The New “Beauty” Standard *Trigger Warning

Recently, Dylan Mulvaney, an American actress, Tik Tok personality, and Instagram influencer, made quite a stir when several companies offered paid partnerships and endorsement deals with the transgender activist, giving her a wider audience, various products, and, of course, money. In the case of Anheuser-Busch, the marketing strategy for Bud Light backfired, and many called for a boycott after seeing the rising star in a promo spot, leaving the beer company in a tizzy as share prices initially fell. It's hard to say what the lasting effects will be, but the higher-ups issued an immediate apology after the boycott began and hoped for a turnaround as they featured one of their Clydesdale horses in a brand new pro-America ad. 

I don’t drink much alcohol and don’t really care who promotes mediocre beer, so none of this really concerns me, but both those on the left and right were involved in the boycott. I understand why people were upset and also why others were in support of the trans actress. My goal here isn't to offend anyone, and in this particular case, I honestly don't care one way or another who drinks or doesn't drink Bud Light or who promotes or boycotts the company. What concerns me more is how this particular transgender individual is influencing her audience. 

It should be noted that Mulvaney is considered a comedian, though some may question her ability to be funny, and, despite having several types of facial surgeries, she has yet to have bottom surgery as part of transitioning. In fact, she seems to enjoy drawing attention to her crotch and was called out for her behavior when she ask her Tik Tok audience to "normalize the bulge" while wearing "shopping shorts," clearly aware that her dick was noticeable while sporting tight shorts. That's a sentence I never thought I would type. Sorry if I sound prudish, but this has more to do with how adult influencers potentially target children than being offended by particular body parts. 

Mulvaney shows off her bulge

This doesn't seem normal or appropriate for young audiences, yet I didn’t see any age restriction on the content. Both she and Jeffrey Marsh have directly addressed children in their videos, though Marsh in particular has tried to deny it and eventually changed the content settings after facing a severe backlash. In the linked video, it might sound like Mulvaney is giving out good advice, but both she and Marsh have been accused of guiding kids away from parents and family and toward other support systems, even though Mulvaney's family has, according to her uncle, always loved and supported her. 

Some of the more controversial or perplexing partnerships with Mulvaney include Kate Spade, Instacart, Aritzia, KitchenAid, and, of course, Anheuser-Busch. Apparently, there are a lot of partnerships, but the one with Nike caught more people's attention, including mine, although I thought her Tampax performance, which may not have been an actual partnership, just some free product in exchange for a little online advertising, was a slap in the face of women and girls. These skits parody and mock women, not support them. 

Do you know how many women and girls are in need of these kinds of products around the world? I'm not sure handing out free tampons to someone who claims to identify as a girl (why not a woman at her age?) but doesn't always act the part (and much of what she does is acting no matter how she identifies) as opposed to hiring or giving out free tampons to an actual girl or woman was the best move, but again, large companies don’t really care about individuals. They care about making a profit and getting the name of their company circulating in the public sphere. 

As someone put it, "My womanhood is not your costume." But businesses are jumping at the chance to work with Mulvaney, even if there’s a risk of alienating potential customers and the outcome might not be desirable. The potential interest or even controversy is what draws in these businesses. No press is bad press if it gets your name out there, in theory anyway. Whatever the reason, Mulvsney is the it girl, but it's becoming more and more obvious that not everyone is happy about her increasing fame. 

Tampax has been a misogynistic mess on Twitter long before the company offered a trans person free schwag to promote its products, but after the little performance with Mulvaney, it became obvious that their primary interest is being seen, most obviously in this case. I know they are involved in some useful programs that assist young girls with menstrual start-up kits, but that doesn't erase their more questionable actions. Back in 2022, their official Twitter account posted inappropriate content, but before I share the tweet, keep in mind that girls start menstruating on average around 11-12 years old, meaning some start well before becoming a teenager. That said, the post isn't even well-suited or funny for adults and seems to be directed at men more than women. It's all kinds of cringe: 

You're in their DMs. We're in them.
We are not the same.

