cw: mentions of eating disorders + predatory relationships

Hyper femininity online has devolved into a microcosm of social hierarchy and the commodification of the Madonna/Whore dichotomy which is tearing through the seams of supposedly safe internet communities for young girls. What began as a lifestyle based in spirituality and reclamation of one’s femininity through a certain way of dress and consumption of media, now has young women gatekeeping and perpetuating the same gender roles they initially wanted to normalize. I’m sick of it. I am sick of the way this seemingly innocent internet microtrend has become a new way of perpetuating the ‘pure,’ childish archetype for women to strive to attain. I am sick of the racist and classist undertones which go unnoticed by the privileged, middle and upper-class sustainers of the aesthetic. I am sick of the glorification of Ballerina diet culture, which does nothing more than perpetuate eating disorders to the most vulnerable and easily malleable people of the internet. 

Femcel, or, Female Incel, refers to self-proclaimed misandrists who idolize manipulative women in the media. This often includes characters such as Amy Dunne from Gone Girl, Jennifer Check from Jennifer’s Body, or prominent female songwriters, such as Fiona Apple and Phoebe Bridgers, whose songs are intentionally repurposed and misinterpreted. 

Coquette, the French word, means flirtatious, and particularly refers to a flirtatious woman. The word has become a French colloquialism for describing flighty, manic women, who lead men on for their own enjoyment. Online, Coquette has become a fashion trend which is a fusion loosely based in upper-class French fashion, and off-duty Ballerina attire. 

The two terms have become inexplicably intertwined underneath the guise of reclaiming femininity, which women have long been mocked for by ‘less feminine’ women, and men alike. 

Coquette, as an aesthetic, has undeniable roots in classism and racism. It is a western European style of dress which quite literally stems from French nobility, and one that is not an easily accessible subgenre or lifestyle for anyone other than thin, wealthy, white women. While I do believe that not every trend has to be applicable to every race and ethnicity, it is absurdly hypocritical to preach coquette as ‘reclaiming femininity’ when, for example, black women are absolutely excluded from being considered the utmost epitome of feminine. If coquette and hyper-femininity is supposed to be all about taking back gender roles and redefining them into something for everybody to partake in, then explain to me why your definition of hyper-feminine is soft, delicate, pale, white girls? Explain to me why a search into Pinterest for the coquette aesthetic offers up only caucasian results, unless you add WOC to the end of your procurence? Those who have denied to me that this is the standard are delusional. And to those who have told me when I bring this up in condemnation of coquette as it appears online, “Black girls can dress feminine too,” I implore you to take a step back, and analyse your remark, which implies that black women become feminine when dressing coquette. Is black culture not feminine to you? These same sentiments may apply to all WOC, who become ostracised from their own femininity simply for not being able to contort themselves into the all-consuming, all ‘feminine’, coquette standard. 

Another facet of the culturally insensitive undertones of coquette lies in the music which they claim their own. Coquette girls have appropriated the music of prominent Japanese musician Mitski, and warped her lyrics about the Asian-American struggle to suit their own issues. They rise to a fierce defence of themselves, saying that music can and will be interpreted however the listener pleases, while also shutting down voices of POC who are adamant about the fact that this is a form of appropriation. No one is telling white listeners that they are not allowed to listen to Mitski, but rather trying to get them to understand that however much they enjoy it, they will not be able to understand and relate to the music in the poignant way that POC, especially Asian-Americans’, do. Despite this, coquette and femcel spaces continuously take over work meant for POC and push for it to be ‘universal’ towards all issues women face, which is highly harmful to already marginalised communities who do not receive much accurate representation. The stereotype which coquette perpetuates about femininity and what it is does not foster a more inclusive environment. Rather, it does exactly the opposite by putting up protective walls around what is believed to best represent womanhood. People of colour should not have to take extra steps to hide their culture to be perceived as hyper feminine in the eyes of coquette. 

Moving on, coquette communities continuously uplift toxic attachment styles and relationships with older men as means of flexing their own abilities to lean in to and live by a misinterpreted Lolita-esque persona. This has already begun to lead girls down dangerous romantic pathways. Coquette and Femcel both encourage pedophilia by wrongfully convicing young women that they, in any way, had control and power over their abusers. By portraying themselves as willingly handing themselves over to older men in a way they do not consider grooming, and by weaponizing their sexuality to keep said man in their control, pedophilia is seen as more acceptable. It is here where the glorification of the music of artists such as Lana Del Rey, and the misinterpretation of ‘Femcel’ films take a harmful hold on the community. Lana Del Rey, who’s music and persona has been the subject of much discourse, has become the figurehead mascot of the fusion subculture which is Coquette-Femcel. While her impressive and controversial lyricism can be subject to its own thinkpiece entirely, it is crucial to be self aware of how harmful the spearheading of her music and lifestyle is to young girls. It angers me to see so many women wholeheartedly believing that, as teenagers, relationships with adult men should be aspired to if it was the girls’ ‘idea’. Are we not trying to dismantle the pedophilic undertones of what ‘aspirational’ femininity should be? If so, why are we leading people to believe that being a ‘female manipulator’ who entraps predatory men into sexual relationships in order to get some kind of revenge is in any way a power play? Once again, our society has come up with an outlet for predators to brew in a way which goes unnoticed, and this time, it can be undoubtedly attributed to the way femcel culture twists popular media to fit its mantras. To be completely clear, Jennifer’s Body is not a movie about a girlboss who murders men because of a femcel agenda. It is story about a young woman who is assaulted and desperately trying to reclaim her body and agency told through a fictitious supernatural lens. Through a combination of stubborn ignorance and the constant misinterpretation of art and music, these subcultures are both a breeding ground for predators, and a facet to enforcepedophilic undertones in anything made for women. 

