Who is Beautiful? How do we define Beauty? Do you have Beauty? What would you have to do to get it?

I want to talk about the concept of Beauty Capital as described by activist Ismatu Gwendolyn, and how it ties into the definition of gender. Gwendolyn describes themselves as “a social worker, a storyteller, and a dancer all living in the head of some Chicago tea drinker.” They share their ideas on platforms such as TikTok, and have a podcast and blog called The Garden Space. One of the topics she covers is that of the difference between “little b beauty” and “capital B Beauty.” So let’s talk about it.

What is Beauty Capital, and how do we define it? In order to define it, we first have to go back to the root of Beauty and Desirability in the U.S. That root is whiteness. Whiteness– though ever evolving and constantly reconstructed to include many definitions and functions– was created as a tool to measure citizenship, and with the procurement of citizenship comes certain social, legal, and economic benefits. This includes but is not limited to wealth, leisure, and Beauty– different from beauty. The difference between little “b” beauty and capital “B” Beauty is the market. Little “b” beauty is subjective; it is up to each individual. It is impossible to prove, and more importantly, is impossible to standardize. Capital “B” Beauty is something else. It is marketable, profitable, and able to produce capital. Also, it is standardized through white supremacist Beauty ideals. Beauty– Capital “B”– then, is held by those who fit these ideals. Those who do not fit these ideals have to work in order to reach them. These people have to acquire a set of characteristics and features that are acceptable to a white supremacist system.

These characteristics include but are not limited to: whiteness– both in features and color; thinness; a gender performance that fits into the binary; “good” hair– long, light, straight, grows downward; decoration– clothing, jewelry, and makeup that looks expensive and displays affluence; and ability– disability and visible disfigurement are prohibited by these standards.

The more of these characteristics one has innately, or can obtain over time, the more one can access Beauty Capital, the more one can market themselves, and profit from it (with less work to do, not to mention). So much is accessible through having this Beauty Capital, such as Desirability, status, respect, and more.

We arrive at the next question. Who has to put in work to obtain Beauty? Who, specifically, has to put in more work than others? Dark skinned Black women do, as their expression does not include those characteristics which are desired in a white supremacist society. This is especially true for dark skinned Black women who lack additional characteristics desired by the Beauty market, such as those who are gender-nonconforming, fat, disabled, or any combination of the sum. Their work is elongated and intensified through having to maneuver through these categories. A Black woman who chooses to engage with this system of labor might have to wake up two hours early to do her hair in order to be deemed “Beautiful” and then have to operate through the exhaustion of not getting enough rest. The examples compound and continue on, but overall we can see that the increased work demanded of Black women leads to increased sacrifice.

We then must look at what this fact means for gender, specifically, “correct” gender as deemed by society. The standardization of gender is constructed by whiteness. In order to achieve this standardized gender expression, you have to put in work. And women of color, specifically those who fit into the categories as described above, have to do more work than white women who have innately possessed Beauty Capital this entire time. Women of color have to earn gender, and have to earn Beauty; it is not innate.

I am left with more questions about how to define gender. To me, gender has always been a nebulous concept that shifted and stretched to meet the definitions individuals created for themselves. Of course, this includes social and cultural influences. For myself, my gender was something I was only able to start defining personally once quarantine started, when I stepped away from public perception and could make my own decision about whether to accept those social and cultural influences that had surrounded me. Even then, it was still amorphous. But in thinking about Gwendolyn’s ideas of Beauty Capital, that definition of gender shifts. It further becomes systemic and structural. What does it mean when, for the majority of the population, gender is not innate, but instead something that has to be earned? When gender becomes a prize we can win based on the labor we do, how can we claim gender as our own? How can we mobilize and come together over shared experiences of gender when the claim to gender looks different for everyone?

This essay has mainly been a collection of questions and answers. But to this question, I don’t know what to say. As is typical in my conversations about gender, and any system of oppression, my instinct is to call for intersectionality. Historically, what is labeled “the women’s movement” has forcefully excluded the struggles of women of color, and as a result women of color are not represented in these conversations. They lack the Beauty Capital necessary to be included in a space like that: one that, while feminist, is still white. So in order to make the space accurately representative of the people it claims to support, intersectionality is vital.

Given these differences between us, that women are of different races and classes, how can a white middle class movement actually deal with all women's oppression, as it purports to do, particularly if most women are not present to represent their own interests?”
—Beverly Smith, Across the Kitchen Table

I am wondering how this quote might be useful when thinking about Beauty Capital. Specifically, how Beauty Capital can be demolished so that those putting in labor to earn it, those who do not possess the characteristics deemed socially desirable, do not have to earn a claim to gender and do not have to defend a right to take up space in activist work (and therefore, the feminist movement can accurately represent all the people it claims to support). I think it begins with a mass consciousness. So I’ll end with a final few questions that I’ll ask myself as well. The conversation does not end here.

Are you Beautiful? Do you have Beauty Capital? How do you use this capital? How do you profit from it?

For Further Reading