top of page

I’ve watched the trailer for Emilie Blichfeldt’s The Ugly Stepsister over 5 times now. It all started when my best friend sent me the trailer on Instagram and I was immediately intrigued. The idea of reworking Cinderella into a horror movie from the perspective of one of her stepsisters sounded like an excellent way of embracing the story’s grim (pun very much intended) roots. Past versions of the tale have featured cannibalism and various forms of mutilation, yet the classic Disney film has remained the prevalent iteration. Aside from Steven Sondheim’s Into the Woods, I had yet to see a Cinderella story that fully leaned into the gory elements that existed alongside the pumpkin carriages and fairy godmothers.

As a bass beat punctuates the trailer, questions start to flash on screen:


“Do you ever feel inferior? Unworthy? Ashamed? Rejected? Invisible?” and finally “Ugly?”


The last word, which continues to flash on screen as the titular stepsister, Elvira (Lea Myren) sits down in front of her vanity. Elvira herself is far from being ugly. Myren is a very pretty actress who looks like she could play Anya Taylor-Joy’s younger sister. But this movie isn’t called The Already Pretty Stepsister, so certain steps have to be taken in order to let audiences know that Elvira is indeed the ugly stepsister.


Frankly, Elvira’s mother lives up to the title of Evil Stepmother because she’s decided to stick this poor girl with an obnoxious pile of sausage curls overflowing her head and completely overwhelming her soft, delicate features while throwing copious amounts of stiff, brown fabric onto her small frame. The torture is topped with a stack of bows that look like a mess of whipped cream atop this Kibbe system nightmare. Of course, all of this serves to emphasize the beauty of our Cinderella, Agnes (Thea Sofie Loch Naess).


Agnes appears to us looking perfectly put together with her historically inaccurate half-ponytail with relaxed beachwaves and her simple yet elegant pale blue dress, which only makes her bright blue eyes stand out. Brief shots of half-eaten cakes and cinnamon rolls crammed into drawers, a close-up shot of Elvira’s stomach, and glimpses of her braces are further meant to alert audiences that Elvira is, in fact, ugly. It’s not enough that (for some reason) her clothes are unflattering to her features, but apparently, her body is also far from the ideal that Agnes apparently embodies.Elvira is not ugly, but she just happens to have all of the supposed signifiers of ugliness. The only reason why she does not appear as put-together as Agnes is that her mother is possessed by the vengeful spirit of a stylist who’s obsessed with heaping bows and curls onto a petite person with pixie-like features. As for her body, Elvira barely looks any different from any of the other girls in her dance class. Sure, the camera focuses on her stomach after eating one of the several sweets hidden in her drawers, but it’s nothing abnormal or shocking. By all means, it is a completely normal body. So when we see Elvira’s nose gruesomely cracked open by a terrifying plastic surgeon (appropriately named Dr. Esthetique), it hurts in more ways than one.


It’s an image that is all too familiar. A girl who looks perfectly fine, even pretty if only her mother would stop, insisted on pairing sausage curls with gigantic bows, going to extreme lengths to completely change everything about herself rather than emphasizing the beauty that is already there. Unfortunately, for many people, and especially young women, these are the types of growing pains that we experience.


A ScreenRant review by Mae Abdulbaki describes how beauty in this world is viewed:“As a performance, as status, as a means to attract and remain valuable in the eyes of society." Beauty is essentially a currency amongst women, and the extensive procedures that Elvira puts herself through are the labor needed to earn it. She screams in pain with blood leaking from her eyes after having false eyelashes directly sewn onto her eyelids, all for the attention of Prince Julian (Isac Calmroth). The film is listed as a horror-comedy, but those who identify with Elvira’s struggles know that it is truly a tragedy. One review that flashes on screen during the trailer calls the film “savagely brutal and yet strangely beautiful.” A description that is ironic, given the way that Blichfeldt’s intentions seem to be to rip beauty standards apart limb from limb, as blood spatters onto a horrified audience. Personally, I’m all for it. If Elvira’s torture feels visceral (one audience member threw up during one sequence during its Cannes showing), that’s because it is forcing the audience to feel what nearly every young girl has had to feel on the inside as she grew up. “Savagely brutal and yet strangely beautiful.”


While it may even be frustrating to see Elvira viciously mutilating herself for the attention of one man she barely knows, how many of us have been like her? Cassie Howard (Sydney Sweeney) has faced similar criticism for the insanely intricate morning routine she subjects herself to just to gain a little bit of attention from Nate Jacobs (Jacob Elordi). But unless you can confidently admit to yourself that you’ve never gone to any lengths just for the attention of a crush, none of us is any better.


