Have you ever wondered where do most of the social constructs of womanhood come from? We tend to think these follow ancient social norms and they do, but in many cases, propaganda and popular influential figures were deliberately created to tell women how they had to look, behave, feel, and conduct themselves. Even at some points, these figures were presented as revolutionary modern images that represented freedom and equality, but at the end of the day, ended up being idealized images created by men to keep telling women who they were supposed to be.
We’ve seen these scenarios in art, literature, fashion, magazines, entertainment, and even social media today. Although the word influencer has changed and acquired new definitions, deep down it’s always been a showcase of how society believes we should look and behave. The story we’re going to talk about today might be set over a century ago, but the story still resounds, especially with social media perceived as a window of social normativity disguised as diversity.
You might want to read this: 11 Cool Photos Of Extremely Strong Female Bodybuilders At The Turn Of The Century
This is the story of the Gibson Girl, the influencer character that became the symbol of the perfect free modern woman but that wasn’t more than a weapon for the commodification of women.
Who was The Gibson Girl?
The Gibson Girl made her first big appearance in the 1890s, as a collection of illustrations published in LIFE Magazine created by the American artist Charles Dana Gibson (thus the name). He wanted to personify the ideal of womanhood and femininity based on their looks, their fashion taste, their interests and activities, and, of course, their behavior. The success these unreal women had was such that Gibson Girls became the aim to follow for American women for over two decades.
According to Gibson, he saw his ‘girls’ as the representation of the modern American woman. But this assumption is simply problematic for many reasons we’ll discuss in a moment. Firstly, let’s talk about the core of the Gibson girls. They were the perfect combination of the contemporary frisky woman with dreams and ambitions and the fragile well-behaved lady of society. The Gibson Girl was presented as a gorgeous woman with a great sense of fashion, always looking her best even at the simplest activities. But the main catch and what made them so popular was the disguise she wore of an independent woman equal (almost) to men.
A feminist approach?
The Gibson Girl was portrayed in all sorts of everyday activities that most women of the time wouldn’t even dare to try. They would play golf and tennis (have this in mind), ride bikes and horses in a modern way (you know with separated legs), and swim in gorgeous suits. She would attend parties, go enjoy a cup of coffee or cocktail, and be seen shopping. All this, in great and trailblazing outfits most women would only dare to wear them in their dreams.
Moreover, the message the Gibson Girl wanted to give to women is that it was ok for them to follow their ambitions and talents, but this was mainly limited to the arts, which in a way wasn’t as progressive as they seemed to. Still, they were seen as free agents of their own destiny and autonomy. So, what’s the problem with this? Many!
As mentioned, Charles Dana Gibson, claimed that his girls were merely the depiction of the modern women he saw in American cities. He would say to the Gibson Girl, “I saw her on the streets, I saw her at the theaters, I saw her in the churches, I saw her everywhere and doing everything.” The problem is that he was talking only about a specific type of American woman, the white accommodated woman with free time to spare and resources to leave everything and “follow her dreams.” The Gibson Girl didn’t represent the majority of diverse women living in the country at the time, and like most influencers today, they were just aspirational figures that didn’t represent the reality of the everyday woman.
The Gibson Girl vs. the New Woman
At the same time that the Gibson Girl was captivating the hearts and souls of some American women, another figure was actually revolutionizing and fighting for real equality. She was known as the New Woman and she represented all those women fighting for equality in the public sphere, like the suffragists.
The New Woman was depicted as a free woman who didn’t really care about looking perfectly good at all times but opted for the commodity to develop her everyday activities like actually working. She was portrayed as a single woman, because “how hard it was to find a partner that believed in full equality?”
Don’t miss this: The Eccentric Royal That Changed The Turn Of The Century’s Art World
Both women contrasted in the American imaginary, one was alluring to watch and was seen as a forward woman, you know, rebellious but in a good way according to the standards of the time, while the other one was a radical woman that constantly threatened the social structures and relations between women and men. In other words, the Gibson Girl was a patriarchy-friendly woman who would only challenge the norms when it came to non-important matters like fashion or doing some sports. She would’ve never taken the next step to fight for actual independence because it was against lady etiquette to do so.
As the New Woman gained more and more popularity, the Gibson Girl became more and more vocal, though not for good reasons. She started to undermine and mock the work and speech of the New Girl, and even condemn her radicalness. The idea of progression wasn’t more than another outfit she could change and throw away. As the roaring 20s were approaching, women no longer needed a cartoon to tell them how to look, the flappers did that for themselves, and as for the New Woman, we could say that she paved the way for modern feminism.
