Note: There are women who believe and engage in bigotry — this post is not about them. That behavior is inexcusable. There are times when, despite our shared suffrage and sisterhood, those women need to be held accountable. Furthermore, it does not excuse the harm that has been caused by “pick me” behavior and decisions. The goal of this post is simply to raise awareness in the different ways that, despite our attempts to further gender equality, women are pinned against each other.

Most of us have heard the phrase “pick me girl” before. If you haven’t, it typically refers to women who speak or act in a way that would gain them favor with men.

These kind of women are usually accused of feigning interest in hobbies, politics, or even sexual acts that will make them more appealing to men.

The idea is that these kinds of girls cater to traditional (and often offensive) male fantasies. Essentially, they become anything and everything that a man (whether generally or one in particular) would like.

One of the most popular discussions — and critiques — on this behavior comes in the movie Gone Girl, based off on the novel by Gillian Flynn. Character Amy Dunne refers to this as the “Cool Girl.”

As the infamous speech puts it:

Men always say that as the defining compliment, don’t they? She’s a cool girl. Being the Cool Girl means I am a hot, brilliant, funny woman who adores football, poker, dirty jokes, and burping, who plays video games, drinks cheap beer, loves threesomes and anal sex, and jams hot dogs and hamburgers into her mouth like she’s hosting the world’s biggest culinary gang bang while somehow maintaining a size 2, because Cool Girls are above all hot. Hot and understanding. Cool Girls never get angry; they only smile in a chagrined, loving manner and let their men do whatever they want. Go ahead, shit on me, I don’t mind, I’m the Cool Girl…

Men actually think this girl exists. Maybe they’re fooled because so many women are willing to pretend to be this girl. For a long time Cool Girl offended me. I used to see men — friends, coworkers, strangers — giddy over these awful pretender women, and I’d want to sit these men down and calmly say: You are not dating a woman, you are dating a woman who has watched too many movies written by socially awkward men who’d like to believe that this kind of woman exists and might kiss them.

Essentially, the “cool girl” is a man’s (unachievable) dream girl. She acts and thinks like a man — yet looks like Pamela Anderson. She maintains a laid-back persona about things that other women may deem offensive (such as expectations of traditional gender roles).

The quote argues that these women don’t exist in and of themselves. They are crafted charades to fool men (who are all too willing to believe) that they can be the perfect dream girl.

From the perspective of other women, this is a charade maintained to be accepted by a man. In response to this, non “pick me” girls (note that there is no clever quip for these women) resist these perceptions.

They try to actively reject the ideal male fantasy and berate the “pick me.”

It’s not an uncommon behavior. We see it in TV, movies, and books. The protagonist is “different.” She sees beyond male BS, has her own interests, and critiques the girls that try to maintain the “pick me” vibe.

Often, social media encourages women to resist being “pick me” girls — and can play a role in tormenting the ones already labeled as such.

This exact thought is later addressed in the infamous Gone Girls monologue:

And the Cool Girls are even more pathetic: They’re not even pretending to be the woman they want to be, they’re pretending to be the woman a man wants them to be.

Once again, a very FEMALE issue becomes about men. Because of that, this is an area where women are starkly divided and are often encouraged to turn on each other.

This is not to say that the critique on “pick me” girls is inaccurate. Women morphing themselves to cater to male fantasies is a real issue. It is discussed by many female writers and philosophers, such as Margaret Atwood.

But the issue with these “pick me” women goes far beyond catering to men: it reveals a deeper and more dangerous issue — women betraying other women (and themselves).

Because, whether someone is a “pick me” or not, this issue turns the war inward. It creates a divide between women who should all be fighting for the same cause.

This is where we must turn and look at the other side of the issue. Through critiquing and downright mocking “pick me” girls, the other women (non-pick mes) have raised a themselves on a platform that puts them above “those” women.

It creates an us vs. them.

