#BoycottUlta - Biggest cosmetics retailer in US faces outrage and boycott

a reply to: Direne

Ulta is not the kind of company that takes input from their employees. They could care less.

I had the unfortunate assignment of working on-site as a contractor for almost a year at Ulta. One nasty company.

The department I worked for was about 1/2 overseas contractors.

So no, you can't point to woman being in upper management as a sign they had consensus from them - it's not the way it works there.

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
I haven't been putting up with the horrors of having a funtioning uterus and all the nightmares that entails all these years to be "schooled" by a MAN about what constitues being a woman.

This is playacting on HIS part.

Real women don't obsess about makeup, clothing, shoes, pink and all that other TEEN GIRL BULLCRAP.

We have more important things to worry about.

You sort of hit on what I was trying to point out in my last post. I believe that transwomen are making up their own reality as to what 'they' feel or believe to be feminine or womanish. It is their own creation in their minds and they've latched onto to particular beauty regimes, if you will. I would like to see them use new language to describe their 'pseudo-feminine' feelings because women can be just as feminine and womanish without the makeup, stilettos and body tight clothes.

But some women, 'real' or 'biological', are definitely into makeup, clothing and shoes, which can be pink, so generalizing the desire to dress and present well and enhance one's features, to me, is not teen girl bullcrap - and some of us women really don't have more important things to worry about.

originally posted by: Daughter2
a reply to: Direne

Ulta is not the kind of company that takes input from their employees. They could care less.

Frankly, I think this is true of pretty much all the cosmetic companies, who capitalize on magnifying and distorting women's insecurities about their looks for maximum profit. And to get women hooked on their products to hide and camouflage all their imperfections -- both real and imagined.

It's an ugly business, no pun intended.

It wouldn't be a bad thing if this wokery made women in general re-think their desire and need for artificial enhancements to face the world...

"Womanface"

Yikes, I hope that gets more traction!

a reply to: quintessentone

You sort of hit on what I was trying to point out in my last post. I believe that transwomen are making up their own reality as to what 'they' feel or believe to be feminine or womanish.

Of course they are!!! They are not women, have never been women, will never be women, and therefore have absolutely no idea how it "feels" to be a woman.

Nor can any woman tell you how it "feels" to be a woman. Beyond our internal biology and external anatomy, there are no other universal womanly experiences. We are all individuals.

It is their own creation in their minds and they've latched onto to particular beauty regimes, if you will.

They've latched onto stereotypes and strict gender roles, which inform their re-definition of "woman". That's all they've got.

I would like to see them use new language to describe their 'pseudo-feminine' feelings because women can be just as feminine and womanish without the makeup, stilettos and body tight clothes.

Using new language defeats their purpose, which is to identify as everything stereotypically "feminine" -- especially sexually. The only new language we need to use is "Autogynephile." If they wanted to simply be their "authentic selves," then they would be. They would dress and speak and act how they wanted without re-defining anything or anyone, without making demands of anyone else, just like so many others have done before them. And we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's not what they want.

But some women, 'real' or 'biological', are definitely into makeup, clothing and shoes, which can be pink, so generalizing the desire to dress and present well and enhance one's features, to me, is not teen girl bullcrap -

To each their own, and everything in moderation, but let's not pretend the industry (and practice) isn't toxic femininity at its worst.

- and some of us women really don't have more important things to worry about.

Oh lordy. I'm cringing for you.

a reply to: Boadicea

I agree with most of what you have to chime in on except the cringing part. You can cringe all you want, that does not change the truth that some women choose easier lives/paths for themselves through life choices.

I sometimes make my own moisturizers, hair tonics, micellar cleansing water, and makeup using natural ingredients and find that some cosmetics companies are providing excellent organic skin solutions, so I have to disagree with you on that cosmetics companies are 'all' toxic.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Boadicea

I agree with most of what you have to chime in on except the cringing part. You can cringe all you want, that does not change the truth that some women choose easier lives/paths for themselves through life choices.