Alongside pushing forward pedophilic undertones through miscontruting media, coquette in particular reinforces toxic standards for femininity through diet culture. Coquette style, while gorgeous from afar with eye-pleasing colour palettes and soft lace detailing, takes on more nefarious meaning when combined with the oftentimes labelled ‘off-duty Ballerina’ title, and corresponding diet. I myself am a longtime ballet dancer, going on my fifteenth year of training this September, and I’m positive it is not shocking information to hear that the true nature behind a sport notorious for fostering eating disorders in its dancers is not as lovely as it may seem. Despite this, subsections of the coquette collective have an unearthly obsession with appearing as though they are off-duty Ballerinas, despite never having participated in dance. While I do not find grievances with people who are not dancers dressing as though they are, it becomes a critical issue when other aspects of Ballet culture are thrown into the mix. The idea of needing to subscribe to a particular routine or diet in order to meet the full criteria for coquette fashion is one reminiscent of the somewhat equally problematic internet microtrend of TikTok’s ‘clean girl’. Here, we interchange avocado toast and lemon water for a breakfast, lunch, and dinner of strawberries and cigarettes. The fierce emphasis placed on appearing and behaving like a Parisian ballet dancer through unhealthy diets and the glorification of nicotine addictions all in the name of staying thin while subsequently preaching body positivity is a double edged sword, and one which coquette stumbles down ungracefully. 

Coquette wants you to be tortured. Coquette is a never ending stream of struggles wrapped in silk ribbons for lonely men to unravel. Coquette is a subculture which thrives on the discoursed-to-death Manic Pixie Dream Girl trope, designed to be unattainable in a teasing way. Coquette absorbs any art which is believed to encapsulate the feeling of ostracization and fetishization of sadness, and clings to it until it cannot be known for anything else. The work of artist Fiona Apple is one such example of art that coquette-femcel spaces do not allow to change. Her music is held hostage to represent hatred and simultaneous adoration for men, and coquette-femcel fans say  that only she understands how they feel.  From here, she is turned into yet another figurehead for a community she never consented to being a mascot of. Due to the nature of the internet, repurposing and gatekeeping artists in this way stops them from being able to migrate to different parts of the internet, and their audience is turned into a fish bowl of coquette-femcels who all share the same feelings and endorse one another’s sadness. The vicious cycle continues and develops into young girls who believe their femininity lies only in their sorrows, impeding them from healing. Once again, I ask, is this what it means to be feminine? To be tormented, to be sought after, to be tormented once again? Why must femininity be so tragic? The perpetuation of this harmful niche continues to glamorise distress, and drag down dozens of artists alongside it. 

To exist online is to be categorised. To be understood is to be fundamentally deconstructed until your personality is nothing more than buzzwords in a semi-ironic tweet about internet culture. You are coquettelanadelreypearlneccklacelolita. You are rorygilmoreautumcorelightacademia. You are a mosaic of all microtrends that have come before you. I find a melancholy solace knowing that the parts of myself which I find the most inscrutable can so easily be summed up in a quote or two from the latest BookTok hit. None of us are truly unknowable. Even making it known to the world that you think yourself unknowable is to give yourself away.  You are your own damage, plus the damage of every person in your collective. You reassure yourself of your trauma through seeing the same traumas mirrored on others, and once you find whatever subculture it is that best attunes to what you have been through, you stay. Maybe, maybe if you can make beautiful the traumas of others, you can get past your own. I think this is the case for the hundreds of thousands of young girls who fall prey to the hands of predatory relationships, misshapen family dynamics, and gruesome eating habits. They are welcomed by a community who brandishes their struggle and makes it lovely. They are offered the chance to take on the personas of powerful women in media to give themselves a false sense of control over their tormentations. Do not let the perpetrators of twisted feminine ideals and camouflaged racism make you feel as though you need to offer yourself up to a way of life which does not help but rather encourages your struggle. Do not become a byproduct of internet assimilation. Do not be exploitative of your own trauma by covering it in lace mesh tops and baby pink wrap skirts. You are more than one aesthetic, more than a single colour palette and fifteen curated pieces of intrinsically misunderstood artistic media, and you deserve to heal past the point of basing your personality around everything that has hurt you so cruelly. 

You are not a femcel. You are a victim.