In the media, we often see the “non-pick me” laughing at those women — typically alongside men. The “pick me’s” opinions, interests, and behaviors becomes a punchline to the women who see themselves (and are presented as) different. Because they are not catering to male fantasy — or at least they don’t appear to be — they are better than the other women.

Because of this, women once again become the butt of the joke. They are silly, oversexualized, and downright not respectable compared to the girl who is different. Her behavior as a “non-pick me” sets her above the other women.

All this does is manage to create more internal division among women and in the feminist movement.

This is described well in a famous quote by Bonnie Burstow:

Often father and daughter look down on mother (woman) together. They exchange meaningful glances when she misses a point. They agree that she is not bright as they are, cannot reason as they do. This collusion does not save the daughter from the mother’s fate. — Radical Feminist Therapy

Though the quote specifically addresses family members, it works in nearly all scenarios. In this instance, the “non-pick me” laughs at the foolish charade of the “pick me” — boiling their behavior down as a pathetic attempt to receive acceptance from men (of which the “non-pick me” is much too good for).

The dangerous aspect of this is that — if unchecked — this leads to the new type of a “pick me.”

As the quote suggests, mocking the “pick me” alongside the man does not save the “non-pick me” from the same fate.

Of course, this is an extremely nuanced conversation. It cannot be simply boiled down to which women are right and which women are wrong. But the term itself does raise red flags about the division of women regarding feminism itself.

The goal of feminism is for each woman to individually choose her identity and achieve true gender equality — this cannot be done when women themselves are setting limited standards for what qualifies.

For instance, the aspiration for motherhood at a young age has become a hot issue among women. Young mothers (especially stay-at-home-moms) often account (through social media) the scrutiny they face from other women for their choices. At the same time, single or childless women face stigma for “failing” to fulfill their societal roles as mothers. Each side feels belittled. This only creates division in a movement that relies on unity.

But to truly understand the dangers of this type of thinking, we must dig deeper. This is accurately described by one of Margaret Atwood’s most famous quotes:

Male fantasies, male fantasies, is everything run by male fantasies? Up on a pedestal or down on your knees, it’s all a male fantasy: that you’re strong enough to take what they dish out, or else too weak to do anything about it. Even pretending you aren’t catering to male fantasies is a male fantasy: pretending you’re unseen, pretending you have a life of your own, that you can wash your feet and comb your hair unconscious of the ever-present watcher peering through the keyhole, peering through the keyhole in your own head, if nowhere else. You are a woman with a man inside watching a woman. You are your own voyeur.” — The Robber Bride

According to Atwood, even not catering to male fantasies is, in its own way, catering to fantasies. This quote is proof of how nuanced this discussion must be. Boiling feminist theory down to easy quips like “pick me” do not deal with the real issues plaguing women in the 21st-century.

I won’t pretend to have the answer. This is a complex and very real problem dividing women in our modern society. And the idea of a “pick me” is harmful. It maintains traditional and unrealistic standards for women. It gives men power and authority over female identity. But berating and critiquing these women only suggest that other women are the enemy or problem.

As Atwood so aptly put it, women will always fight to define ourselves in a patriarchal society. That is not something that can be easily changed overnight. But other women — women who aren’t like you or me — are not the real enemy: it is the patriarchal society we live in.

The Unspoken War Between Women was originally published in WAVE 4 on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Gender inequality is nothing new. History shows the countless ways women have been at a disadvantage since the beginning of time.

Every right women have obtained has been through immense sacrifice and labor. From working to voting to even having independent bank accounts, women have fought tooth and nail for these things.

Despite our efforts, chronic inequality still exists, though often in more subtle ways.

Don’t get me wrong, misogyny is still openly accepted — a claim verified by the election of Donald “grab them by the pussy” Trump.

However, these extreme versions of sexism are often advertised as rarities while women face the subtler versions nearly everyday.

The Pink Tax has been a point of contention for generations, specifically among women’s rights groups. The nickname represents the inequality of expenses between men and women.