Easier? Um... I don't think so. Primping and preening takes a helluvalotta effort!!! Not to mention time and money. So let's just call a spade a spade: It is the epitome of superficiality and shallowness.

It might be easier on the ego. But it's also chasing rainbows, and there isn't a pot of gold at the end of this rainbow. What will such women have when even the best cosmetics in the world can't hide their imperfections? What happens when the one thing women counted on for their worth is gone and they have nothing?

I sometimes make my own moisturizers, hair tonics, micellar cleansing water, and makeup using natural ingredients and find that some cosmetics companies are providing excellent organic skin solutions, so I have to disagree with you on that cosmetics companies are 'all' toxic.

That's just being competitive. Once organic and natural and not-tested-on-animals became "the thing," of course the big boys got in on the game. But, again, let's not pretend that they aren't capitalizing on women's vanity and insecurities to make a buck. And let's not pretend that they aren't selling women out just to capitalize on the "trans woman" craze.

a reply to: Boadicea

You are missing my point, it's not all about using cosmetics for insecurities, cosmetics specifically skin care regimes are used to keep skin healthy. I took a skin science course at a college and the teacher told me that her skin was so dry that it tended to crack, she used cosmetics, namely specialized moisturizers, as a health measure - nothing to do with vanity.

Considering this 'trans' is a relatively new reality in society, I honestly think that these companies just don't know how to handle it properly. I am sure with the boycotting and a proper and reasonable explanation from women, they and transwomen will eventually come to understand our position and use different language to describe their reality.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Boadicea

You are missing my point, it's not all about using cosmetics for insecurities, cosmetics specifically skin care regimes are used to keep skin healthy. I took a skin science course at a college and the teacher told me that her skin was so dry that it tended to crack, she used cosmetics, namely specialized moisturizers, as a health measure - nothing to do with vanity.

You are missing my point. Sure, "cosmetics" include products for nurturing and maintaining a healthy condition, such as lotions and cleansers. And as I already stated, everything in moderation.

None of that changes the fact that the cosmetics industry as a whole exploits and capitalizes on women's vanity and insecurities to sell their products, or that much of what constitutes the cosmetics industry is NOT about healthy skin, etc. Sure, sometimes our skin becomes dry -- moisture deficient -- and we can benefit from some hand lotion. But no one's health is suffering from mascara deficiency... or bronzer deficiency... and so on and so forth.

Considering this 'trans' is a relatively new reality in society, I honestly think that these companies just don't know how to handle it properly. I am sure with the boycotting and a proper and reasonable explanation from women, they and transwomen will eventually come to understand our position and use different language to describe their reality.

So, in other words, once Ulta et al lose more (female) customers than they gain (male) customers, they'll re-think their position and stop pissing off their primary customer base, and return to their tried and true exploitative practices? Yeah. That sounds about right.

But make no mistake, they know they are insulting and alienating women, and have doubled-, tripled- and quadrulpled-down on their Twitter page in defending their wokery. They know what they are doing. And they don't care as long as it pads their wallets.

a reply to: Boadicea

Catering to the trans community won't pad their pockets because they won't have the numbers to replace women's purchasing power. I think it has more to do with trying to be inclusive, but they just haven't got it right yet.

By the way, most products out there prey on us (men and women and others) to make us think we will be happier, thinner, smarter, healthier - need I go on?

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Boadicea

Catering to the trans community won't pad their pockets because they won't have the numbers to replace women's purchasing power.

Of course not!!! What they do not/did not realize, is that it might lose them those female customers with their wokery. Much like a drug dealer, get 'em hooked and they'll take all kinds of abuse because they need the product. We'll see how it plays out.

I think it has more to do with trying to be inclusive, but they just haven't got it right yet.

In their minds, we haven't got it "right" yet. Ulta did exactly what they wanted to do. Everyone knows that women are and have been fighting this trans crap. Including Ulta. They did it anyway.

