3 hours ago
1
When Sydney Sweeney stepped outside last week, she probably had no idea she’d spark international headlines.
However, the Euphoria and The White Lotus star’s simple act of sunbathing in the garden has led to passionate discourse, still brewing over a week later.
Sweeney, 27, was pictured outside her Florida home wearing a bikini with her hair tied up in a messy bun.
To most, the images show a healthy woman enjoying her life, dressed simply, comfortably and functionally – nothing out of the ordinary.
Yet, a dark portion of the internet disagreed. Within hours of the images being published across gossip sites and news publications, swathes of trolls saw fit to deem Sweeney unattractive, and less appealing than previously imagined.
That poison from those attacking Sweeney was bad enough, but in the aftermath, those defending the actress offered an antidote that, while well-meaning, was just as unhelpful.
The comments were the usual body shaming that women in the public eye have sadly come to expect.
‘Too pale and she needs to lose a few pounds in the middle,’ offered one person, while another added that while Sweeney was ‘nothing special’, she’d be a prime candidate for the popular weight-loss drug Ozempic.
‘She ain’t hot in any way! She looks like a mom who had a few kids,’ chimed in another commenter.
Others claimed that, because she sunbathed privately looking different from her usual red-carpet appearances, she was a ‘catfish.’
Reading these words, I was one of many who were appalled.
Sweeney, who has been widely considered a sex symbol since her breakout role in dark teen drama Euphoria, has already hit back at her critics, sharing abusive comments spliced with footage of her training regime as she prepares for a role as legendary female boxer Christy Martin.
Sweeney has been praised for her response, but comments like these feel symbolic of how beauty standards have been warped by excessive internet usage, and how some people genuinely seem to have lost touch with how real people look without filters and editing.
But as sad as it made me to see these grim reactions to a woman’s fit body, it was equally disappointing to see how some chose to combat these criticisms – by sharing images of Sweeney that seemingly prove her ‘hotness’.
Pictures of the star wearing lingerie in photoshoots, or stills of her in glamorous dresses with a full face of makeup and expertly styled hair have been posted on X and Instagram in an effort to fight back against detractors calling Sweeney ‘frumpy’.
Of course, it’s understandable that her supporters want to quash this incel-adjacent ribbing with proof of Sweeney at her ‘best’.
But fighting for validation from the kind of people making comments about her looks in the first place is a losing battle – it maintains the idea that there’s an argument worth having in the first place.
To those who see women as only useful for one thing, the goalpost of acceptability will always be in motion. By trying to one-up them with photos that veer closer to the ‘accepted’ beauty standard, we all move further away from conversations that matter.
It’s fighting misogyny with misogyny; Sweeney’s looks are still used as a way to illustrate a point.
Women’s bodies are not canvases for people’s commentary or conversation, whether positive or negative, and a woman’s worth is not determined by whether faceless trolls online find her attractive.
It’s worth noting that Sweeney has previously been heralded by right-wing commentators online precisely for how her body looks – her wearing a low-cut dress and displaying cleavage while presenting Saturday Night Live was called the ‘death of woke’ back in March.
The speed with which she has been discarded by some in these same camps goes to show that many who make such remarks only see women as worth championing if they satisfy their narrow requirements of beauty.
But by defending Sweeney, we are entertaining debates over Sweeney’s looks, continuing the cycle of women’s value being tied to whether they’re appealing to the male gaze – and how misogynistic is that?
There’s no way to beat the patriarchal standards by operating within them; victory comes from disregarding the system entirely.
Have your say in the comments belowComment Now
Similarly, it’s no use wondering what the people who made these derogatory comments look like themselves, behind their anonymous web personas – because there isn’t a level of attractiveness that would make judgement on a woman’s body acceptable.
When a woman is spoken about as a collection of features, rather than an entire living being, it is dehumanising.
Even when trying to be supportive, these objectifying remarks can go towards seeing women as things, rather than people – an issue that only seems to become more mainstream by the day.
If there’s anything to be taken from this, it’s that there will always be people who want to tear a woman down for the way she looks.
So rather than trying to hit these pointless goalposts, all of our energy would be much better served by not playing the game at all.
Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk.
Share your views in the comments below.
MORE: Women in Gaza get just £3 each in funding to prevent gender-based violence
MORE: ‘There’s no joy’: EastEnders star reveals she’s less healthy after weight loss
MORE: I’m still haunted by this classic Christmas movie with 71% on Rotten Tomatoes
English (US) ·