Naomi Wolf and Flawed Arguments

In 1991 noted feminist author Naomi Wolf wrote the book The Beauty Myth. In which she examines beauty as a demand and judgment upon women. She goes onto explain that women in western culture are hurt by the pressure to conform to an idealized concept of female beauty. It is a book that has inspired many young women to take up the fight for equality.

However, her book, The Beauty Myth contains several flawed arguments. There are three errors that stand out noticeably. The first problem is that many of the statistics listed in her book are wrong. The second issue is her argument that many older feminists have burned out and that many younger women don't want to take up the fight. And finally, Wolf seems set on specifically blaming men, and men's institutions for the existence and perpetuation of the beauty myth.

Like any good author, Wolf uses facts and statistics to try and support her (beauty myth) theory. For example, Wolf seems to focus on statistics relating to anorexia nervosa, a well-known eating disorder. On the surface this seems like a sound basis to her argument. Anorexia is often associated with women feeling pressured to look a certain way. To achieve this look they literally starve themselves to death. This seems to fit right in with Wolf's idea of the beauty myth, except for one fatal mistake: as Casper Schoemaker of the Trimbos Institute points out, all but five of her twenty-three statistics were grossly exaggerated. For instance Wolf states in her book that 7.5% of American women are suffering from anorexia, this sort of number lends a sense of urgency to her writing. But when one looks carefully, one finds that the true number is closer to 0.065% (Schoemaker 99). That means that Wolf's number was 115 times higher than the true figure.

Another example of embellishment in The Beauty Myth, is the statistic Wolf gives about the annual death rate of anorexics. Wolf states that 150,000 people die every year from anorexia; in truth, this number is impossibly high. Barry O'Neill, a professor of political science, appeared on the show "20/20" to discuss his findings about the effects of eating disorders and reported that there are about 950 yearly deaths among anorexics (polisci.ucla.edu). Christina Sommers wrote in an article for the b that "...the Division of Vital Statistics at the National Center for Health Statistics reported that in 1991 [the year "The Beauty Myth" was published] there were 54 deaths from anorexia nervosa and no deaths from bulimia" (Sommers 30).

While one can appreciate the strong rhetorical play on her readers' pathos, it is evident that Wolf has exaggerated the statistics in her book. But feminism will not benefit from embellished facts and figures. What it needs are cool, clear arguments with strong facts to support them. The twisting of facts to suit the argument makes Wolf seem less credible, and leaves doubts in the minds of her readers. When presenting a book as controversial and hard hitting as The Beauty Myth the sort of incongruity that comes from sketchy facts is unacceptable.

Just as unacceptable is the disrespect towards modern day feminists that Naomi Wolf shows in her book. She writes, "After years of much struggle and little recognition, many older women feel burned out; after years of taking its light for granted, many younger women show little interest in touching new flame to the torch"(Wolf 925). At first glance this statement makes sense. Fighting and struggling does make people tired, and there's no debating that the quest for feminine equality has been a long and arduous journey. It also stands to reason that if someone has had something (i.e. equality) her entire life, then she will probably take it for granted.

But current events show that this just is not true. There are many feminists today who have more than enough strength to keep fighting, and many who are willing to "...touch new flame to the torch." Take for instance, bell hooks, who has published over thirty books; Nancy Hartsock, the feminist philosopher and author; Robin Morgan, the activist and author; Catharine Alice MacKinnon, the feminist lawyer and professor of law; or Gudrun Schyman, the Swedish politician. The list goes on and on, but these are all feminists that have been fighting for years and don't seem to feel at all burned out. As for young women keeping the fight alive, the National Organization for Women currently has over 500,000 members, with an entire branch dedicated to feminists under the age of thirty (N.O.W.). To say that these women are "...burned out," or taking things for "...granted" is to disrespect and ignore all the hard work these dedicated feminists have put into the fight for equality.