By the way, most products out there prey on us (men and women and others) to make us think we will be happier, thinner, smarter, healthier - need I go on?

Yup, which is why I taught my kids to "spot the lie" 30+ years ago. It's not rocket science.

a reply to: quintessentone

You're right, of course.

I responded from my perspective and did not take into account that there are a multitude of feminine expressions out there that may or may not jive with my own experience.

I have friends who are experts on makeup and look absolutely grogeous when dolled up, I never mastered the art and get by with a touch of mascara and that's about it.

Some women are really into fashion and can be a bit obessive about their aesthetics.

But for a MAN who refers to women as "slits" (a derogatory term for the female genitalia) and to act this way shows that he is more about the performative aspect and fetishisation of certain behaviours.

He does not have a uterus, he has never menstrated, he will not bear children and will never undergo menopause.

Remarkable how women have slowly but surely been excluded from everything women related. Not in favour of transwomen but in favour of perverted fetish exhibitionists who can’t keep their AGP kink to themselves.

Quite sick really.

Really?!?!?

This triggers you?

What?!?! Do you live in a box or something?

dp

originally posted by: GENERAL EYES
a reply to: quintessentone

You're right, of course.

I responded from my perspective and did not take into account that there are a multitude of feminine expressions out there that may or may not jive with my own experience.

I have friends who are experts on makeup and look absolutely grogeous when dolled up, I never mastered the art and get by with a touch of mascara and that's about it.

Some women are really into fashion and can be a bit obessive about their aesthetics.

But for a MAN who refers to women as "slits" (a derogatory term for the female genitalia) and to act this way shows that he is more about the performative aspect and fetishisation of certain behaviours.

He does not have a uterus, he has never menstrated, he will not bear children and will never undergo menopause.

I agree, that's why I stated that they need to develop their own specific language for themselves and body parts if need be and stop using language that describes a biological woman's anatomical parts as being a 'slit' of 'fish' 'fishy' or 'womanface' or whatever. I recall being called a 'fag hag' back in the '80s because I befriended a gay guy and I always felt it was a derogatory label.

You know I read so much about how LGBTQ persons get microaggressions from others all the time, well I can tell you when I had that gay friend I was on the receiving end of microaggressions from the gay community, but it felt more like hate.

I'm just wondering if this is a form of (unrealized?) microaggression against biological women showing itself through derogatory descriptions?

Thoughts?

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe
I want to know what the hell happened to all the liberal feminists in the world?
Have they gone deaf and dumb?

Some of them are hiding behind their keyboards on Ovarit and Spinster and Mumsnet cuz they don't wanna be cancelled donchaknow... Others (like TransgenderTrend and 4thWaveNow) are playing purity politics and refusing to work with conservative groups. They shun conservatives and the libs shun them so they're basically operating within their own echo chamber.

"womanface" indeed!!!!!

I'm loving it... and it's about damn time!!!

a reply to: quintessentone

I think it's a form of competitive behavior.

a reply to: quintessentone

Somehow I don't think you want any more of my thoughts but I gotta ask what is informing your thoughts on this matter? I understand wanting to be charitable in your thoughts and opinions of others, but the trans activists have been very clear in their ideology and their demands, which are very different than what you are suggesting.

They do not want new language. They want our language. They don't want to compromise with women. They want women to compromise with them. They don't want female body parts. They want their male body parts to be called female.

And, yes, there is a HUGE element of misogyny among men who identify as women!!! They do, literally, think they are "better" women than women are. They literally want to re-define womanhood in their image.

Are you at all familiar with the hate and threats that the trans communities inflict on women who question their ideology and agenda? The threats of rape with their "lady penis" and violent threats of all kinds? Are you aware of the abuse that JK Rowling and others have endured from the trans community?

I'm really trying to understand where you're coming from with your opinions, which just don't fit the reality.