Empowerment or Illusion? The Complex Reality of Women on Social Media ❤️

“Has Social Media Done More to Empower Women’s voices

or

Has Social Media Created Unrealistic and Harmful Standards for Women?”

#Women'sDaySpecialDebate

7th March 2026 (II MA Classroom)

Official Rapporteur: Ms. Catherin Sabu

Official Time-Keeper: Ms. Dency Jayaraj

Official Photographer: Ms. Anagha Anil

Group Leaders: Ms. Sivasankari & Ms. Terese Maria Broosily

A debate was conducted in class today on the topic, “Has Social Media Done More to Empower Women’s voices or has it Created Unrealistic and Harmful Standards?”.

The discussion brought together diverse viewpoints, theoretical references, and contemporary examples.

Ann Mariah began by referring to Gayatri Spivak’s famous question, “Can the subaltern speak?” She argued that social media has become a powerful platform for voices that were historically marginalised or silenced.

According to her, stories and perspectives that were once confined to history or small communities now have the possibility of reaching a global audience. She further noted that speaking “from a pedestal” is not always problematic if it helps bring attention to unheard narratives. 

Ann Mariah illustrated this by referring to the film Ayyappanum Koshiyum and the story of Nachiyamma, suggesting that social media and cultural discourse can make such characters and experiences visible to wider audiences.

Milind argued that social media as a platform does not inherently discriminate; it is an open space where anyone can participate.

He mentioned that he personally knows women who actively use social media to raise issues, share opinions, and participate in discussions about social and political concerns.

He further emphasised that women today are using social media as a powerful tool to promote their political voices and express marginalised perspectives.

While acknowledging that there are negative aspects, he argued that focusing on the positive potential of social media reveals how it can empower women and amplify their voices.

Pooja highlighted that social media empowers women across generations. She observed that both young and older women are increasingly using digital platforms to pursue their passions, share creative work, and build communities around their interests.

Sivasankari discussed the representation of tribal voices on social media. She pointed out that digital platforms allow tribal writers and artists to share their literature and cultural expressions, thereby gaining visibility and recognition that might otherwise be limited.

Sivasankari acknowledged the issue of unrealistic beauty expectations but argued that such standards are often linked to elite and capitalist structures rather than social media alone.

She referred to the expensive nature of cosmetic procedures like plastic surgery, noting that these ideals are accessible only to a privileged section of society. She also pointed out that beauty standards themselves are part of a larger capitalist framework and cannot be blamed solely on social media.

Additionally, she mentioned the growing conversations around gender nonconformity, which challenge traditional beauty norms.

Vasupradhaa shifted the focus of the conversation to health and well-being. She argued that fitness should not be understood purely in terms of body structure or appearance, but rather as a reflection of inner health and well-being.

Ann spoke about the influence of Korean beauty trends that circulate widely on social media.

She observed that some of these trends create unrealistic and unattainable standards for appearance. However, she also pointed out that social media has encouraged conversations around representation, such as the visibility of black skin and diverse beauty identities.

Ann also argued that judgment existed even before the rise of social media, often within small communities.

In contrast, social media can sometimes provide encouragement and support, as people with similar experiences come together and motivate one another through comments and interactions.

She further reflected on the concept of performativity, suggesting that even performative actions on social media can sometimes influence people positively and encourage social change.

From her perspective, social media celebrates diverse identities and experiences across the world, aligning with her understanding of feminism as allowing women to pursue what makes them happy.

Lindsay questioned whether social media truly reduces the idea of womanhood only to beauty standards.

She argued that while beauty trends exist, social media has also expanded opportunities for women in areas such as employment, entrepreneurship, and professional networking. She also highlighted the role of algorithms in shaping online experiences.

According to her, social media feeds are curated based on user preferences, meaning that what people see is often determined by the algorithm.

While capitalism continues to shape these platforms, she suggested that gradual change and awareness can still lead to more inclusive spaces. At the same time, Lindsay pointed out that judging others is an innate human tendency.

Audience responses, she noted, significantly influence how content is perceived and how individuals feel online.

Rajsri reflected on the changes brought about by social media in terms of visibility and fame. She argued that in earlier times, only powerful or influential individuals could become widely recognised. Today, however, even homemakers can become influential figures and “nationmakers” through their presence and creativity on social media.

Sivasankari referred to the ‘Me Too’ movement as a powerful example of how social media has empowered women.

The movement allowed women from different backgrounds to share their experiences and collectively challenge systems of harassment and silence. On the opposing side, Lara argued that social media frequently produces aestheticised and idealised standards, particularly in areas such as modelling and beauty culture.

Even when platforms claim to empower women, subtle expectations about appearance continue to exist. She also observed that trends such as celebrating brown skin can sometimes become performative or fashionable rather than genuinely transformative. In addition, she pointed out how audiences often harass influencers when their appearance changes, such as when they gain or lose weight.

Lara further emphasised that marginalised voices often receive fewer views and less engagement compared to mainstream influencers. She also highlighted the growing influence of plastic surgery trends, which contribute to unrealistic and harmful expectations about physical appearance.

She discussed consumer culture surrounding beauty and self-care, including trends such as Korean spas and the pursuit of “glass skin.” While often presented as self-care, she argued that these trends can create unrealistic expectations influenced heavily by social media marketing.

Lara also questioned the beauty industry’s standards, such as the idea of seasonal foundation shades for summer and winter, suggesting that these practices reinforce rigid expectations about appearance. She noted that many people are drawn toward trends that they can afford, which further reinforces consumer-driven beauty ideals.

In addition, she spoke about algorithmic bias on social media and the unequal distribution of visibility.

According to her, creators who genuinely empower women are often fewer in number compared to consumers, reflecting an “80–20 rule” where a small percentage produces content while the majority consumes it.

Lara also warned about toxic digital cultures, including podcasts and online communities that invite individuals only to shame or ridicule them.

She described such dynamics as creating cultlike social relations within social media spaces and argued that focusing only on empowerment risks ignoring the struggles faced by minorities.

Terese added that social media can also become a space of constant judgment. She suggested that such scrutiny may reduce confidence and encourage a superficial understanding of identity and self-worth.

Shobhana provided a critical perspective on representation and theory. Referring again to Gayatri Spivak, she argued that intellectuals often speak from positions of privilege while the real voices of marginalised communities remain unheard.

She also pointed out that documenting marginalised communities does not necessarily mean they are empowered. According to her, representation can sometimes be selective, highlighting certain voices while ignoring others. She further questioned whether digital performativity truly moves society away from capitalist mindsets.

Overall, the debate revealed the complex and multifaceted nature of social media.

While many participants emphasised its role in empowering women through visibility, activism, and opportunities, others highlighted the ways in which beauty standards, consumer culture, and algorithmic systems can create unrealistic expectations.

The discussion demonstrated that social media functions simultaneously as a space of empowerment and a site where societal pressures continue to evolve.