Cara Delevingne’s shaved head was one of the most ostentatious, shocking, and talked-about looks of the 2017 Red Kawakubo/Comme des Garçons Met Gala. The international supermodel and actress rocked up in a low-cut, embellished silver Chanel trouser suit, matched with a newly-shaved head painted in glimmering liquid silver, which continued down her forehead in the shape of fierce lightning bolts. “I am tired of society defining beauty for us,” she claimed, “The more we embrace who we are as people and rely less on our physical attributes, the more empowered we become. Beauty shouldn’t be so easily defined. It is limitless.” So, it seems that this look was supposed to be a statement about oppressive societal beauty values, a rally against mainstream appearance ideals in an attempt to create a more diverse perception of beauty.

“We cannot pick and choose what ‘imperfections’ are socially acceptable to embrace.”

But the more I think about it, the more I question it. Is Delevingne really going against mainstream beauty standards? She is an international supermodel, and despite having shaved her head, she still fits into the westernised, accepted, and praised category of young, white, and slim. She claims that it’s exhausting to be told what beauty should look like. Personally I think it’s exhausting to be told to accept our imperfections through the very medium of perfection itself. How can ‘self-acceptance’ and ‘diversity’ be preached by a young female already assimilated and accepted into societal norms? Needless to say, Delevingne’s makeup remained immaculate, and certainly her shaved head alone was not enough for the lavish affair of the Met. Delevigne’s statement, whilst admirable, was not a redefinition of beauty standards, but instead a re-enforcement of the power of white, Western beauty itself. Were we praising and accepting Delevingne due to her positive message, or due to the fact that, despite a shaved head, she still looked undeniably and extremely good?

It reminds me of the pervasive exploitation of the ‘Body Positive’ movement, which encourages women to adopt a more forgiving and affirming attitude towards their bodies with the goal of improving overall well-being and confidence. In an age where women are continuously scrutinised for their appearance, this movement aims to combat the stigma associated with an ‘imperfect’ appearance. There is no denying that now this movement has been capitalised on and commoditised by corporations who have realised its commercial potential. Zara’s shameless ‘Love your curves’ campaign, which featured two extremely thin and beautiful models in low-slung denim jeans, received backlash for its supposed ‘body positive’ message that failed to grasp the real concept of the movement. Another example is Victoria’s Secret’s attempt to promote diverse body types with their new slogan – ‘a body for every body’ – accompanied by not one, not two, but ten very thin models. Clothing companies often rely on photoshop to remove cellulite, stretch marks and other imperfections, despite telling us to love these very imperfections that are the supposed selling point of the campaign. A contradiction emerges as the body positive message is assimilated into the capitalist system of stereotypical consumer culture which it originally sought to reject.

In 2017, body positivity is no longer the action of being positive about your body. It has lost its true and radical meaning. Instead, it has been capitalised to the extreme. What we are left with is slim-but-curvy white women preaching body positivity when they are accepted by society anyway. This is problematic because it means that body positivity is no longer inclusive of all identities, as the movement has been boycotted by the western commercial world, so that it now represents conventionally attractive white women. The origins of the movement lie in a rejection of stereotypical beauty, so why is it being promoted by this very stereotype?

Gigi Hadid was recently praised in Vogue for defying beauty standards by embracing her moles. While this is a step towards preaching imperfection, it is still taken in the context of an incredibly attractive and ‘perfected’ image. We cannot pick and choose what ‘imperfections’ are socially acceptable to embrace. Despite the embracement of moles and freckles, blemishes and acne scars are still digitally removed, contradicting the message of loving your imperfections.

The continual controversy of fashion ad campaigns

We should all accept our flaws, but the fashion industry is continuously failing to broadcast this important message in an effective and realistic way. Beauty is diverse, beauty is imperfect, and beauty is unique, – it is about time that the fashion industry really started to embrace this