Embedded Files
February publication out now!!!
February feature:
"The Fine Print of Being a Woman"
This February feature series explores the visible and invisible forces that shape women’s lives. Across history, culture, policy, and personal experience, these essays look beyond surface-level ideas of empowerment to examine the deeper structures influencing women’s choices, opportunities, and recognition.
From overlooked historical figures to modern social pressures and institutional gaps, the series highlights how inequality often hides in everyday norms and long-standing systems. At the same time, it recognizes the impact, resilience, and agency of women who continue to challenge those limits.
Together, these pieces invite readers to question what we’ve accepted as normal, whose stories get told, and what genuine equity might actually require.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
"When We Didn't Mean Me"
The country that promised liberty and justice for all has a history of quietly deciding who “all” really includes. This article explores how the rollback of reproductive rights reveals the ongoing gap between America’s founding ideals and women’s lived realities.
"More than stress"
For many women, stress isn’t an occasional visitor — it’s a daily expectation we’ve been taught to normalize. This article explores how gendered pressures shape women’s mental health and why community, support, and small habits can be powerful steps toward breaking the cycle.
"High Fashion"
From couture uniforms to courtroom battles, the flight attendant has always been more than just a pretty face in the aisle. This article explores how glamour, gender expectations, and labor rights collided in the skies — and how the women who were hired to look perfect helped reshape workplace equality on the ground.
"Career, kids and the cage called choice"
What if women’s “choices” are just different versions of the same expectation? This article explores how social norms and moral pressure shape women’s lives while disguising limits as freedom.
"The working mothers penalty"
In a country that celebrates family, why does having a baby come with a financial penalty? This piece examines U.S. maternity leave policy and how economic structures push mothers into impossible decisions.
"The marketplace of not enough"
Behind every “must-have” product might be a message that you were never enough to begin with. This article unpacks how consumer culture profits from gendered beauty standards and self-doubt.
"After Tea"
While men drafted freedom, women quietly built the skills and spaces that would claim it for themselves. This article explores how salons, sewing circles, and women’s clubs turned domestic life into a hidden hub of political power — laying the groundwork for suffrage and proving influence doesn’t always announce itself.
"Dangerously Desired"
From bound feet to beauty filters, the pressure to be “perfect” has always come with a cost. This piece explores how beauty standards weren’t just trends, but tools of control, shaping everything from marriage prospects to modern-day self-esteem. By tracing the line from arsenic wafers to Instagram face, the article reveals how the mirror has long been a political weapon.
"She changed lives, history changed the subject"
Some women change the world, history just forgets to mention them. This piece highlights overlooked feminist figures and examines why women’s contributions are so often erased from mainstream narratives.
"Denied at the ballot"
When one woman tried to vote, the Supreme Court revealed how narrow equality really was. This historical deep dive explores Minor v. Happersett and the legal limits placed on women’s citizenship.
all Images sourced from pinterest
all Images sourced from pinterest
“When ‘We’ Didn’t Mean Me”
by Aseel Nasrallah
“ We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The Declaration of Independence, 1776
The United States of America is the greatest country in the world, is what they all say. I’m here to challenge that idea, not because I don’t love my country, and not because I don’t believe in my country, but because I grew up a woman in my country. Above are the first official words produced by this country, that established our freedom from the oppressive forces tying us down. Yet, there is not a single mention of the women who made up half of this country, and helped the men free it from its shackles.
Women in this country spent centuries fighting tooth and nail for every bit of freedom and equality they could get, just for it to be reversed on June 24, 2022, when the battle wasn’t even over.
Since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, according to the MS. Magazine movement as of January 4, 2024 12 women had died as a result of the abortion ban, citing it as most likely being an undercount, with many more being unnamed or not public. This is due to the fear that has been instilled in our healthcare workers, causing them to have to choose between their licenses and possible jail time, and saving the lives of their patients.
This decision was overturned under the guise of saving lives, when in actuality it is taking more, or leaving children to face difficulties in the foster care system that remains overcrowded and under funded. It also allows states to make vague laws that criminalize doctors who provide their clients with abortions, making it so that even women that require an abortion to survive cannot receive them because their doctors are afraid, and end up with life altering consequences. It has also led women who are desperate for an abortion to resort to unsafe and unsanitary tactics that are costing many their lives.
Overturning this decision was a calculated effort to take back control of women, in an effort to force them to conform to societal standards. It was used to encourage publicly shaming women who have sex out of wedlock, and control victims who have to carry their abusers' child despite the emotional and psychological toll it has on them. Since June of 2022, there has been an uptick of backlash on gender equality and sexism, which was applauded and encouraged by the reversal of this decision and political leaders' response to public backlash as a result of its reversal.
America is not the best country in the world. I believe if we return to the core values of this country, and apply them to all people, including our women we can be. But, as of right now I cannot come here and support the idea that this is the best country, when many of its citizens; including people of color, women, the LGBTQIA+ community, immigrants, and any marginalized group, constantly feel attacked and live under fear of losing their rights or being discriminated against for simply being different. And that is something we must strive towards, making the statement “We the people,” mean something.
