Pretty Price Check (04.09.10)

The Pretty Price Check: Your Friday roundup of how much we paid for beauty last week.

Photo from National Go Topless Day Campaign

  • 24: How many women marched topless through the streets of Portland, Maine to try to normalize the presence of female skin in public. A noble mission, perhaps – but I gotta agree with Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams, who notes that women have to put up with enough ogling as it is, and asks “Who wants to be the bare-breasted canary in that coal mine?” Also, the photo above from the campaign’s headquarters, GoTopless.org, is relying pretty heavily on size discrimination to make its point. Last I checked, most people would rather see the boobs of the perfectly toned, bikini-clad lady than those of the obese man. Aren’t I supposed to be more concerned about moms being able to breastfeed in public, even if we catch sight of a nipple or two, without being harassed?
  • 3,163: The number of chemicals used to make fragrances; meaning any beauty product you buy that lists “fragrance” as an ingredient could contain any or all of these. Which is some sketchy business. Especially since high on that list are phthalates, groups of plasticizers that have been linked with abnormal genital development in baby boys and early puberty for 7 to 9-year-old girls. (Via Enviroblog and PlanetGreen.)
  • $35: What you’ll pay for a shampoo and blow dry at one of the new blow-out-only salons popping up in LA and New York. Is this modern convenience at its finest, or unhelpful competition for small business owners in an already saturated market? (Via Talking Makeup.)
  • 7 percent: How much more the average blond earns compared to the average brunette woman. I know it sounds like a blow-off kind of stat, but this is the kind of thing I fixate on when people say media-enforced beauty standards don’t really matter. If it translates into your paycheck, it matters. (Via Sephora’s Beauty & The Blog)
  • 9: The number of pricey wrinkle creams that a new Consumer Reports analysis deemed totally ineffective. So those little jars don’t come with time machines? I know, I’m shocked too. (Via Slate’s DoubleX)
  • 60: The age that the average Baby Boomer’s self-esteem starts to decline. This stat (as reported by the esthetics trade journal Skin Inc) just possibly related to the one before.
Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Pretty Price Check, week 21

3 responses to “Pretty Price Check (04.09.10)

  1. I love your ‘by the numbers’ round-up, as always.

  2. I saw that Consumer Reports article and felt vaguely smug that I refuse to pay $[ridiculous amount] per ounce for creams that (as suspected!) do nothing for my skin.

  3. Melissa

    Is that 7% statistic only counting white brunettes? If WOC are included in the statistic, it’s actually a lot better than I would have expected. If it’s referring to “blondes” and “brunettes” when it’s really only talking about white women, that sounds like another dangerous reinforcement of the idea that only white women are “real” women. (Not you, the people who determined the statistic.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s