More specifically, it shows how there is a significant price difference between men’s and women’s products.

As Healthline describes it:

“Gender-based pricing… is an upcharge on products traditionally intended for women which have only cosmetic differences from comparable products traditionally intended for men.”

Essentially, products like shampoo, conditioner, body wash razors, etc. that are marketed towards women consistently cost more than the same products geared towards men.

The Pink Tax is just one of the ways women are charged more for necessities. It directly aligns with “the tampon tax,” which is used to describe the extra expenses of period products and like.

As you can see, these are ways that women are unjustly overcharged simply for being women.

However, there is a new tax in town and her name is pain.

The Pain Tax

By new, I mean completely not new. The only thing “new” about it is the fact that women are openly talking about it. For ages, women have been expected to tolerate pain at a higher rate than men.

Women’s pain has become a normalized aspect of society.

However, thanks to the advent of social media — and reignited feminist fire — women are sharing their own personal stories of how they have been mistreated by doctors, specifically when it comes to pain management.

Women are repeatedly withheld pain medicine. Whether their symptoms are dismissed as psychological or “dramatics,” they are ignored nonetheless.

Countless women have shared personal stories on social media of how severe medical issues were misdiagnosed and ignored. Because of this, they were not given pain medicine for real issues that later blossomed into severe medical emergencies.

But that’s not the worst of it. Women are also sharing stories of how they undergo the exact same procedures as men, yet are receiving weaker pain medication.

On Tiktok, one woman shared that she and her husband both had a root canal on the same day by the same doctor. The only difference? She was prescribed ibuprofen while her husband was given an opioid.

This is just one of many stories women are sharing.

Another video showed a woman explaining that her epidural did not work. However, she was dismissed by her male doctor, who claimed she was feeling pressure and not pain. She went on to explain that, immediately after she was stitched up “down there,” she walked to the bathroom.

This video was duetted by a female medical professional who explained that if the epidural had worked, the woman shouldn’t have been able to walk immediately afterwards. This proved that the original woman was right and her pain was ignored and minimized.

This is only a handful of the thousands of stories that women have shared about their pain being dismissed, ignored, and minimized in the medical field — predominantly by male practitioners.

The sad part is these are stories that women are telling about their experiences in the 21st century.

This doesn’t even begin to cover the abhorrent treatment and pain women were forced to endure throughout history.

Many of these conversations are happening thanks to it being women’s history month, a key motivator for women to share injustice and inequality.

But beyond this, women are still facing mass inequality when it comes to pain management.

And talking about them on social media may bring about awareness, but we need real change to happen.

These are not isolated incidents.

Women are regularly expected to endure unreasonable amounts of pain, often on a continual basis.

This can be exemplified by the amount of women with extremely debilitating painful periods — and the fact that many of us didn’t learn until we were adults that it’s not supposed to be that way.

These can often indicate intense underlying conditions, such as endometriosis.

In line with this, it takes a long time for these diseases to be noticed and diagnosed. On average, it takes 7 years for a person to be diagnosed with endometriosis. This is a severe and painful condition in which tissue grows outside the uterus onto other organs, causing deep lesions and possible cysts.

On average, women have to suffer this pain for 7 years before finally being recognized. And that doesn’t include treatment, which is disputed and difficult to ascertain.

Yet, nearly every woman who has experienced menstrual pain and gone to their doctor — myself included — was shoved a prescription for birth control and sent on her way.

Not only does this ignore those deeper conditions, but it puts women at risk for future health concerns and side effects of the overprescribed birth control.

Women’s expectations to handle pain be seen in the dangerous side effects of birth control (which comes with a blanket — sized sheet of warnings), painful IUD insertion procedures, and more.

Yet none of these procedures or treatments are regularly distributed anesthesia or pain medicine stronger than ibuprofen.

All of this points to the fact that women are:

1) expected to endure more pain

2) not taken seriously when they are in pain

Though it’s not a new issue, it is a pressing one. We need to end the generations of pain inequality.

