Rising inequality drives a global surge in cosmetic procedures, reshaping beauty standards and social competition.
Have you made your New Year’s resolutions yet? Perhaps you’ve already made them, broken them, and moved on. A research study revealed that only 61 percent of people committing to ‘Dry January’ managed to get through the month without alcohol. By the time this column is published, around 80 percent of resolutions will have been abandoned, with only 8 percent of us persevering for the entire year. And what are the most common resolutions each year? Losing weight and exercising more consistently top the list, with the desire to look good often as significant a motivation as health and wellbeing. If improving your appearance is the goal, perhaps a long-lasting fix or upgrade might make more sense. Deciding to plump thin lips or whiten yellowing teeth might prove an easier resolution than dieting or heading to the gym. And why stop there? A cheekbone lift or a nose job eliminates the possibility of backsliding entirely.
The Economist kicked off the New Year with a report noting that the number of cosmetic procedures performed globally surged by 40 percent in just four years, rising from twenty-five million to thirty-five million. However, this figure is likely a significant underestimate, as it includes only procedures carried out by certified plastic surgeons, excluding those performed in high street beauty salons or low-cost plastic-tourism hubs such as Turkey. The market for aesthetic injectables, such as Botox and fillers, in the United States and Canada alone is projected to exceed 5 billion dollars by 2025.
Journalist Leora Tannenbaum has chronicled how women undergo cosmetic surgery to erase perceived ‘flaws’ in their faces and bodies, striving to align with a narrow, idealised vision of femininity. But it is not just women. The roots of plastic surgery can be traced to the nineteenth century, when Jewish men sought to alter racialised facial features in a bid to escape discrimination in their professional and personal lives. Today, men are increasingly opting for procedures, with liposuction of the chest area, eyelid lifts, facelifts, and nose jobs among the most popular. Non-invasive treatments, such as fillers and microneedling, are also gaining traction among men. After all, achieving the Ken look is as challenging as emulating Barbie. Nevertheless, in 2023, women accounted for 86 percent of cosmetic procedures, compared to just 14 percent for men.
The Economist attributes this boom in self-reshaping to several factors: the increased time we spend scrutinising ourselves in Zoom and Teams meetings, the convergence and escalation of beauty standards driven by social media, and the phenomenon of ‘pretty privilege’, where physical attractiveness correlates with higher earnings, more lucrative contracts, success in job interviews, and other career advantages.
‘Upkeep’ to Keep Up
Yet, these pressures manifest differently across regions. Economic inequality plays a pivotal role in what has been termed the “Cosmetic Enhancement Cycle, a symbiotic growth between wealth accumulation among the affluent and the plastic surgery industry.” ‘Upkeep’ or ‘tweakments’, as cosmetic procedures are colloquially known, become part of a status-driven competition – driven by inequality – to keep up with the Joneses. In the United States, a significant correlation exists between spending on cosmetic surgery and the wealth of the top five percent. This creates a ripple effect of emulation, where openly discussing cosmetic surgery becomes a positive signal of social status. In Brazil, members of the working class pursue inexpensive elective surgeries to conform to the aesthetic preferences of the white, upper-middle class. In South Korea, cosmetic procedures are sought as a means of social distinction amidst economic uncertainty.
Sexy Selfies
Does this matter? It is part of a broader trend where women are more likely to post ‘sexy selfies’ on social media, and men are more competitive for status, respect, and mating opportunities in more unequal societies. Women tend to prefer more masculine facial features in countries with greater inequality. A recent study demonstrated that manipulating income inequality in an experimental setting heightened women’s intentions to wear revealing clothing, driven by anxiety over their social standing.
What concerns me is that these phenomena could represent the initial waves of a larger tide of repression and regression, threatening to undo hard-won progress in gender equality and women’s rights. The reversal of the federal right to abortion in the United States has disproportionately impacted poor women, ethnic minorities, and those with insecure migration status. Amnesty International has documented what it describes as ‘alarming assaults’ on women’s rights globally, including the dismantling of legal protections and increased risks faced by women human rights defenders.
Gender and economic inequalities are deeply intertwined. Although the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals treat them as distinct issues, progress on Goal 10—Reducing Inequality—requires advancements in Goal 5—Gender Equality. Goal 10 targets include empowering and promoting social, economic, and political inclusion regardless of age, gender, or ethnicity, as well as ensuring equal opportunities and reducing inequality of outcomes. Meanwhile, Goal 5 aims to end all forms of discrimination against women and girls everywhere.
The varying prevalence of cosmetic enhancements over time and across regions offers insights into the pressures of gender and economic inequality. Globally, women reduce their use of cosmetic procedures as workforce participation and political representation become more equitable.
Resistance and Resolution
Resisting the social pressures perpetuated by inequality is no easy task. As I approach my 60th birthday, with the inevitable greying and wrinkling on the horizon, I am reminded of the value of New Year’s resolutions in strengthening resolve. For me, this means no ‘tweakments’ or ‘upkeep’, but rather a renewed commitment to campaigning for greater equality on all fronts.
This is a joint publication by Social Europe and IPS-Journal
Kate Pickett is professor of epidemiology, deputy director of the Centre for Future Health and associate director of the Leverhulme Centre for Anthropocene Biodiversity, all at the University of York. She is co-author, with Richard Wilkinson, of The Spirit Level (2009) and The Inner Level (2018).