More than “Stress”
More than “Stress”
by Aria Sena
by Aria Sena
As you wake up you feel the pit forming in your stomach, the tenseness returns pinching and pulling in all of the wrong places, your hands start the light, constant shaking and anxious thoughts start to cycle through your mind. This is the way many women start their day, not my choice but through the idea that it is normal. As women we’re often told “It’s just a little stress, it’s healthy.” We let the thought infest us, that what we go through is ok, it becomes a generational lie that protects no one, but there’s one small habit that can help lead you to a slightly calmer place.
As you wake up you feel the pit forming in your stomach, the tenseness returns pinching and pulling in all of the wrong places, your hands start the light, constant shaking and anxious thoughts start to cycle through your mind. This is the way many women start their day, not my choice but through the idea that it is normal. As women we’re often told “It’s just a little stress, it’s healthy.” We let the thought infest us, that what we go through is ok, it becomes a generational lie that protects no one, but there’s one small habit that can help lead you to a slightly calmer place.
We’re going to start by talking about the importance of all of this. For some of you stress likely feels like a burden you’ll always have but for others it may be more hidden or you feel like it manageable. Research has shown time and time again that women absorb more stress than men and on average that’s led to women having rates of anxiety and depression that are almost double the rate of our male counterparts. As women we take on a lot in life, we need to prove ourselves but we don’t want to be too much. This constant fight that most men don’t deal with has left us in a pit of our own struggle. Why is this though?
A lot of this built up stress comes from the stigma and expectations we’ve dealt with our entire lives. Men typically express their stress through anger, aggression and addiction; forcing immediate attention and recognition. Women on the other hand tend to express through worry, anxiety and emotional labor; things we dismissed as normal long ago. There’s obvious overlap depending on the individual but on average men have gotten immediate care and women have been left to “just deal with it”. Now generally this would be a nuisance on its own but on top of
that women also haven’t been properly taught how to manage our stress. In clinical settings most trials and research have been conducted on men, especially when it’s mental health related. Historically most studies have been conducted on the male stress patterns (e.g. anger, addiction and aggression). Meaning our common stress signs typically get ignored and pushed aside again. Gender norms have aided this for years, as men’s mental health is typically made into a larger deal they’ve fought to hide it, and women have fought for the attention their mental health deserves. Some don’t even get the chance to make that fight.
Many things stop people from reaching out and getting help. Factors like the cost and whether their insurance will cover it, cultures that won’t allow it, the inflexibility of being able to get help and the stigma around getting help. Even when stress is impacting us daily we’re taught to push it down. Society has normalized the idea of being stressed and in some ways romanticized it. Often once in school or working we are told to strive and fight for our spot at the top. Whether it be valedictorian, ivy league graduate, ceo or the perfect wife and mother. We fight to be the best and often force the strive and actual want out of us and end up fighting off the idea that “I’ve come this far now, I have to do it.” This thought adds to the anxiety and the cycle repeats. There are ways we can pull ourselves out of this mindset though.
I’ll start with some of the more known ones. You can talk to people, like a therapist or maybe a psychologist if you need to. Letting someone know you're struggling can feel like a weight lifted on its own. You can lean into hobbies and things that remind you to slow down and breathe. Make these things that don’t benefit your goals to better separate from it. Finally having a community is one of not only the easiest but also most effective ways to manage stress. Studies
have shown that social support is strongly protective to mental health and has an amazing effect on women especially. By talking to friends and a community about your stress it can help to make it feel less like a burden and less internalized, it helps to break down the stigma by giving it a physical space, and finally it takes away some of the anxiety surrounding a diagnosis as you get the support without the clinical stress (that being said if you feel like getting a diagnosis will help you please reach out to a therapist or psychologist) . There are some issues with this strategy but none unfixable or making it impossible to work around. Many communities lack safe spaces in which they can speak or support each other. There’s also the issue for caregivers finding the time and availability in being able to get help. Then there’s the stigma again, although in practice it helps to break it down, it doesn’t make it any easier in getting there. There aren’t any immediate fixes and everything takes work, but think about your friends, family and children. A world with no stigma on mental health feels impossible but it's not and it starts with you reaching out.
Works cited
OECD-Gender Equality in a Changing World
Nature-Psychological Stress correlations
Cornell-Invisible Burden of a Mental Load
Yale School of Medicine-Gender difference in Mental Health Risk
Springer Nature-Mental distress among young adults
Springer Nature- Gender Specific Trends
NIH-Gender differences in mental disorders
Nature-Hidden Impacts of Inequality on Mental Health
Yale School of Medicine-Stress Factors in a Gendered Environment
Cleveland Clinic- Women and Stress
"High fashion"
"High fashion"
by: Siri Tanvi Atamakuri
by: Siri Tanvi Atamakuri
Early Days (1930s-1950s): Glamour & Gatekeeping
First Flight Attendant: Heinrich Kubis (male) on a Zeppelin in the 1920s; Ellen Church (female) in 1930.
Requirements: Strict rules for women (age, weight, marital status, appearance) to cater to mostly male clientele.
Role: Service, comfort, and projecting an image of luxury.
Uniforms: Military-inspired, then feminine and fashionable, often with haute couture designs.