Women’s pain cannot — and should not — be reduced or ignored. This is dangerous.

It’s led to many women foregoing doctors and necessary medical procedures because they simply cannot endure the pain.

This doesn’t even begin to include the emotional and mental damage of your doctor ignoring and invalidating you, leading to many women having severe medical trauma.

Foregoing these necessary procedures due to pain is putting women’s lives at risk.

For instance, many young women are choosing not to get Pap smear exams because of the pain they endure. This pain can be heightened if a woman has pelvic floor dysfunction or a number of conditions.

But, rather than find ways to make the exam more bearable, doctors only reiterate the necessity of it. Women are expected to grit their teeth and endure.

Yes, this exam is important to screen for cervical cancer. But when people are too afraid to get the exam, it’s not doing anyone any good.

So, many women are are not getting these exams, therefore risking their lives, because they cannot bear the pain.

Because women’s pain has been ignored and minimized for so long in the medical community, women are willing to risk life to avoid the pain they are forced to endure.

Read that again.

This cannot continue. Women all throughout history have suffered because of this. We can no longer force women to pay the pain tax.

The Pain Tax is the “New” Pink Tax was originally published in WAVE 4 on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Virginia Woolf pushes women to recognize and utilize the privileges they have in the current century, since many women in the past were unable to become writers, readers, philosophers, or artists due to immense patriarchal power. Woolf encourages women to fight for themselves and for other women, not just for the past and the present but also for future generations. While women in the 21st century have a room of their own to write, create art, and make music, they are still looked down upon. As American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift has rightly pointed out, there is a different vocabulary for men and women, where men are allowed to react while women can only overreact, women are often portrayed in media as melodramatic and overreacting characters. Swift herself has faced backlash throughout her career, with her abilities being questioned once she achieved success, this is a common occurrence for women across different fields, where their accomplishments are often attributed to someone else or simply just dismissed as insignificant. Women are also subject to harsher criticism for expressing their emotions compared to men, who are often viewed as sweet and emotional beings, as men are glorified and appreciated for the same actions that women are shamed for.

In Farida D’s words ‘You don’t become a feminist you are born a feminist; no one is born believing that women deserve less rights than others, the patriarchy teaches us that. Everyone is born a feminist either you remain a feminist or you become a misogynist.’ A little less every day but till date patriarchy still, has a hold over every aspect of a woman’s life. Today on Woolf’s death anniversary when we think of her let us remember the kind of hopes she had from the future generations and try to live up to her expectations.

This is women trying (Virginia woolf’s version) was originally published in WAVE 4 on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

After finishing “On Failure: How to succeed at Defeat”, I am intrigued to learn more about this one specific chapter which is called “Bourgeois Respectability”. To be honest, I am unfamiliar with this term, let alone have a complete understanding of what it is about. My second guess was the urge to be ‘perfect’ in front of people or to build a perfect image in order to gain respect from people, especially from the proletarians. It is not completely wrong tho, but not quite an impeccable explanation for that term. To be precise, Bourgeois Respectability is the tendency of the Bourgeoisies to separate themselves from the dissipation of the aristocrats and the chaotic way of living of the proletarians. By that, it means that they have to own well-ordered houses, read important books, teach their children good manners, and dress well. Not only that but it is also related to their behavior of sticking to the moral codes created by society during that time (The School of Life, 2022).

The way the Bourgeoisies lived around the 19th century has led me to think about the women at that time instead. This thought popped up in my head when I worked on my thesis several days ago about second-wave feminism. Even though second-wave feminism began way far after the degeneracy of the separation among those social classes, I think the discussion of the 19th century middle-class women can be linked to the core issues that feminists are trying to demolish, considering the society’s unequal rules which violate women’s rights for the sake of respectability and perfection.

