How The Body Positivity Movement Became A Way For Bitter Women To Attack Natural Beauty

Body positivity was supposed to liberate us—from oppressive beauty standards, societal judgment, and the endless pursuit of perfection. It dominated the cultural zeitgeist for the last decade, supposedly encouraging women to embrace their bodies “just as they are.” But a troubling question has emerged over and over again: Why does the movement so often celebrate behaviors that harm health but shame beauty?

It’s time to unpack the hypocrisy of body positivity and ask if it’s truly serving women—or if we need a healthier, more honest way forward.

Confusion on All Sides

Many women, particularly in liberal circles, still cling to the idea of “eradicating fatphobia,” even as their favorite plus-size celebrities quietly embrace weight-loss drugs like Ozempic. Meanwhile, conservative women are more likely to reject extreme body positivity rhetoric, admitting that some lifestyles are healthier than others, but they'll still champion feel-good ideas like “beauty comes in all sizes.”

The Glaring Double Standard

Simply put, why do body positivity advocates defend obesity—a behavior-driven health issue—but not thin women? If body positivity is about celebrating all bodies, why do its loudest champions pick and choose which ones deserve celebration? Why are we told to praise Lizzo’s fat body as beautiful but say her thin body is a betrayal?

The truth that body positivity avoids at all costs is this: Beauty has objective qualities. That simple statement once caused a woman to lash out at me. By the end of her conversation, her argument boiled down to, “Beautiful people get enough attention, so we don’t need to give them more," which (ironically) confirmed that she could identify beauty when she saw it—it was just her resentment of it that was clouding her reasoning.

In trying to reject beauty standards altogether, she inadvertently proved they exist. This is the rotten fruit of body positivity: a strange mix of denial and resentment, wrapped up in the language of empowerment. It claims to liberate us from oppressive standards but leaves us tethered to confusion and a fear of aspiring to be better.

Health as Beauty: The Universal Standard

It turns out beauty is not all in the eye of the beholder. Symmetry, health, vitality—these are universally appealing traits. They’re hardwired into us for a reason. A face free of inflammation or a body that moves gracefully through the world doesn’t just look good; it signals well-being.

So when I say “objective beauty,” I’m not talking about some hyper-specific ideal like the 90's supermodel, although let’s be real—most of us agree it’s a gorgeous aesthetic. What I’m talking about is optimal health, and that’s a standard that’s achievable for most people, no matter their body type.

That's because optimal health is achieved by consistently doing what’s good for you—eating a balanced diet, exercising, sleeping well, and taking care of your mind and spirit, and it shines through every person who embodies it, whether they’re curvy, tall, or petite.

The only body types that can’t project health are extremes—whether it’s obesity or extreme thinness. Both represent states where the body isn’t functioning optimally. By shifting our focus from random preferences to being honest about what being healthy really entails, we create a standard that encourages people to invest in themselves in the most meaningful ways.

Enter the Raw Milkmaid Dress

if you enjoy being chronically online, then you saw all the fuss about Evie's viral Raw Milkmaid Dress. The dress was modeled by women of various shapes and sizes but only one model—the iconic Penny Lane—was bombarded with hateful comments. Her crime? Having a naturally small waist and large bust.

But the backlash wasn’t really about a dress or even about Penny Lane herself. It was a reflection of our culture’s growing discomfort with objective beauty. Lane embodies traits humans have celebrated for centuries—symmetry, health, and fertility—and yet she was accused of being "unrealistic" and "unrelatable." Why is it that celebrating body types associated with poor health is acceptable, but admiring a figure that signals vitality sparks so much outrage from feminists and conservatives alike?

Because let's be real: Lane doesn’t look unhealthy. Her proportions—a beautiful waist-to-hip ratio, clear skin, and vibrant appearance—are the picture of health. And that’s precisely what seemed to bother her detractors. Her figure triggered something deeper, perhaps a resentment of beauty that shines a little too brightly against the backdrop of modern body positivity rhetoric.