The "Stewardess" Era & Shifting Roles (1960s-1970s)
Feminism & Deregulation: Societal shifts and airline deregulation challenged norms, making flying more accessible.
Inclusivity: The term "stewardess" faded; "flight attendant" became gender-neutral; men were hired; age/marital status rules eased.
Focus: Greater emphasis on safety training alongside service as passenger numbers grew.
Uniforms: Became bolder (miniskirts, hotpants) but began shifting towards functionality.
Professionalization & Diversity (1980s-Present)
Safety First: Role became clearly defined as safety professionals; uniforms became more androgynous and functional (pantsuits, blouses).
Diversity: Increased racial, ethnic, and gender diversity in the workforce.
Modern Era: Uniforms incorporate high-fashion designers (Lacroix, Pucci) for style and brand, while training focuses heavily on emergency procedures, reflecting increased passenger volume and complexity.
Today: A highly trained, diverse workforce focused on safety and customer service, reflecting the evolution from glorified waitstaff to essential crew.
Enforcing Femininity & Glamour
Aesthetic Appeal: Airlines hired young, attractive women to serve as glamorous, idealized figures, using uniforms to highlight their figures and appeal to passengers (especially men).
Sexualized Uniforms: From the 1960s, uniforms evolved to include revealing styles like mini-skirts, hot pants, go-go boots, and cinched belts to accentuate bodies, creating a "sexy" image.
Girdles & Heels: Mandatory girdles and high heels were enforced to create a specific posture and silhouette, adding to the disciplined, feminine look.
Enforcing Respectability & Control
Strict Regulations: Rules on height, weight, appearance (no glasses), and marital status (no marriage/pregnancy) enforced conformity to an "ideal" woman.
"Effortless" Appearance: The goal was for the work to look effortless, hiding the difficult safety and care work performed, making attendants appear as part of the luxury amenity.
Challenging Norms: Activism by groups like Stewardesses for Women's Rights (SFWR) challenged these rules, using the 1964 Civil Rights Act to fight age/marriage discrimination.
Enforcing Labor Expectations & Control
Marketing Tool: Uniforms and appearance standards were used to differentiate airlines, turning attendants into a marketing strategy for service quality and glamour.
Disguised Labor: The emphasis on beauty and charm masked the demanding physical and emotional labor (safety, fear management, service) as merely "feminine" charm, reducing their status as skilled workers.
Control of Body & Work: Strict dress codes and appearance rules were a form of labor control, making attendants' bodies and performance extensions of the airline's brand.
Evolution & Resistance
Unionization: Flight attendants unionized to demand respect as workers, not just pretty faces, fighting the sexist image.
Legal Battles: Court cases, like Celio Diaz v. Pan Am, chipped away at discriminatory policies, leading to broader acceptance of married, older, and male attendants.
Shift in Focus: Deregulation in the late 1970s shifted focus from glamour to cost, further changing the industry and uniforms.
Key Influences & Eras:
1950s: Chic & Structured: Early uniforms, influenced by wartime austerity, featured tailored, fitted jackets, pencil skirts, and hats, mirroring post-war sophistication, while later in the decade, they embraced glamour with bouffant hairstyles and pillbox hats, echoing mainstream fashion trends.
1960s: Modern & Mod: This era saw a shift towards bold colors and youthful styles, with designers like Emilio Pucci creating iconic, psychedelic-print A-line dresses and plastic bubble helmets, bringing space-age mod fashion to the skies and runways.
1970s: Groovy & Glam: Uniforms adopted bell bottoms, hot pants, minidresses, and vibrant patterns, aligning with the era's counter-culture and disco styles, featuring patent leather and bold hues that were directly mirrored in everyday clothing.
Designer Collaborations (1960s-Present): Airlines partnered with high-fashion designers (Dior, Pucci, Versace, Kate Spade), treating uniforms as couture, making designer looks accessible and setting trends for women's workwear and general style.
How it Worked:
Marketing Tool: Airlines used attractive, fashionable flight attendants to appeal to (mostly male) travelers, making uniforms a direct reflection of popular culture.
Trend Adoption: Uniforms quickly adopted current fashion trends (e.g., military looks, miniskirts, bell bottoms) to appear modern and stylish, influencing consumer purchasing.
Accessibility: By putting designer fashion into a mass-market context, airlines made haute couture's influence tangible and wearable for the general public.
Early flight attendants were simultaneously constrained by rigorous and discriminatory standards and empowered by the unique professional opportunities the job offered for women at the time. Ultimately, the standards were a complex mix of constraints that objectified and controlled women, and empowerment that provided a unique career path and galvanized a powerful fight for workplace equality that changed the industry forever.
Constraints
The standards placed significant burdens on flight attendants, primarily women, who faced pervasive sexism and objectification.
Strict Physical Requirements: Airlines imposed strict and often superficial rules regarding age (forced retirement as early as 32), weight (mandatory weigh-ins), height, and appearance, including required makeup, specific hairstyles, and "girdle checks".
Gender and Marital Status Discrimination: Historically, most airlines only hired young, single, white women. Attendants were forced to resign if they got married or pregnant, a "no-marriage policy" that was only struck down in the mid-1960s after legal challenges.