To begin with, women’s rights movements were increasingly stroke beginning from the late 19th century as first-wave feminism came to the surface in the Western World, demanding equality for women. Aside from the fact that women during that time were already aware of their rights outside their traditional gender roles which mainly involve domestic chores and the private sphere, the conditions of middle-class women and lower-class women were distinguishable. Scott & Tilly (1975), stated that the massive amounts of women who worked in the 19th century were dominated by the working classes, and most industries they were occupied to are textile industries and domestic services. Moreover, those women were coming from lower classes families, causing the daughters of the families to work before they got married (p. 40).

As is said before that the Bourgeoisies are eager to separate themselves from the chaotic lives of Proletarians, which explains how women from both social classes differ in their roles in society. While lower-classes women were expected to help their family’s financial instability during the growth of industrialization, middle-classes women were expected to take care of the domestic chores and their main value is to teach their children to have a good manner which reflects Bourgeois Respectability. Both conditions were not deliberating women from deciding what they want to accomplish in their lives. Lower-classes women were restrained by the economic conditions which hinder them from even thinking about their passions and middle-classes women were assigned to certain tasks that force them to obey for the sake of a good reputation in front of the public. Additionally, for middle-classes women, their husbands hold the highest hierarchy in the household, thus their commands should be obeyed nevertheless.

There are at least two goals that first-wave feminists wanted to achieve, including the right to pursue higher education and to showcase their talents in public domains (Briatte, 2020). Both goals could hardly be achieved by women from the lower classes and middle classes due to their responsibilities to their families (for the lower classes) and their husbands (for the middle classes).

Bourgeois Respectability is responsible for the mentality of making themselves exclusive among the Proletarians, making women from both classes unable to collaborate in reaching gender equality and breaking their boundaries. Furthermore, it also hinders middle classes wives from pursuing their own dreams because they are owned as the property of their husbands, let alone the judgment they would receive for not being ‘woman’ enough according to society’s standard of femininity. As for the lower classes women, they could not get enough chances to change their life trajectories due to a lack of support from people from the higher hierarchy in society.

This article is composed based on my findings about women’s conditions in 19th-century Europe and it also includes my hot takes on this issue as I am very interested in feminism as well as history. So, happy reading^^

References:

The School of Life. (2022). On Failure: How to succeed at Defeat. The School of Life.

Scott, J. W. & Tilly, L. A. (1975). Women’s Work and the Family in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 17(1), 36–64. http://www.jstor.org/stable/178370

Briatte, A. L. (2020, June 22). Feminisms and Feminist Movements in Europe. Digital Encyclopedia of European History. https://ehne.fr/en/encyclopedia/themes/gender-and-europe/feminisms-and-feminist-movements/feminisms-and-feminist-movements-in-europe#:~:text=These%20movements%20first%20and%20foremost,and%20participation%20in%20public%20affairs.

Bourgeois Respectability and Its Significance in Feminism was originally published in WAVE 4 on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Feminists don’t shave. They don’t shave their underarms, legs, bikini lines, or faces. After the first time you mention the gender pay gap or refer to the patriarchy in a conversation, you have to burn your razors. As well as your bras.

I’m joking, of course.

But it is a very persistent stereotype that feminists don’t shave. Why do so many people attribute so much political significance to the shaving habits of women?

Feminists really are less likely to shave

Well, the truth is, there really is political significance to not shaving.

It’s not about having hairy armpits. It’s about having the freedom to choose. It’s about having the same freedoms men have. It’s about not being obligated to shape yourself after society’s demanding beauty standards for women.

Society doesn’t recoil at the sight of a man with hairy legs, so why should women feel obligated to remove their hair? Advertisements have conditioned us to believe that hairless skin is desirable (with words like “smooth” and “silky”).

In fact, society dislikes hairy legs on women so much, that even ads for razor blades don’t show hairy legs before shaving. Both the before and after are usually hairless (smooth! silky!) legs.

