Archive feature, first published 2017-12-25.
These illustrations show just how confusing it is to be a woman in 2016.
While both men and women are preyed upon by the advertising industry, it’s women especially who are subjected to ridiculous double standards on the daily. For example, if a man in a high-level position asserts his power, he’s regarded as a ‘leader’ by his colleagues. Meanwhile, a woman who does the same is deemed to be bossy.
Furthermore, a woman is often judged to be a prude if she dresses conservatively, and a slut if her clothing is revealing – even slightly. It’s a no-win situation for females, which is why artist and fashion designer Daisy Bernard created the following illustrations.
Each illustration represents a different situation, yet the message largely remains the same: that women are judged regardless of the expectations they try to live up to.
Bernard wrote in an article for The Tab:
“Women are being told to take off their burkinis and undress on the beach. But at the same time, we should keep ourselves covered up, and shouldn’t show too much skin. These ridiculous expectations are created usually by men, and in many cases, by other women too.”
Until every individual – male, female, and those who identify as ‘in between’ – feels comfortable enough to express themselves how they see fit, artists and activists will continue to create and share series such as the one below to raise awareness about the importance of equality.
When both choices attract criticism
Being told to do something and then criticised for doing it creates a game with no reliable way to win. Daisy Bernard’s paired expectations make that frustration visible. The contrast is sharper than a general complaint about pressure because the instructions can be held next to each other: what is praised in one moment becomes a fault in another. The drawings place the inconsistency in the demands themselves, instead of assuming the person receiving them simply made a poor choice. They invite recognition of that experience without needing every example to describe every woman, every workplace or every culture in exactly the same way.
The setting behind the expectation
The surrounding situation still matters. A comment from a stranger, an expectation at work and a demand inside a relationship can have very different consequences. Naming that setting gives the conversation somewhere concrete to go. It becomes possible to ask which expectation is unfair, who benefits from it and what would change if the person were allowed to choose differently. The illustrations open that conversation through a compact visual contradiction; the experiences people bring to it supply the detail that a single drawing cannot contain.
A closer look
Read each contrast as a question about the standard being applied. Who gets to set it, and would it be applied consistently to someone else? That keeps the discussion focused on the double standard.
Links: Daisy Bernard · The Tab
Work
Clothing
Relationships
Appearance
What are your thoughts? Please comment below and share this news!
Source: True Activist
Related reading: Cassandra Calin's Comics About Everyday Expectations.
Reading the four settings
The following details come from the original profile; ages and relative dates refer to that report.
The workplace example turns on a change of label. The same assertion of authority is described as leadership in one person and as bossiness in another. That is the pattern Bernard’s comparison challenges. It does not require a claim that every colleague reacts identically; the point is that an assessment can shift even when the conduct being assessed has not. The paired words make the inconsistency easier to name.
The clothing example raises a related question about who is allowed to make an ordinary personal choice. In Daisy Bernard’s comparison, criticism can follow both covering up and showing skin. A different outfit cannot solve a demand that changes with the observer. The contrast puts that unstable expectation into view, rather than prescribing an alternative way for everyone to dress.
The settings change across work, clothing, relationships and appearance. That movement gives the collection its cumulative effect: an apparently small comment can belong to a much wider pattern of judgement. Each drawing still has its own setting, which helps keep the discussion attached to recognisable experiences.
A drawing cannot settle every disagreement about equality or personal expression. It can give someone a concise way to describe a contradiction they have encountered and make another person pause over a phrase they might otherwise repeat without thinking. That is a modest but worthwhile ambition for social illustration: to make a familiar judgement visible enough that it can be questioned.
More from the archive:
- 19 Pregnancy Troubles Illustrated by Line Severinsen’s Kos og Kaos
- Andrew Hou’s HJ-Story: Affection in Everyday Illustrations
- Adrienne Hedger's Comic About Falling Asleep on the Couch
- IN-Q’s The Only Reason We’re Alive: A Poem About Love
- True Love VS. Toxic Love: 14 Core Differences
- Why Modern Relationships Are Falling Apart So Easily Today
- How Loved Ones Describe Success in a Campaign Video
- Ten Romantic Sketches by Zac Retz
- Korean Artist Puuung Captures What Real Love Looks Like
- Why Readers, Scientifically, Are The Best People To Fall In Love With
- 8 crazy symptoms of being in love
- 10 Signs Of True Love
- What Happens in Your Mind When You Meet Your Crush: An Animated Short
- The Pain Of Being In Love With Someone You Can Never Be With
- Social Science Says Lasting Relationships Come Down To 2 Basic Traits
- Signs That Your Relationship Can Last
- 9 Good Signs That You’re In The Right Relationship
- Relationship Lessons From a Personal Experience of Partnership
- 10 Signs You Have Found Your Soulmate
- 60 + 1 Heart-Warming Historical Pictures That Illustrate Love During War
COMMENTS