Not the typical person that you would think they would chose for a shopping spree in Paris. The episode is one of my favorites. Yes, it promotes materialism and beauty standards, but so does the New York Times, the paper not the magazine.
Class is a big element here.
I just watched a show where the fashion victim was being “cured” of her thrift shop fixation, and they soon had her buying $120 pants and $160 dresses.
What normal person can afford that?! After I pay my bills, I don’t have much left of my paycheck. How is is possible that this show can run with the economy the way it is?
I’d like to put the hosts on the city bus I ride so they can try and tell the welfare moms that their kids can’t eat if they want to look “confident.”
I think that while What Not To Wear is a bit over the top at times, you have entirely missed the point. Her achievments were not cast asided because they don’t matter, they were cast aside because IT IS A SHOW ABOUT FASHION. It’s not supposed to be an hour for Stacy and Clinton to praise badly dressed people about their degress. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.
Sexism is bad; women shouldn’t be expected to be runway models 24/7. However dressing so poorly that people immediately make negative assumptions about you is just stupid. As far as I’m concerned, being such a stubborn mule (and looking like a disgusting mule too) in such a way that it hinders your career progress and social life is far worse than having high expectations. YOU’RE PREVENTING YOURSELF FROM FUNCTIONING CORRECTLY IN SOCIETY.
In all honesty, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Your hatred for the show is too overwhelming and you’re blatantly dismissing the facts because you’re worked up in a self-righteous rage. You’re not being accurate.
Get over yourself and realize that the show is filled with good intentions. Or better yet, CHANGE THE CHANNEL.
What the hell? The show takes people who dress like hobos and makes them look professional. I don’t care if you’re the best at your job. If you show up to your job in sweatpants or atletic wear and you’re not a personal trainer, then there is a problem, no matter if you are male or female. Stacy and Clinton are taking women AND MEN who dress nicely if a bit too tight or not the best shapes, etc. They are taking MEN and women who are dressing in an inappropriate manner for their lives. Women like you make me so angry because you are pulling women down. Whenever most rational people think of women’s equality, your loud-mouthed, anti-standards for women of any sort are the type of women that comes to mind. And who wants to cater to the whims of radical b*tches? NO ONE. Your type of crazy feminist gives all women a bad name and YOU present a bad face for womenkind. If women like you would just SHUT UP, then women’s equality would be much furthered. So just go have your little rant somewhere someone cares. Oh..wait.that’s right..no one cares about your clearly prejudiced views.