In this modern time, women that don’t shave still face a lot of criticism. In a study on this topic, for example, a researcher asked college women not to shave for a period of 10 weeks:

Responses reveal that women confronted direct and anticipated homophobia and heterosexism from others as well as hostility for rejecting traditional norms of femininity. Heterosexual women regularly encountered demands that they acquire permission to grow body hair from their male partners, while queer and bisexual women expressed reluctance about further “outing” themselves via their body hair.

So yes, there’s still a lot of pressure to shave and not shaving can have political significance.

Am I a bad feminist?

However, that doesn’t mean that every feminist is obligated to shave, of course.

And even though most people realize this, I think subconsciously there can be pressure to conform to certain norms. Not only when it comes to being a woman in society, but also when it comes to being a ‘good feminist’.

For example, I usually do shave. But for a while, I used to live in a very feminist community where almost everyone chose not to shave. Of course, they were fine with me shaving. But on some level, it still made me feel like I was a bit less of a feminist than the women who shaved their heads and grew out all other body hair.

Like I just didn’t give it all, not the same way they did.

Roxane Gay, the author of Bad Feminist, says in an interview with The Guardian:

I shave my legs! Again, this mortifies me. If I take issue with the unrealistic standards of beauty women are held to, I shouldn’t have a secret fondness for fashion and smooth calves, right?

And the same goes for wearing dresses, makeup, high heels, all things that are considered traditionally feminine. Because they can also be considered as trying to appeal to the male gaze. As trying to fit an unrealistic standard of beauty.

I would rather be a bad feminist than no feminist at all.

Roxane Gay describes her fondness for other feminine things as well:

“I love dresses. For years I pretended I hated them, but I don’t. Maxi dresses are one of the finest clothing items to become popular in recent memory. I have opinions on maxi dresses.

Pink is my favourite colour. I used to say my favourite colour was black to be cool, but it is pink — all shades of pink. If I have an accessory, it is probably pink. I read Vogue, and I’m not doing it ironically. I once live-tweeted the September issue.”

She even admits to liking men, despite being a feminist:

“Despite what people think based on my writing, I very much like men. They’re interesting to me, and I mostly wish they’d be better about how they treat women so I wouldn’t have to call them out so often. And still, I put up with nonsense from unsuitable men even though I know better and can do better.

I love diamonds and the excess of weddings. I consider certain domestic tasks as gendered, mostly all in my favour because I don’t care for chores — lawn care, bug killing and trash removal, for example, are men’s work.”

The fourth feminist wave

Of course, it’s okay to shave and wear dresses and like pink, and it’s even okay to (the horror!) like men.

As Emma Watson said:

“If you want to run for Prime Minister, you can. If you don’t, that’s wonderful, too. Shave your armpits, don’t shave them, wear flats one day, heels the next. These things are so irrelevant and surface to what it is all really about, and I wish people wouldn’t get caught up in that. We want to empower women to do exactly what they want, to be true to themselves, to have the opportunities to develop.”

It’s good to remind ourselves of this every once in a while. And it’s also good to be aware of the system that makes us want to shave our legs in the first place.

Hopefully, in the fourth feminist wave, we can find a way to do both. Let’s not judge women for shaving or not shaving, but let’s judge the system that made us unhappy with our bodies in the first place.

Because we all have internalized beauty standards, we just choose to respond to them in different ways.

To conclude with Roxane Gay:

No matter what issues I have with feminism, I am a feminist. I cannot and will not deny the importance and absolute necessity of feminism. Like most people, I’m full of contradictions, but I also don’t want to be treated like shit for being a woman. I am a bad feminist. I would rather be a bad feminist than no feminist at all.

I hope you enjoyed reading this. If you’d like to support me as a writer, consider signing up to become a Medium member. It’s just $5 a month and you get unlimited access to Medium.

• Join Medium with my referral link - Mira Lucas
• Write for WAVE 4
• Psychological Techniques for Enhancing Your Writing
• 5 Things I Include in Every Cold Pitch to A Magazine

Why Do Feminists Not Shave? was originally published in WAVE 4 on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.