Sexualization and Objectification: In the 1960s and 70s, many airlines adopted marketing strategies that leveraged the "sexy stewardess" stereotype, with revealing uniforms (like hot pants) designed to attract male passengers.
Emotional Labor: Attendants were expected to perform significant emotional labor, always appearing cheerful and poised while suppressing their true feelings, which could lead to emotional exhaustion and job dissatisfaction.
Empowerment
Despite the severe limitations, the role offered a rare pathway to independence and professional activism for women in the mid-20th century.
Opportunities for Travel and Independence: The job promised adventure, a steady income, and opportunities for travel that were largely unavailable to most young women in the post-war era, fostering a sense of independence.
Professionalism and Skill: The role required genuine skills, including first-aid training (early attendants were registered nurses), safety knowledge, and customer service expertise, which lent the position an air of professionalism and respect.
Catalyst for the Women's Movement: The restrictive and discriminatory policies became a flashpoint for activism. Flight attendants were among the first groups to file cases under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, challenging the biased rules through the courts. Their collective action, known as the "stewardess rebellion," significantly influenced the broader labor and feminist movements and led to the eventual elimination of the most discriminatory standards.
Sources:
https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/womens-fashion-and-airline-industry
https://www.unitedafa.org/news/the-flight-attendant-labor-union-in-womens-history-month
https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/editorial/womens-fashion-and-airline-industry
https://www.sfomuseum.org/exhibitions/fashion-flight-history-airline-uniform-design
https://pciaw.org/style-at-30000-feet-a-trip-through-the-evolution-of-flight-attendant-style/
https://www.facebook.com/groups/DoYouRememberThe60sFanClub/posts/1535338480192113/
https://commonslibrary.org/when-flight-attendants-fought-the-airline-industry-and-won/
https://resilience.si.edu/story/flight-attendants-equality
https://www.leanblog.org/2017/09/airplane-food-kaizen-violation-standardized-work/
https://www.1940airterminal.org/evolution-of-the-flight-attendant-uniform
"Career, Kids, and the Cage Called Choice"
"Career, Kids, and the Cage Called Choice"
by: Annie Sun
“I believe most plain girls are virtuous because of the scarcity of opportunity to be otherwise,” Maya Angelou’s statement questions the longstanding correlation of virtue with free will in women’s lives. From the feminist lens, Angelou’s statement raises a philosophical question: in a patriarchal society, do women possess free will? Possessing both consciousness and conscience, women are the doers of their actions. Yet, are their decisions manifestations of the moral architecture they are raised in, or their will as an individual. For many women, their lifetime will consist of free choice, but not necessarily free will. True free will is often denied to women whose choices are dictated by rigid moral compasses.
Morals, constituted by the patriarchy, keep women in cycles of this-or-that decisions where they are unable to break free, for fear of moral reprimand. The patriarchy does not force women, rather, it entraps women with moral fallacies. Moral codes are the cornerstone to civil society, often held by the collective without doubt. Yet, when morals are shaped in favor of an oppressive power, the morals may justify free choice for the confinement of free will. Women often make decisions based on morality, as does any other individual, but women are entrapped by options more than they are confronted with possibilities. In truth, there is no control group, free of society’s ‘moral influence’ to evaluate the extent of the Patriarchy on women’s free will. In evaluation, there is no necessity for a woman to be a mother, or to be a working woman. It is purely her choice, but the society’s normalcy dictates a woman do one or the other.
To women, there has always been the decades-old question. Career or motherhood? Career, the pride of financial freedom, self-reliance, and their impact in the workplace. Motherhood, the pride of creation, growth, and a cornerstone of ‘femininity’. There is no free will in the decision between career and motherhood. The freedom to choose either option constitutes a woman’s free choice. Conversely, a woman’s free will constitutes the ability to choose an option free of the necessity to abide by societal virtue. For long, society has held narrow moral codes toward women, lacking nuance in a mature woman’s options. Black-and-white choices such as giving up motherhood for a career, or career for motherhood, are the current epitome of a woman’s freedom. Is it moral for mothers to work long hours with children at home? Society says no. The statistics agree, finding 55% of working “moms have reduced hours or switched jobs to manage childcare costs”, an additional 36% leaving “the workforce entirely due to cost-prohibitive childcare expenses,” [1] There is no moral statute stating women need to sacrifice working ambitions for motherhood. There is simply a lack of choices that forces women into the chasm between a ‘this-or-that’ between motherhood and career. International Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found women more likely than men to take parental leave, experiencing reduced labor market attachments post-childbirth. [2] Retired, 23-Slam, tennis professional, Serena Williams grieved retirement, noting “If I were a guy, I wouldn’t be writing this because I’d be out there playing and winning while my wife was doing the physical labour of expanding our family.” There is no true necessity for women to abandon one for the other if society accommodates women for diverse options.