Even without a romantic interest, we live in a society that immediately judges people based on their physical appearances. Lori Baker-Sperry and Liz Grauerholz write how “it is acknowledged that many women willingly engage in ‘beauty rituals’ and perceive being (or becoming) beautiful as empowering, not oppressive.” This idea is made more complex with the frequent promotion of “self-care” and “wellness” by social media. We may not view multi-step skincare routines or smoothie recipes as beauty rituals because they have been wrapped in the idea that it is being done for yourself. But, let’s be honest here, “wellness” has simply replaced “beautiful,” and it is not a coincidence that the expected outcome of following these rituals is a “glow-up” in the form of a slimmer body, smoother skin, and more voluminous hair. These rituals are meant to lead to the achievement of beauty standards.


“The social advantages of pretty privilege are many: good-looking people come off smart, capable, trustworthy, and generally morally virtuous.”

On the other end of the spectrum is the unfairly gorgeous Agnes. Silently judging Elvira while looking effortlessly ethereal in an Elle-Fanning-as-Sleeping-Beauty type of way. Although she meets beauty standards in a way that Elvira does not, she, too, is dependent on her beauty to move herself forward in the world. The Aarne-Thompson-Uther folklore index categorizes Cinderella under type 510A — Persecuted Heroine. While it would have been easy to place Agnes/Cinderella into the role of villain to Elvira’s persecuted heroine, Agnes is not any better off. As previously mentioned, beauty is a currency, and Agnes only happens to have an abundance of it.


As a young woman without a father or a dowry, Agnes must rely on her pretty privilege to catch the attention of the wealthy prince. According to Sable Yong for Time Magazine, “the social advantages of pretty privilege are many: good-looking people come off smart, capable, trustworthy, and generally morally virtuous.” Elvira temporarily gains this advantage sometime after she swallows a tapeworm egg to eat away her body weight, and her hair begins to fall out in clumps. Whether she likes it or not, she has become beautiful. But it’s still not enough. Yong writes that pretty privilege “calls for a kind of beauty that appears convincingly ‘natural’ in order to imbue positive associations of goodness and moral virtue.” As painful as those procedures may have been, it is no match for the beauty that Agnes was born with.


“A kind of beauty that appears convincingly ‘natural’ in order to imbue positive associations of goodness and moral virtue.” The penultimate moment comes when Elvira holds up a meat cleaver, preparing to chop off her toes. Besides the moment when the slipper fits Cinderella, this is one of the most famous scenes of the Cinderella story. Elvira has gone through hell and back to forge herself into the living doll that she thought the prince wanted. But Agnes, even with her face obscured, has managed to destroy everything that she has worked towards. When we see her glaring down at her own foot, there is a sense that it was never just for the prince. The whole world has told Elvira that in order to be valued, she must be beautiful. All of those surgeries and procedures were ways of punishing herself for failing to embody beauty standards in the same way that Agnes does. But we all know how the story of Cinderella ends. Only one stepsister will get her happily ever after.

Everything has become stan twitter, and stan twitter has become sports fandom. Here’s how it’s affecting awards season. 



The 2025 awards season has finally come to an end. From discourse around Timotheé Chalamet’s Marty Supreme marketing campaign (and everything else about him), to stan wars erupting from the results of every major awards program, social media has become a hostile hellscape. But since when did social media have this much of an impact on major awards ceremonies? Why does the prestigious nature that these events seem to have had in the past no longer exist? 


Simply put, everything has become stan culture. While this may be a broad statement, it seems that the notion of shows like the Grammys and the Emmys have become hubs for fans of every individual nominee to fight and compare why their favorite nominee has to win and why any other nominee cannot. The Grammys in particular have become saturated with categories, leaving room for more nominees. It has become more embarrassing for your fave to not receive a nomination than it has for it to be an honor. 


Musicians such as Sabrina Carpenter and Billie Eilish have developed intense fanbases that tend to believe in awards supremacy. Eilish, who holds 10 wins with 34 nominations with her career being less than a decade old, has slightly stirred the pot within the past few years of the awards. Evidently, becoming a darling of the Recording Academy rarely goes home empty-handed. In the 2025 awards, Beyoncé won Album of the Year, arguably the highest honor of the night, and stans of the 24-year-old musician were incredibly displeased. Arguments of who had more streams and track virality piled against Cowboy Carter, the winner of the award. Fandoms began to point fingers at one another, the Beyhive alleging racism against fans of Eilish for the outrage of her win, Eilish fans concluding that the award was paid for by Roc Nation. What neither seems to consider is that experts and knowledgeable members of the Recording Academy simply saw Cowboy Carter as the album of the year, plain and simple. However, fans could find some sense of peace after the 2026 ceremony, after Eilish re-released the track “Wildflower” as a single, well after its initial May 2024 release on the album. To have qualified for the 2026 Grammy Awards, music had to have been released between August 31, 2024, and August 30, 2025. Eilish’s Hit Me Hard and Soft " was only eligible to be nominated for the 2025 Grammys, and she released “Wildflower” as a single on March 4, 2025, nearly ten months after it had already been released with the rest of the album. There are no rules against this per se, but the song won the “Song of the Year” award for the 2026 Grammys, which left some viewers upset with the snub of other songs in the category, such as “DtMF” by Bad Bunny and “Luther” by SZA and Kendrick Lamar. 


