Madonna Looks Absurd
The public response to her appearance modifications is not ageist or sexist, it is expectedly normal.
by Rebekah Wanic
Reactions to Madonna’s bizarre appearance at the Grammy’s have nothing to do with ageism or sexism, and everything to do with a completely normal human reaction to the absurd. The fact that she is older and a woman has nothing to do with it.
Human psychology is primed to be alert to the novel, the unusual, the scary. Such a tendency provided us with evolutionary advantages in making choices related to survival and successful mating. Additionally, social approval and disapproval are a means by which behavior can be regulated and shared norms reinforced. Manufacturing an unnatural face is decidedly not normal and, in this case, not attractive. No one should have been surprised when a strong public response occurred.
In the woke world, criticism of appearance targeted toward a member of a “marginalized” group - in this case someone who is older and female - is almost always, and often incorrectly, interpreted through the lens of an evil “ism.” The narcissism that misplaces accepting personal responsibility for choices to faults in others is evident here. Rather than accept that she may have let herself travel too far down the rabbit hole of appearance modification, Madonna places the fault with the public for not accepting and celebrating her.
The public criticism and negative responses are a sign that most people do not prefer an extremely artificial appearance to a more normal one. This is not any sign of poor character or a phobic response - it is a basic feature of human psychology. And, the standard admonishment to children, “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all,” doesn’t apply here. Celebrities benefit from public attention and therefore cannot ask to be immune from public critique. Madonna chose to engage in behavior and make appearance-related choices throughout her early career that helped magnify her fame and garner attention. People were not obligated to avoid critiquing her then, nor can they be expected to now. A celebrity who chooses to present themselves to the public must be willing to bear the consequences.
One may look at Madonna and wonder, “what happened?” Perhaps the desire to retain her earlier youth and beauty were driving forces in her choices. If so, isn’t society to blame for the ageist and sexist messages that reinforced the value of these attributes, especially for women, and affected her behavior? No. An individual’s inability to adjust to their biologically natural changes (and to chose to fight against these changes in a manner that makes them age un-gracefully) is their personal issue. Society is not responsible for it, but Madonna need not go it alone. Those around her should have encouraged her to get some help adjusting if warranted.
It might be true that accepting the changes that come with age, that transitioning from being a sex-symbol to irrelevance can be difficult, particularly for someone for whom this was such an important part of their public identity. But, the solution is not to change society to accept the absurd. The solution is to reinforce healthy adjustment and acceptance of life transitions. The large, negative public reaction to one who failed to do so helps to do just that.
Yes, the reaction could also be rooted in the disconnect between her current and past appearance. The comparison with tattoos is also apt. Many people who get tattoos in more traditional locations don't experience much pushback, but those who opt for less traditional placement or more extreme amounts often do face increased likelihood of judgement. Aesthetic preferences can be unique but that is not to deny that there is plenty of evidence for shared conceptions of beauty, influenced by social norms and often connected with evolutionarily-derived biases.
I honestly completely did not recognize her and maybe that is an underlying element of the response. We want to recognize those that we know, and falling back on evolutionary explanations, recognizing those we know to be "safe" or "not safe" is important for survival. So, not recognizing someone creates a sense of disorientation - and many people may feel a need to explain their feeling. I simply did not recognize her at all (I have a 1990's image in my mind) but I did not think she looked ugly or grotesque. It just wasn't "Madonna" and so I just dismissed whoever this imposter was! ;-) But recognizing people is central to our lives and she created a face that is so very different that it was impossible to see any vestige of her old self. Sort of like putting on a costume and mask but she cannot take hers off. And, IMHO, not a whole lot different than doing anything relatively permanent to ourselves, c.f., tattoos. Some people love them and some people don't.