In personal testimony, I had grown up believing my mother was selfish. For much of my formative years, I had believed my mother was inferior to a woman because she was a working woman. Both my parents were manual laborers, working tiresome shifts that went into ungodly hours. I felt the distance between my parents’ job, and my neediness as a child. Watching as my peers were picked up by their mothers, while I was picked up by my grandfather, I felt hatred toward my mother. Watching her hunch over a composition notebook every night, callously budgeting, against the image of my friend’s mother who would bake the class goodies. I saw my mother as a greedy monster who loved money more than she did her daughter. Interestingly enough, it had never crossed my mind to blame my father the way I’d blame my mother. In truth, we were a lower-class family trying to scrape by. My mother didn’t have the means to stop working. The models of free will lie in choices, where the woman is not “neglecting” her child as she actively works to put food on the table.
Works Cited
Angelou, Maya. I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. Pasadena, Calif., Salem Press, 1969.
Fiona, Toni. “87% of Working Moms Hide Their Parenthood at Work.” LiveCareer, 30 Apr. 2025, www.livecareer.com/resources/motherhood-on-mute-report. Accessed 15 Jan. 2026.
“Gender Equality in a Changing World.” 2026. Gender Equality at Work, OECD Publishing, 28 Apr. 2025.
Sahay, Aditya. ““If I Was a Guy”- Serena Williams Claims Sexism Played a Big Role in Her Retirement Call.” WION, 13 Aug. 2022,
www.wionews.com/sports/if-i-was-a-guy-serena-williams-claims-sexism-played-a-major-role-in -her-retirement-506591. Accessed 24 Jan. 2026.
all images sourced from pinterest
all images sourced from pinterest
“The Working Mother’s Penalty”
by: Grace Castleberry
The United States Maternity leave policy doesn’t fail because it's not developed, but it fails because it was created without thought of a woman's economic reality in the picture. When looking closely at the legislation, it’s clear that this system doesn't just overlook women, it also disadvantages them.
Federal Maternity leave was introduced in 1993 with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). This act would implement up to 12 weeks of protected maternity leave. However, this leave does not need to be paid. It was signed in February 1993 by president Clinton. While many thought this act was very progressive and fixed many issues regarding employed women, it still left barriers for new mothers. The leave not being paid makes new mothers go 3 months without a paycheck if they stay home all 12 weeks. This is incredibly hard to live off with hospital bills, and incoming child expenses like doctors appointments, clothes, formula, etc.
California saw this issue and in 2002 became the first state to implement paid maternity leave. The bill they passed allowed eligible workers to take up to 6 weeks of partial (usually 55%-75% of weekly earnings) paid leave when taking care of a new child or a sick family member. Studies showed this increased breastfeeding rates, showed positive effects on women's long term health, and allowed people to bond with their newborn. Other states followed California's footsteps like New Jersey (family leave insurance program in 2008), Rhode Island (offered paid family leave in 2013), and New York State (offered paid family leave starting in 2016). As of January 2026, 13 states and DC have mandatory paid family leave laws. This is just over 1/4th of the states; meaning the other 3/4ths of states who don’t implement these laws have parents going 12 weeks without pay after having a newborn baby. The original Family and Medical Leave Act is still flawed in itself as it only applies to companies with over 50 workers in a 75 mile radius. This means if working for a small business, protected maternity leave isn’t an option. To qualify, the employee also must have worked with that company for a year. Even when workers qualify to take the leave, it disadvantages those of lower socioeconomic status as they can’t trade job protection for financial instability.
With all these reasons, the current federal act disadvantages millions of new mothers and newborns. In fact, research shows that with a lack of early parental bonding, long-term effects like increased aggression and emotional detachment impact newborns. Infant child care is expensive and hard to find, tangling many aspiring moms in either pursuing their professional career, or deciding to be stay at home moms. However, women shouldn’t need to make that decision. There should be more protections for mothers to balance young children and work. People around the nation agree, and have started drafting reforms. A big one is the H.R.5390 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): FAMILY Act, which is a proposed US federal bill that will offer paid maternity leave for up to 12 weeks. It wants to replace or extend the already existing FMLA, which is unpaid.
The United States Maternity Leave policy reveals the sad truth on how working women are valued. Paid maternity leave shouldn't be seen as a luxury or a progressive order, but a necessity for women. After all, childbirth sustains our country, and until federal policy recognizes that, motherhood is continued to be viewed as an inconvenience to women in the workforce, rather than a joy of carrying on the human race.
Excess sources not cited specifically in article:
"The best color in the whole world is the one that looks good on you." — Coco Chanel
"Each time a woman stands up for herself, without knowing it possibly, without claiming it, she stands up for all women." — Maya Angelou
“The Marketplace of Not Enough”
“The Marketplace of Not Enough: Gendered Insecurity in Consumer Culture"
By: Kylie Harrington
While feminists are trying to combat beauty standards and consumption, fast fashion brands are actively trying to promote it. In a world where looks take priority, insecurities are bound to increase and therefore profits sky rocket.