Alas, Eilish has now won a Grammy for the previously “snubbed” 2024 album. This culture of stans demanding higher numbers, more wins, and better statistics is highly reminiscent of sports culture. Variety reported that for the 2026 Oscars, betting on the awards has become a $100 million business, with bets wagered on who will win. Kalshi and Polymarket ads are difficult to ignore, with the amount of commercial time betting platforms had during the broadcast of the Super Bowl and when the latter partnered with the Golden Globes to integrate live odds into the ceremony. While online betting forums have been around for years, they gained massive popularity right before the U.S. 2024 Presidential Election. Once players bet correctly on Trump’s win, sites such as Kalshi and Polymarket have entered the mainstream for various events. Online predictions do not necessarily count as gambling (which is regulated by a few states in the U.S.), which is why these sites are able to promote their platforms as heavily as they do. 


Stan culture and betting are intertwined has turned the awards season into a gamified event. Press and publicity have been around for as long as Hollywood has, but now more than ever can a potential smear campaign or just saying an ill-worded statement on ballet and opera can change the public’s perception of “deserving” the award. Chalamet’s Best Actor campaign for Marty Supreme was nothing short of interesting, to say the least. From standing on top of the Las Vegas Sphere as an orange ping-pong ball to tapping slightly into method press, becoming Marty, embodying greatness, and desiring to be at the top. Many have been turned off by his behavior as it drastically opposes his previously indie-darling persona from the late 2010’s/ early 2020s. Recently, he has found himself in hot water with his comments about ballet in opera while in conversation with former Interstellar costar, Matthew McConaughey. Major ballets and operas across the world have given their two cents on the matter, dissing Chalamet in any way they can. This event has caused a major setback in the public’s view of who should win Best Actor, leading many to one: root for and two: bet on Michael B. Jordan to win. Ultimately, the award went to Jordan, not without some ballet and opera jokes thrown Chalamet’s way during the ceremony. 


The prestige of the award remains partly in its title and the doors it may open for performers and filmmakers. However, the run and the “competition,” so to speak, is no longer a test of the “best performance,” it's a game of numbers. This is where I believe stans across the board would do well in sports fan culture. Once awards and streams became a commodity within stan culture, the direct correlation became blatantly evident. The awards season has now become an amalgamation of stan wars and morality olympics. Does Chalamet deserve an Oscar ever because of his comments? Should movies with bad characters playing antagonists win Best Picture? Can Beyoncé or Taylor Swift win another Grammy? They’ve already won plenty! 


Numbers have no place in the space of honoring art. If you want to bet on winners or compare stats, watch a sport.



Have you ever heard of the pink tax? No, I’m not specifically talking about the color pink or your actual taxes, but an extra cost that’s often added to products and services marketed toward women. It’s basically gender-based pricing, where items marketed toward women are more expensive than the same or very similar items marketed toward men. This directly impacts women’s buying power, with studies showing personal care products can be roughly 13% more expensive than men’s, creating a substantial financial burden over time.


A lot of these products are things society says women have to have, and many of them we realistically can’t go without. For instance, personal care items that we use regularly and most times, even monthly, are affected by the pink tax. Things like razors, deodorant, lotion, clothing, and even services often have a male counterpart that is cheaper, even though the product is basically the same.


Even when you look at actual products, you can see the difference. At Target, a men’s Degree Cool Rush deodorant is priced lower than a women’s Degree MotionSense deodorant, even though they serve the same purpose. 


This pricing difference even starts with kids. A Spider-Man bike helmet marketed toward boys can be significantly cheaper than a nearly identical Spider-Man “Ghost-Spider” helmet marketed toward girls, just because it’s pink and branded differently. It shows how early this kind of pricing starts, even when the product itself is basically the same.

While it’s called a “tax,” it’s not actually a government tax. It’s more of a price markup, mostly caused by marketing

tactics. Companies often claim the higher prices are due to production differences, like adding colors or scents, but realistically, those small changes don’t justify the consistent price gap. We don’t need pink versions of products; we need products that are safe, effective, and affordable.

There’s also something called the tampon tax, which refers to the sales tax placed on essential menstrual products. These are necessary items, not luxury goods, yet they are still taxed in many places. Some states are starting to remove this tax, but it’s still an issue.


The pink tax can be fought in small ways, like buying the “men’s” version of products when they’re cheaper, but that doesn’t fix the bigger problem. This is really a form of price discrimination, and it’s something women deal with every day, whether they realize it or not.


The impact adds up. Women can end up paying up to $2,000 more per year for similar products. Over a lifetime, that’s a huge amount of money just because of gender-based marketing. On top of existing wage gaps and inequality in the workforce, this becomes just one more financial burden.


So is this really the cost of being a woman? It might sound like a theory, but there’s strong evidence that it’s happening. The pink tax shows how inequality can exist in everyday things, even in something as simple as buying deodorant or a bike helmet.


References ;






Vs 




And 



vs


You reached the end! Make an account to get updated when new articles and interviews drop.

bottom of page