Women Shouldn’t Need a “Why” to Embody Their Beauty

On sexy selfies, the sin of being hot “for no reason,” and society’s expectation that women justify their visibility

Photo from Sam Lion on Pexels

Recently, for a feminist photojournal project, I took some boudoir-style selfies. Some of the photos can be posted on general-audience platforms. Others — because we live in a society that insists on considering women’s nipples indecent (though never men’s, of course) — cannot.

Yet while I studied the “decent” photos and tried to decide which to post to my Instagram, I noticed something in my thought process that bothered me:

Before I’d even selected a selfie for broader public display, I caught myself already attempting to compose an intellectually lofty or emotionally poignant caption that might justify why I was posting it.

Like a written mea culpa for displaying a sensual photo at all.

So I paused and asked myself:

Why the fuck do I even feel obligated to justify my choice to post one of these pictures?

Lots of reasons. I’ll tell you why.

Feminine bodies and feminine beauty — however “feminine” and “beauty” are defined in a given place and time — are considered socially disruptive. This is because patriarchal societies hesitate to hold men accountable for their own transgressions. If a man feels a flicker of desire for a given woman and decides to overstep her boundaries, the patriarchy very often tells us it’s not his fault that he’s acting like an asshole and making a fool (or a criminal) of himself. It tells us it is her fault for having dared to exist in a format that he found desirable.

She tempted him. She asked for it. Simply by being visible — beautifully.

Such is the logic of patriarchal power structures: women who happen to attract “too much” male attention are cast as disturbances of the peace.

I’ve received accusations along this vein, and my guess is that most other women have too: even when we aren’t flirting or don’t think we’re looking “sexy,” some man who “cares” about us nevertheless announces that our conduct or our outfit is wrong, in that it ostensibly provokes men’s lust. Rather than risk having to say “no” to a problematic rando who feels entitled to us, therefore, the Man Who Cares asks us to tone ourselves down, so that some asshole won’t get the wrong idea and make a move at all.

These “good” men who attempt to “correct” us explain that they’re “just worried” about safety — ours, theirs, and innocent bystanders’. They “don’t want to have to get into a fight” in order to protect us.

… the fight being, of course, our fault:

In a patriarchal system, it is easier to endlessly police women’s appearance, apparel, and personalities than to hold men accountable for lapses in basic human decency.

Patriarchy’s demand for women’s self-censorship is rooted in the implicit accusation that it is irresponsible of us to be attractive… but luckily we can support the pacifist cause by dressing down and muting bits of our authentic personalities!

Ever notice that we’ve all heard remarks like, Who does she think she is in that pose/makeup/outfit?! This is why: women’s willingness to embrace and display our untempered beauty is often considered impertinent and indecent. Likewise, it’s why “good” women are expected to try to minimize the amount of male attention we receive, maybe by dressing a little more demurely than we actually want to or (barring that) at least not letting anyone see us dressing how we choose.

Such as by not sharing a photo of ourselves looking good and feeling good about it.

Women’s socialization into the male gaze is therefore not just about anticipating what men might find attractive so that we can court them; our socialization into the male gaze is also about anticipating what men might find attractive so that we can avoid this— and can attempt to curtail our self-expression accordingly.

All to evade men’s violence. And society’s reproach.

Here is where the “need” for a deep and poignant caption on a sexy selfie begins to become apparent:

As a corollary to women’s status as Disturbances of the Peace, we are not only expected to dim ourselves down; we are also expected to be apologetic and self-minimizing about the moments when we haven’t thrown a veil over our light.

This is a huge part of why women are famous for deflecting praise: it’s safer for us not to shine. Literally.

“Oh, you like this dress? But it’s such an old thing!”

“Oh, that’s kind of you to compliment my body, but really, I’ve fallen off my gym routine recently and haven’t been looking my best…”

At the very least, if we won’t self-minimize, then we must justify why we’ve been so brazen as to embody our beauty out loud.

Consider: if a woman amps up the glam and puts it on display (as a free agent, of course, rather than in service to an advertiser, producer, pimp, etc.), it’s often assumed that:

a) She’s trying to find a fuck. (Because if you look at her and think of fucking, that must mean she wants to fuck, right?)

b) She’s a tease. (Because how dare she look hot without being sexually available to you?)

c) She’s “looking for attention.” (Because “I just felt good about my appearance and didn’t want to hide it” is not an acceptable stance in a world that believes women uphold the social order by remaining invisible.)