This hate underscores a hidden agenda within the movement. Body positivity isn’t about embracing all bodies—it’s about redefining beauty by eroding the cultural ability to recognize and celebrate the physical attributes that signal health. Instead of fostering true inclusivity, it demonizes bodies that naturally align with these objective standards, revealing its double standard in full force.

Shaming What People Can't Control

Another flaw in body positivity is its approach to shame. The movement argues that shaming someone for being overweight is harmful (and in most cases, it is). But why does this logic stop short of people who are naturally beautiful or have genetic traits that align with beauty ideals? Is shaming someone for being born with a thin frame or symmetrical features somehow really going to make things more "fair"?

If we’re going to talk about shame, let’s be honest: Shame can have a role in discouraging behaviors that harm individuals or society. We instinctively “shame” lying or stealing because these actions disrupt trust and community. But shaming someone for something they can’t control—like the shape of their nose or the size of their boobs—is cruel and counterproductive. And yet, body positivity encourages us to do just that to people whose beauty makes others feel insecure.

Why Neither Side Celebrates Real Beauty

Despite its name, body positivity in its current form—whether embraced by liberals or conservatives—often ends up being anything but positive toward real, objective beauty.

For many liberal women, if a woman dares to look classically beautiful—like she puts effort into her appearance and wants to be attractive—she’s accused of catering to the male gaze or perpetuating "oppressive" beauty standards. What’s so ironic is that this overreaction suggests these women do recognize real beauty when they see it. Otherwise, why get so bent out of shape about it? If all bodies are truly equally beautiful, then how are they able to identify which ones are more alluring to the male gaze?

I once had an acquaintance refuse to continue a conversation with me because I dared to suggest that beauty includes objective elements. Her argument ultimately boiled down to, “Beautiful people get enough attention, so we don’t need to give them more.” Again, this response confirmed that she could identify beauty when she saw it—it was just her resentment of it that clouded her reasoning. In trying to reject beauty standards altogether, she inadvertently proved they exist.

This is the fruit of body positivity: a strange mix of denial and resentment, wrapped up in the language of empowerment. It claims to liberate us from oppressive standards but leaves us tethered to confusion and a refusal to believe we can feel and look better.

Conservatives aren’t off the hook either, though. They claim to value family, health, and tradition, but they often stumble when beauty becomes too appealing, especially if it has a hint of sexiness. A naturally large bust paired with a healthy waist-to-hip ratio—a classic sign of fertility and vitality—should not cause fits and spasms.

Why the antagonism toward beauty on both sides? Because many liberals reject beauty because they see it as exclusionary and some conservatives are suspicious of beauty that doesn’t fit within tightly controlled preferences of modesty. Both approaches are rooted in the same flawed idea: that beauty itself is a threat rather than an inspiration.

Beauty isn’t the problem. It’s a gift—something that can motivate us to care for ourselves, connect with others, and aspire toward the best version of ourselves. When we deny the objective elements of beauty, we’re not being progressive or traditional. We’re just limiting our capacity to celebrate and cultivate something that makes life better.

A New Approach

What if we replaced body positivity with something healthier—something that acknowledges beauty as real and aspirational but also encourages self-improvement and grace? What if we unapologetically and unreluctantly held beauty in a positive regard? What if we just admitted that beauty exists, both naturally and through effort, and that striving for it can be a good thing within some constraints?

This doesn’t mean everyone needs to look like a supermodel, but it does mean that working toward your healthiest, most vibrant self is rewarding in multiple ways.

With this approach, self-improvement becomes an act of self-respect, not self-loathing. It encourages us to cultivate what we have—through fitness, skincare, style, or maybe just embracing good posture and a positive outlook.

It’s not about perfection but about aiming for the best version of ourselves within the means we have. This will lead to far more "positivity" than feel-good platitudes designed to dissuade people from acknowledging beauty when they see it.

Perhaps the body positivity movement truly wanted to make everyone feel worthy, but it stumbled when it started rejecting reality. We don’t need to deny beauty’s existence to affirm someone’s value. In fact, embracing beauty as aspirational—while respecting the diversity of how it manifests—is a far healthier and more honest way forward.