What is fast fashion? Fast fashion is a term used for clothing that is cheaply made, and is made for the latest trends, that is aimed at being quickly used and thrown away. Stanton quotes The Good Trade, Currently, fast fashion companies churn out about 52 'micro, seasons' a year, or essentially a new 'collection' each week (Stanton). This ceaseless rhythm does a lot more than just damage the global environment it alters if not entirely changes, the way especially women view and understand their identity and what gives them value. With the arrival of 52 micro seasons annually, women inevitably feel as if they have been left out. Trends that are now based on modern femininity, rather than being based on the ideals of creativity, self, expression, or even traditional beauty like pink dresses and bows, now are rather measured by having the right brands, wearing the latest fashion, and following the trendiest makeup styles. Beauty gurus and fast fashion industries excessively commercialize the female gender, thus turning empowerment into a commodity that can be bought. Of course, one will hardly be able to avoid the feeling of being "less than". Late night scrolling easily becomes a cycle of comparison and micro insecurities leading to the feeling that you never have enough or are enough.
And that feeling is accompanied by a price. Elementary tops generally cost around $20, $50, while jeans and sweaters are between $50 and $100 (Jifing Apparel). For a lot of people, it is not financially possible to keep up with these constantly changing standards, but using a different option feels like social failure. Fast fashion hides this pressure through empowerment marketing, which is a trick to convince customers that they are in control by choosing confidence, independence, and self expression whereas in fact, they are being sold insecurity on a weekly basis.
Fashion, however, is an essential part of a person's identity. We wear clothes as if they were the first chapter of our story. One can tell a person's interests and taste in art and music just by looking at their outfit. People form cliques through their looks and dress to find those with similar appearances and thereby to find a common ground to connect. So on the one hand, clothing can be harmful. They are the most basic element of our being. Hence, empowerment marketing, which is basically a strategy that deepens people's loyalty towards a brand by making them feel confident, capable, and in control. Therefore, when you have the power to control your appearance, it makes you feel confident and well capable. Feminism, being a hot topic in society today, could not possibly be left out of marketing. (Algar) points out that femverting or feminist advertising uses female empowerment techniques to increase brand affinity and authenticity. There are numerous examples like pantene covergirl and nike. By incorporating feminine themes, the shopper is made to feel acknowledged, and therefore, more inclined to purchase. Which in effect makes prices sky rocket and consumers eager for the next collection.
In short there is no way to stop consumerism but you can recognize it and its effects. You can see the tricks and plays used. But this is not to say fashion is bad; it's part of who we are as individuals. It has fuelled movements and powered revelations not just for groups but for everyone. So don't give up clothes, give up the novelties surrounding them.
Works Cited
Algar, Emily Frances. “Femvertising: The Commercialisation of Feminism – The Winding Roads That Led Me Here.” The Winding Roads That Led Me Here, 7 November 2014, https://thewindingroadsthatledmehere.wordpress.com/2014/11/07/femvertising-the-commercialisation-of-feminism/. Accessed 27 January 2026.
jifing apparel. “what is the average cost of woman clothing.” jinfengapparel.com, Sustainability Directory. “V]How Does Fast Fashion Affect Body Image?” fashion.sustainability-directory.com, fulcrum point and co, https://fashion.sustainability-directory.com/question/how-does-fast-fashion-affect-body-image/.
Stanton, Audrey. “What Is Fast Fashion? Our Sustainability Editor Explains.” The Good Trade, 5 November 2025, https://www.thegoodtrade.com/features/what-is-fast-fashion/. Accessed 2 January 2026.
"After tea"
"After tea"
by: Lina Bernatska
“Remember the ladies” Abigail Adam’s
The men did just the opposite, in this case it ended up working in the ladies favor.
Since the founding of the country, women were largely excluded from areas of political power, education, and the Declaration of Independence. They were confined to the domestic realm, justified by the republican motherhood and the cult of domesticity. Women decided to make their own spaces in which they could inadvertently grow their rights. In the Early Republic, the Republican motherhood assigned women to raise informed and virtuous future citizens, aka their sons. This ideology gave them some freedom as they were expected to pass on their “education” to their children. Salons allowed women to host discussions on politics, philosophy, and culture, under the guise of educating their children. These informal gatherings in private homes allowed them to intellectually exchange ideas and influence cultural life. During the Second Great Awakening, a religious Christian revival, women were brought together in sewing circles in order to “perform community labor.” This allowed them to improve their lives by socializing, exchanging ideas, and getting out of the house. In these circles, they stressed moral reform and social responsibility backed by religious motivation to eradicate sin in society. In tandem and immediately following the Second Great Awakening, the cult of domesticity developed which emphasized the home as a moral, spiritual sphere that was distinct from the working world of men. Women’s clubs in the antebellum, gilded age, and the progressive era aided to progress society. During the antebellum period, many women gained organizational experience through these groups in which they called for reforms in education, self improvement, abolition, temperance, labor reform, and women’s suffrage. In fact, many future suffrage leaders gained experience by participating in and advocating for the abolitionist movement. Societies of women transformed domestic spheres into a powerful, positive network in which they helped shape American culture and reform as well as subtly expand their rights in the political world. They were able to transform in this way because these spaces aligned with traditional gender expectations, and therefore men did not see them as a threat and often dismissed them. This lack of scrutiny allowed women greater freedom to organize and discuss controversial ideas and tightly-knitted networks without immediate opposition. These spaces also redefined women’s roles by demonstrating their potential in education, organization, and the influence they can carry outside of the home, justifying their future participation in public life. In the end, these spaces acted as stepping stones taken by women in order to achieve national suffrage as stated in the 19th amendment; a result of the women’s suffrage movement propelled by many influential women such as Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Alice Paul, who gained insightful experience through their participation in these circles.