… and, in a patriarchy, all of these assumptions are condemnable, of course.

Granted, people might be willing to reserve their judgments and view us charitably when we’re embracing our beauty on our own terms… but often only if we’re willing to explain what business we have in looking so magnetic.

For example:

• It’s for art

Is the woman’s sexy outfit/selfie in service to some kind of creative project? Okay, we might offer her a pass for art.

• It’s for politics/feminism

Is her sex appeal or her nudity a political statement? Hm, we can possibly get behind that too. Staunch misogynists, of course, would still condemn a woman who makes a political statement for transgressing gendered expectations (being visible, taking up space, doing so of her own agency)… but a partly-feminist, partly-liberal viewer might still excuse her: Oh, she’s being flagrantly gorgeous/naked for a feminist purpose? Well, alright, as long as it’s not strictly for herself…

• It’s for personal healing

What if her photo or outfit’s raison d’être is a self-care practice — an effort to reclaim her body and reaffirm her value and agency in the wake of interpersonal and/or systemic trauma? Aw, poor thing, we knew that any woman who flaunted her beauty must be broken… but at least she knows she’s broken. Now we’ll just objectify her with pity instead of scorn!

• It’s for a spiritual practice

Does her sensuality have a spiritual motive? Perhaps she’s just in her “magic” era, embracing her “fertility-goddess” physique and embodying her “creative life-force energy” more fully? Well, that sounds… weird. But if she’s spiritual, that means she has some depth. So, fine. We’ll give her a pass too.

In essence, a woman cannot just be hot and confident for no reason. Being hot and confident “for no reason” renders her character suspect — because the reason, unless stated, is generally assumed to be some flavor of impudence. Women cannot just show up and expect to be treated with respect; the patriarchy tells us we must earn our right to be seen as show-stoppingly beautiful by having some mission therein.

… and the mission cannot be simple self-expression, either — because the patriarchy insists that women exist to serve others. Any moment in which we act for ourselves is condemnable.

Hence, if ever we show up beautiful or unclothed and knowing it, we must be doing this either to benefit someone else or to mend something about ourselves that was formerly broken…

so that we can complete that mission and return to quiet obscurity.

With our heads down and our clothes back on.

This subconscious script — absorbed from four decades of living in patriarchal societies across four different continents — was why I felt an immediate impulse to compose a deep, compelling caption as soon as I began merely thinking about posting a picture of myself in lingerie to my Instagram profile.

“I can’t just do this! If I’m about to express myself in this way, then I have to articulate some kind of well-considered explanation for people…”

The irony is, when I dreamed up the photojournal for which I took these pictures, I did take time to journal about my reasons for wanting to show up in a more visually uninhibited way online — reasons that numbered in the dozens, from the personal, emotional, and spiritual, to the political, intellectual, and sociological.

And those reasons matter. The reasons deserve to be heard.

Someday.

But the knee-jerk obligation I felt to offer any of those reasons alongside that very first photo? To tiptoe out of the starting gate with my ginger excuses and my apologetic half-requests for permission to leave my holding pen, rather than just take off running?

That was my internalized patriarchy.

The feminist in me, who desires to embrace and express myself sensually, was cowing to the demands of a misogynistic world that insists that women shine less brightly, or else only embrace our beauty if we can offer a noble justification for looking the way we look.

Yet no woman should need a defense to be seen as beautiful or sensual.

No woman should be censured with disdain just for having a body and being seen inhabiting it with joy.

No human being should have to justify her radiance.

In words from a long-ago interview of Halle Berry’s that I read two decades ago and never forgot:

We shouldn’t have to make excuses for walking around with the bodies we have.

We shouldn’t have to hide ourselves either.

So here’s a photo of me in a bra. Maybe someday, I’ll give you my “reasons.”

But really, I don’t need to provide any at all.

And neither do you.

Author selfie, July 2026

Laura Rosell writes about society, spirituality, and human connection. You can support her writing through a tip at Ko-fi.