Just as Naomi Wolf ignores the work of other dedicated feminists, she ignores common sense. In ignoring common sense, she sets herself up for a fall; exaggeration and hyperbole are not resources necessary for proving a point. As a matter of fact, they are counter productive to her goal. In her book Naomi Wolf lays the claim that "...The beauty myth is always actually prescribing behavior and not appearance" (Wolf 928). But then who is doing the prescribing? Ms. Wolf would answer that it is men. In her book she writes "The beauty myth is not about women at all. It is about men's institutions and institutional power" (928). But it isn't men that are to blame. How could it be, when they are just as victimized by their own version of the beauty myth as women are by theirs? For men it isn't beauty, but wealth, money, power, and prestige that they are told from birth to strive for.

Another point Ms. Wolf fails to acknowledge is that blame might lie elsewhere. Perhaps she should look to the cosmetics and diet industry's standards, which are created entirely by the consumers! Though women may attempt to conform to those standards, the meme created by consumers is what the consumer tries to adapt to. And thus, Ms. Wolf's argument that the blame lies on "...men's institutions" falls. Consider this quote from an article in the National Review by Mary Gotschall, "...Women have free will, contrary to Miss Wolf's assertion, and they are not forced to buy beauty products." If women stopped buying beauty products and services, the industry would die, as other industries have died in the past." In summation, Ms. Wolf has again failed at realizing a critical flaw in her argument -- condemning the very people she's attempting to liberate.

All in all, Miss Wolf has so many fundamental flaws in her logic that one is reduced to pointing them out at every turn. For one, her facts and figures are dramatically inflated, secondly she presents her flawed (and disrespectful) argument that many feminists don't care to keep up the fight for equality, and finally she goes on to blame the beauty myth on men and men's institutions. To maintain that many flaws is no way to propagate liberating and rousing feminist rhetoric. There are aspects of her argument that, truth be told, are compelling, but the converse to that face of the coin is fanaticism. Pure fanaticism is too extreme to be listened too; in fact the main critique she draws to her work is the lack of moderation and level-headedness. Mary Gotschall agrees when she says "The central flaw of The Beauty Mythis its extremism. It lacks moderation, balance, judiciousness."

Naomi Wolf is a passionate author that really believes in what she writes about, and because of this she deserves much of the praise she gets. But because of the flaws and incongruities in her writing she also deserves the criticism she has received for her work. Passion is a powerful thing. Passion draws people to a cause and that in itself is admirable; feminism is admirable. But when you twist and corrupt facts into the truth you want, and not the truth that is, the cause is buckled. The cause of feminism is not destroyed or even tarnished much by her extremism; yet there is an irreversible answer to opponents of the cause -- the extremism of Naomi Wolf. Though her goals were well-intentioned and admirable, objectively, they were interpreted in much the manner they should be, and appropriately labeled as radicalism. This radicalism is what now gives adversaries "Å"ammunition" to charge all feminists with the zeal of Ms. Wolf.

All feminists are not demagogues, but the extremist writings of Ms. Wolf force people to stop and consider what would happen if they were, and it pushes the cause of feminism into a bad light. The cause is not the problem -- the radicals, as in most cases are. Sadly, she tried too hard for the best; and that is what has made her as harmful to feminism as feminism's opponents.

Works Cited

�â'¬Å"From The Beauty Myth.�â'¬ï¿½Inside Literature Reading Responding Arguing. Gwynn, R.S., Zani, Stephen J.. Pearson Education, 2007. 924-933.

Gotschall, Mary G. "Poisoned Apple." National Review 43.12 (1991), 42-44.

National Organization for Women. �â'¬Å"About Now�â'¬ï¿½ 8 February 2007. http://www.now.org/issues/young/index.html.

NNDB Naomi Wolf. Accessed February 8, 2007, at http://www.nndb.com/people/ 454/00117103/.

O�â'¬™Neill, Barry. �â'¬Å"Anorexia Statistics.�â'¬ï¿½ 1996. 12 Feb. 2007. faculty/boneill/anorexia.html>

Schoemaker, C. (2004, Summer). A Critical Appraisal of the Anorexia Statistics in The BeautyMyth : Introducing Wolf's Overdo and Lie Factor (WOLF). Eating Disorders, 12, 97-102.

Sommers, Christina. �â'¬Å"Figuring Out Feminism.�â'¬ï¿½ National Review 46.12 (1994): 30-34.