Dangerously Desired: The Weaponization of Beauty Standards Against Women
by: Grace Mueller
Would you: break your bones, chemically burn your skin, or alter your body permanently in the name of beauty? For centuries, such practices were not only customary but also expected of women and girls across the globe.
Maybe you don’t consume arsenic or stuff your face in order to be paler, but you don’t need to associate with the periodic table to feel the effects of unrealistic beauty standards. Chances are you have, however, put on a filter, or attempted to Photoshop or AI your pictures at some point. Perhaps not as extreme as deforming your body parts, but although the tools have changed, they still have an impact on how women perceive themselves, contorting their minds more than their figures.
That said, let’s get into the specifics of what global and historical perspectives of the ideal female body can teach us about our current standards.
An extreme beauty practice that deeply reflected patriarchal society was the millennium-old foot fetish of Chinese lotus feet. Confucian-era footbinding involved the tight binding of young girls’ feet to limit growth to about 3 inches. Physically, it caused permanent, severe injuries, including broken bones, infections, and reduced mobility, serving to restrict women to the domestic sphere and signify subservience.
Initially, you’d only see aristocratic women with lotus feet, mainly because they could afford to not work or be on their feet all day. However, women of lower social classes subsequently joined the bandwagon even if they actually did have to be on their feet all day. It eventually became the only way to guarantee future success and marriage, since men saw bound feet as more desirable and attractive, and normal feet as kind of despicable. It was common for mothers to bind their own daughters’ feet, as it was so essential for living even somewhat decently.
Now the million-dollar question: why would an entire culture be comfortable hobbling half its population? The Marxist-feminist answer is that footbinding made women incapable of labor, reinforcing male dominance in production and wealth accumulation. Moreover, because women were heavily dependent on men, their lack of education, property rights, and career
opportunities was the main reason lotus feet persisted as long as it did.
A couple more notable practices were from the Victorian era, which, like the Chinese, emphasized a pale, “natural” look, to distinguish upper-class women from laborers. To achieve this translucent appearance, instead of using cosmetics, women would snack on arsenic wafers; they would also use drops of belladonna to dilate their pupils and make their eyes look bigger. As you probably guessed, both of these products were highly toxic; belladonna was known to cause blindness, and continued consumption of arsenic was fatal.
Women still had their classic lead powders to conceal blemishes; however, obvious makeup was considered vulgar and associated with actresses or prostitutes (according to Queen Victoria). The only thing more outrageous than women having skin issues like freckles and pimples was unnatural women, so logically, they just got better at hiding makeup. Businesses would sell products discreetly to wealthy clients, and most hid their makeup in old prescription bottles.
The Victorian obsession with a natural yet corpse-like pale look shows how social control can be exerted through moral shaming. By labeling visible cosmetics as "vulgar" or "dishonest," the patriarchal structure of the time created a psychological trap: women were expected to meet an impossible standard of porcelain perfection, yet were morally condemned if they caked on too much paint.
Throughout both these eras, femininity was classified as fragile, modest, and gentle, with an emphasis on domesticity and submissiveness. These standards shifted the burden of class onto the woman’s body, ensuring that her time, health, and reputation were constantly managed and only valued as an ornamental object of status rather than a person.
Although footbinding and arsenic wafers belong to the past, modern society has developed new methods of female oppression. Beauty products are still advertised to make your skin look “flawless,” and high-end makeup companies are known for digitally editing their models. Hair companies will even use wigs to showcase their products’ effectiveness, setting false precedents as to what women actually look like. This influences a woman’s perpetual dissatisfaction with her appearance, which the beauty market can easily exploit to push products as “solutions” to imperfections.
But just like in the past, when people questioned harmful beauty practices, today there’s a growing movement encouraging us to embrace real, diverse, and authentic beauty. Thus, understanding this history helps us see how important it is to challenge these unrealistic ideals and celebrate ourselves just as we are.
womensagenda.com.au/latest/beauty-or-bondage-the-illusion-of-empowerment-in-beauty-standar ds/
herhalfofhistory.com/2024/08/15/13-4-chinese-footbinding/
www.prestonparkmuseum.co.uk/article/16976/The-history-of-Victorian-makeup
“She Changed Lives. History Changed the Subject.”
by: Nora Kovacevic
Throughout history, many women have made significant contributions to help advance us to where women rights stand today. However, they seem to be forgotten or rarely taught in our education systems. This leads us to wonder why such important figures of our history don’t seem to have enough relevance that they be brought up in modern education. One of the many women who haven’t reached household popularity is Urani Rumbo.
Urani Rumbo was an Albanian woman, born on January 20th in 1895. She was born and raised in Gjirokastër, southern Albania. She was raised by her father who was a school teacher along with her mother who was a house wife (as per the norm of the time) along with her three brothers Kornil, Thanas, and Dhimitër. Throughout her childhood, she focused on making an education for herself, going to the school of Filates where she educated herself there. In the school of Filates she learned to read and write in many languages including Greek, Albanian, French and Italian. From the age of 15, she was very smart and despite the views of women educating themselves at the time, she still remained educated anyway.
