Dove’s “Real Beauty” campaign is often praised for promoting body positivity and challenging unrealistic beauty standards. However, a closer look suggests that while Dove uses feminist language to attract socially conscious consumers, the campaign may prioritise brand loyalty over genuine empowerment. This blog argues that, by situating empowerment within a consumerist framework, Dove’s campaign ultimately reflects “commodity feminism,” where feminist ideals are used as a marketing strategy rather than a call for substantive social change.
Dove’s campaign encourages self-acceptance through slogans like “Real Beauty,” but it subtly implies that this empowerment is attainable through product purchases. Varghese and Kumar (2022) argue that this is typical of “femvertising,” which is instead driven by patriarchal consumer culture and is primarily a form of tokenism that reduces feminist discourse to brand add-ons, rather than honestly promoting feminist action (Varghese & Kumar, 2022, p. 443). Dove’s messaging, while appearing to disrupt traditional beauty norms, still reinforces consumerist ideals by positioning its products as a means of self-empowerment. This aligns with “commodity feminism,” where brands repackage feminist values into consumer-friendly messages that increase consumers’ consumption but “harm the feminist political agenda”(Varghese & Kumar, 2022, p. 443).
Sarah Banet-Weiser’s concept of “popular feminism” highlights how feminist messaging thrives within an “economy of visibility,” where success is measured by engagement—likes, shares, and visibility—rather than social impact. According to Banet-Weiser (2018), this form of feminism often avoids challenging structural issues, instead opting for “safely affirmative” messages that appeal to broad audiences (Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 4). Dove’s campaign exemplifies this dynamic: it promotes body positivity in a way that feels accessible, stylish, and engaging. However, Banet-Weiser warns that this type of feminism, designed to be palatable and widely appealing, often makes it necessary to keep certain images and practices invisible.(Banet-Weiser, 2018, p. 11). The campaign, by making empowerment a purchasable commodity, underscores the limitations of popular feminism in achieving substantive change.
Dove’s campaign also fits into the ideological structures described by Marx and Engels (2006), who argue that “the ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relations” (Marx & Engels, 2006, p. 9). Although Dove’s campaign purports to challenge traditional beauty standards, it ultimately reinforces capitalist frameworks by presenting self-worth as something attainable through consumption. By connecting beauty with product usage, Dove benefits from feminist ideals while perpetuating the very consumerist culture that creates beauty pressures. Thus, Dove’s campaign does not challenge the structural forces behind beauty ideals; instead, it aligns feminist values with consumerist goals, maintaining rather than disrupting the capitalist model.
Dove’s campaign aligns with what Banet-Weiser describes as “neoliberal feminism,” a framework rooted in neoliberal values of individualism and entrepreneurialism, which are embraced rather than critiqued by this strand of feminism (Banet-Weiser, 2018, pp. 12-13). This approach focuses on the individual body—such as purchasing a Dove product—rather than addressing the systemic forces that perpetuate beauty standards. Thus, the campaign’s focus on consumption as a path, the value of prioritising the individual over the collective is incorporated into a marketing tool that focuses on individual solutions to structural problems. Instead of criticising the beauty industry’s impact on self-esteem, the responsibility for self-worth is subtly transferred to the consumer.
Although Dove’s ‘Real Beauty’ campaign advocates concepts such as body diversity, which is of some positive significance, it is regrettable to see from this article that Dove ultimately places empowerment within a consumerist framework that serves corporate interests. This further exposes the flaws in the authenticity of women’s advertising and the integration of corporate and social causes. It can be said that Dove does not in fact promote real social change but rather provides a limited vision of empowerment that prioritises profit over progress. All of this demonstrates the complexity and ambivalence of women’s advertising in a consumer-driven society. Looking to the future, for women’s advertising to have a real impact, brands must go beyond superficial gestures and commit to structural change that challenges the systems driving beauty standards.
References