Back to Nike, another reason to cringe. I've already brought up the giant shitty shoe company before, and while I don't personally have an issue with any trans individuals being selected for advertising purposes when appropriate, I am adamantly opposed to transgender women mocking and belittling women while displacing them and taking away opportunities in the same way I am when it comes to transgender women competing in female categories in athletics. At least back in 2021, Nike hired an actual transgender female athlete to star in its Play New campaign, and the same can be said of its 2016 ad featuring a transgender man, Chris Mosier.

This year, when Nike invited Mulvaney to prance around in a sports bra and leggings in an effort to promote women's sportswear, female athletes took notice. Some pointed out that Nike doesn't exactly have the best history when it comes to how the company treats women, so hiring a biological male who identifies as a girl and isn't athletic in place of a female athlete shouldn't really surprise anyone. What is surprising is that any business, especially one supposedly dedicated to promoting athletes, would use images fit for a pro-ana group as a selling point. 

Sharron Davies, a former Olympic swimmer had this to say about the new Nike ad:

The ad feels like a parody of what women are. In the past it was always seen as an insult to say, "run like a girl" and here we've got someone behaving in a way that's very un-sporty and very unathletic and it's so frustrating when only one percent of USA sponsorship dollar goes to females in sport. That Nike would do this feels like a kick in the teeth.

Because I know anyone who reads this blog could potentially be triggered by what looks like thinspiration content, I'm going to add a second warning here.  

Back in 2015, France and several other countries took a stand by banning models who were deemed too thin when it was revealed that images of underweight women and girls contribute to the development of eating disorders. Back then, the health ministry in France said its aim was to "fight eating disorders and inaccessible ideals of beauty," a take that was celebrated as a step forward in an industry that had previously showcased not just thin models but dangerously thin models, like Luisel and Eliana Ramos and Isabelle Caro who eventually died from complications related to anorexia. 

Enter Nike, 2023. 

Mulvaney has always been petite, but through her transition, it appears that she may have become even leaner. Because of her biology, it's easier for her to maintain lean body mass than it is for those with XX chromosomes. Over time, hormone replacement therapy can have some effect on body fat, but estrogen treatment won't drastically change an individual's physique unless the treatment is combined with lifestyle and dietary changes as well. Several studies show that the lean body mass of trans women remains above that of cisgender women, even after over a year of treatment. 

What Mulvaney and the companies that use her images perpetuate are derogatory stereotypes and unattainable new "beauty" standards targeting young girls and women, and the trans community, too. The images shown below demonstrate an unrealistic body ideal for girls and most individuals, even if they engage in dieting and exercise. It would have to be excessive to reach such a lean look. People were so angry when fashion designers did this, but for some reason, Mulvaney gets praised. 

I'm not suggesting anything about Mulvaney's mental health, but I am aware of how these kinds of images can appear to others. Female athletes, even some who claim to be advocates of eating disorder recovery, are guilty of the same type of thing when they showcase images taken at angles that intentionally make their bodies look longer and much leaner, but the fat percentage of a female will never be as low as that of a man unless she starves herself into possibly unhealthy or even dangerous territory. 

Before transitioning

These are not images that inspire girls to be healthy

You might as well put these on a pro-ana website

Unfortunately, these kinds of images often inspire comments from young girls wanting to change their bodies

People should boycott Nike for all kinds of reasons. This latest stunt can be added to the ever-growing pile, but chances are little will change. Nike is too big, and exposing the shady things they have done in the past didn't put much of a dent in its success. 

I don't really know what the solution is when it comes to supporting transgender individuals while protecting vulnerable populations, but I can't bring myself to get behind anyone promoting a very clearly unhealthy beauty standard like the one Mulvaney is presenting. I just can't. Young girls and women have enough pressure on them to look a certain way, and now huge companies are shoving these kinds of images in our faces? No thank you. 

And fuck, I missed an opportunity for a "hold my beer" joke. sigh.