Urani Rumbo was a very smart women and used her wisdom to benefit many women in Albania. She decided that she would create a school for young girls, so that they could receive an education like she did. She ended up founding Koto Hoxhi, a primary school. She later became the director of the school, leaving a lasting impact on the students. She also voiced the importance of education on young girls in newspapers so that she can open the Albanian community’s eyes on something other than the traditional standard. She even directed training courses on agriculture and theater, inspiring many to follow their passions despite what others may think. Traditionally, Albanian women were only meant to be housewives, but she wanted women to have the opportunity to more than just that, so she founded Lidhja De gruas. Lidhja de gruas was a feminist organization that targeted the restriction of women to household chores, as well as illiteracy. She changed the game for thousands of Albanian Women, and inspired change to still happen today. After all that Urani Rumbo has done throughout her career, she left a legacy for Albanian women to thrive even after her death. Today, there is some biographies written about her, showcasing her life story even though the media fails to push them far. The school she founded is still here today, giving education to many young girls and will continue to do so for centuries to come. The Women’s union feminist organization still stands and proves the importance of women’s rights and everything she has done has impacted the people generations after her, serving as a reminder to all women that they matter and they deserve to be educated.
While Urani Rumbo was such an impactful person, many of us have never heard about her or her story. When we see the school she created, and the masses of women who became educated because of it, we fail to see that she was the woman behind the scenes who made it happen. Urani Rumbo remained largely unheard of because she lived in early twentieth-century Albania, a society that was dominated by strict patriarchal norms that limited women’s access to education, public influence, and historical recognition. Although she founded a school to educate girls and actively worked to improve women’s rights, her efforts were marginalized by male controlled institutions and later excluded from mainstream historical narratives. Her lack of recognition reflects a larger pattern within feminist movements, where the voices of women are often silenced or overlooked, especially when they come from smaller nations. Urani Rumbo’s story demonstrates how women’s contributions to social change are frequently erased, not because they lacked impact, but because history has consistently failed to value and preserve women’s activism.
Urani Rumbo’s life and work serve as a powerful example of how women’s contributions to social progress are often overlooked despite their lasting impact. Through her dedication to education and women’s rights, she helped transform opportunities for countless Albanian women and challenged the restrictive norms of her time. Her lack of recognition is not a reflection of her importance, but rather of a historical pattern that has silenced many women’s voices. By acknowledging figures like Urani Rumbo, we not only honor their legacy but also take an important step toward creating a more complete and inclusive understanding of history that isn’t biased to patriarchal means.
Sources:
History Back
NCRI Women Community
Pantheon World
Infinite Women
“Denied at the Ballot”
by: Elisa Nikovic
[ Virginia Louisa Minor, Born in Virginia on the 27th of March, 1824, was a suffragist known for her case with the Supreme Court, Minor v. Happersett. In 1852, Minor had her only kid. In 1866, Virginia Minor had helped found the Woman Suffrage Association of Missouri which she would soon be declared the first president of. At a St. Louis suffrage convention 3 years later, Virginia Minor held a speech encouraging women to strive for equality. In 1871, Minor resigned from the group due to its association with another organization. In 1872, once Virginia Minor had attempted to register to vote, she was denied on the basis that she was a woman. This event prompted her to file a civil lawsuit where she used the 14th amendment to her defense. This case marked one of the most prominent and important Supreme Court decisions regarding women’s history in the U. S. and the fight for suffrage. In this article, the court case and ruling will be talked about in further detail. ]
For over a hundred years women had fought for their rights, publishing documents such as the Declaration of Sentiments, hoping for the same freedom that was given to white men succeeding the statement “all men are created equal.” Resorting to any endeavors necessary to require that freedom. Whether it was clothing or protest, all were efforts to gain rights. Following the Civil War, in an attempt to guarantee and protect the rights of freedmen, the 14th amendment of the Constitution was ratified on July 9th of 1868. This declared that anyone who had gone through the process of naturalization or had been born on American soil was a citizen of the United States and entitled to the rights of one. This contained the right to vote. Following this amendment the 15th amendment was ratified. This protected African Americans from discrimination when voting. However, women were yet to gain suffrage. Thus, the suffrage movement began.
Due to the 14th amendment declaring that anyone born on American soil or had been naturalized is a citizen and therefore guaranteed the rights of one, many women from 1868 onwards to 1875 in a movement following the “new departure strategy” used the 14th amendment to vote, declaring that they were citizens and were allowed to vote as a result of that. Some women had successfully voted. However, the majority were not successful and had been fined. One woman, Virginia Minor, an officer in an organization named the National Woman Suffrage Association and the first president of the Woman Suffrage Association of Missouri, had been turned away at a poll and brought the issue to the Supreme Court. In this she argued, similar to other women at the time, that the 14th amendment had protected her right to vote as she was a citizen. However, the Supreme Court ruled against her, concluding that the states would decide if women could vote and voting was not a guaranteed right that comes with citizenship. This ruling showed the deep gap between how women were viewed in the U.S. and how men had been viewed. When it had come to women, the rights guaranteed with citizenship were no longer guaranteed.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse