This is the midweek edition of Culture Study — the newsletter from Anne Helen Petersen, which you can read about here. If you like it and want more like it in your inbox, consider subscribing.
Yes! I have literally been waiting for this since the minute I saw the Insta, and really appreciate the way you offer us context for influencers and how they're really just another form of advertising, with the internet allowing a divorce from the traditional celebrity machine.
A couple weeks ago they did an open Q&A and one of the questions was whether Bailey was engaged...her response was a coy "not yet", and I immediately assumed that there was something in the works, but even in my deep cynicism I didn't go to "sponsored ring".
Also have to assume that the jeweler was involved in the content, given that Bailey is actually wearing a full wedding set in all the photos. It's a very achievable and aspirational look for an outdoor, distanced wedding-and explains why everything is white, where a pink flower sitch would have played up the trendy rose gold of the ring. Interesting to consider the semiotics of this as product advertising separate from the B&B brand building; if it were just Bailey, the focus would have been purely engagement. The presence of a wedding band in the grid photos and, frankly, continuing to be worn in some stories in which the jeweler is tagged raises an eyebrow for me-because why wouldn't they try and double-down on the exposure with a wedding band reveal later on?
As a former marketing guy, I can't not analyze this from that lens. You obviously want to point people to big-ticket items, but if I were lining this up I would also plot out some smaller things down the line to get people in the door. Think "omg, my fiance just surprised me with this little thing" and show a bracelet or some shit that costs $200 and can be financed super easily. Maybe I'm in awe of the cultural ramifications of this microtargeting and offended by the quality of marketing.
Wedding-day gift watch for Asa and bridesmaid jewelry gifts are obvious options that fit with the demo of their followers, but are slightly aspirational. The microtargeting in digital is literally the only way it "drives value" but also few brands budget appropriately for the volume of content required so influencers are necessary
See, that's why you get them in the door for something small and to sign up for credit before that day. Give them a few small and easy things to say "yes" to and before long - with retargeting and direct marketing - you've created a permission structure to $2,500 of presents on the store credit that you already have. Coordinate your platforms with your influencers for decent cross-promotion (in addition to the sponcon posts), and I think you could really move the needle here.
Hey, Asa here. I somehow came across these and I wanted to clear some things up. Firstly, I would like to clarify that Bailey truly didn’t know when the proposal would be. She knew that it was coming at some point in the future but had no clue for the specifics. I had over 20 people from both of our families helping out to create a scene that we would both enjoy. So then you ask, “why was she wearing white? She must have known?” Well, that was also part of my plan. I convinced Bailey that we were having a large family dinner to celebrate Easter and my great grandmother’s 90th birthday. I told every one of my female cousins to subtly drop hints that they were also wearing white. But the time we had to leave for the “family dinner”, she put herself in that white dress.
As for the sponsorship for the ring. Bailey and I had already been dating for over four years by the time we were approached by the brand. We were already deeply talking about marriage and we were starting to evaluate possible options. I planned on proposing with a $500 ring and Bailey had no true preference. However, we were blessed by the opportunity to work with James Allen and I was able to custom-make her dream ring.
As for the ring itself. Let me clarify. What you see in the images is not the wedding band. It was a personal choice to go the non traditional route because I knew that that look and style was something she liked. So when ordering the ring, I had it customized to have the bands fused together. She’ll be getting another band for the wedding.
I was raised LDS, which meant from about the age of 11 on, every lesson focused on the idea that marriage was not optional. (We were taught that our entrance to the highest level of heaven depended on marriage to a worthy LDS man in the temple, and having children.) My teenage years were a weird blend of being desperately unhappy and depressed, while also feeling bad because being LDS was supposed to make you happy. I really don't miss that culture.
I didn't want to go too deep into this, but I have such strong memories of the discourse around LDS men before their missions (only quasi-eligible) and the feeling of almost feeding frenzy around RMs
I can't stop thinking about how "cute" is the descriptor for their account and content (I take no issue with this, and completely agree!) while at the same time there's something unsettling and jarring about how young B&B look and act while also trying to appeal to consumers around their own age?
First thing I thought about the engagement photo was "how old are they, again?" and remembering they're my own age was so destabilizing. Makes me reflect on how B&B and co. have to project/perform youth and innocence while also be eternally prepared for "adult" things like marriage. I also can't help but wonder about how actual real life contrasts so much with all the imagery here, and really have a hard time picturing Bailey and Asa doing normal-people things like managing laundry, cooking, and the less photographable parts of life that are also part of marriage. This is less a criticism of them and more my own struggle to put into words how disturbing this cultural intersection is for me. What a great piece that I'll be thinking about all day.
This makes me want to talk about "cuteness" for a second. (Riffing off of Sianne Ngai's work--good summary of her book here: https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-zany-the-cute-and-the-interesting-on-ngais-our-aesthetic-categories/) I think the unsettling and contradictory thing about cuteness as a marketing tool is that, as Ngai says, cuteness is an aestheticization of powerlessness, so it's made to be disarming or innocent. Which doesn't square well with the fact that a hyper-aestheticized entity like these influencer twins is also attempting to sell us, well, something, whether that's a purchasable commodity or, as AHP writes, an ideology and set of received aspirational narratives that go along with that ideology--not that they'd say that's what they're selling; I mean, they, like us, are consumers of that ideology at the same time that they're producers of it. All of this makes the whole thing at once mercenary and helpless along multiple lines, which is what makes it both effective and disturbing.
Also, though, dovetails beautifully with gender norms around owning/running a business (I recommend Meg Conley's recent essay on the Beanie Baby market for a much more insightful version of this point). The cuteness is kind of what allows them to effectively sell anything, because it renders them perceptually powerless. So there's no threat and it declaws the capitalist underpinnings.
Yeah, really excellent point. Makes me think in general about the gendering of capitalist enterprise as a form of obfuscation, like how MLMs are frequently articulated as being about care or wellness or other female-coded transcendent values.
Oh, this is fascinating. Thank you for sharing it! I think there's an some kind of an extension of this in 'hating on things that teen girls like'. I can't quite articulate it, but there's an intersecting track some place -- have you seen Lindsey Ellis' video essay apologizing to Stephanie Meyer? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O06tMbIKh0
This is exactly what I was getting at, but written out better than I could have! (Also want to read her book, have it on my shelf and excited to pick it up soon!) I think it's that under capitalism, they're bound by the very thing they're using to market themselves and supposedly benefitting from, even though ultimately "cuteness" ultimately shrinks/neutralizes their power.
I mean, it's strange how cuteness is so frequently accompanied by feelings of it being fake, or even "icky," right? Someone should write about "icky" as an aesthetic category. It's not the horror show of abjection that "disgusting" is; it's the "cute" version of disgusting.
What you say about "bound by the very thing they're using to market themselves" reminds me that in the last week, when attempting to find a sample scholarly article that I could use with students in a library instruction session, I came across and decided to use one on selfies that articulates them as a form of "conspicuous prosumption" (production + consumption in a single act). Still trying to wrap my head around the layers of prosumption that influencers are engaging in--what they're producing, what they're consuming, all in the singular act of posting.
Oh this is very interesting — do you think that they're still appealing to their own age group? To me they strike me more as appealing to a younger audience, but I know a lot of college students do follow them out of....interest? Fascination?
Honestly, I don't know who the target audience really is, beyond the one you've identified—I would guess they're trying to, seeing as they do wear crop tops/fashionable apparel that 21 year olds would wear, and have really nailed the combo of girl next door/beachy waves/effortlessness/skinniness that white female culture seems to prize, especially in college. So they definitely have the look, and I think fascination is really the right word, because that's what they inspire in me (as I can't relate to a lot of what I'm seeing on their instagram, even though I'm the same age as they are and also a white woman). I think the appeal for women my age could be a specter of relatability, but it's really deeply buried below the way purity culture vibes are much more their thing.
I also think about it in terms of, what is appealing about them to younger women/girls, beyond their conventional attractiveness and fake cheeriness? They're vaguely aspirational for younger girls, perhaps? But what they aspire to is also elusive and complicated by their own ages, partnerships, and clear premium on getting married asap. That's what's so weird about all of this, is that they absolutely look 16 but are definitely not 16 in terms of marriage/outfits/general influencer shrewdness. Which is why it was so freaky for me to see the image and think "is that a 10 year old getting married??" It was the dress and headband that did it for me.
I've recently been really fascinated with how they kept their audience young, yet there were always comments asking Bailey when she was going to get married, which feels like something children don't necessarily talk about?
They've managed to somehow bring the "college" experience to youtube in a 100% PG (probably G) way, while still keeping their close ties to their family and family channel. I think their audience ties in a lot with their mom's channel, which I would consider a family channel. Also I think the fact they've grown up on youtube brings a whole other level of fascination. Just knowing that they've been around on youtube for that long makes me want to watch to try to figure out what the appeal is.
I’m sure anyone here knows more than me, but I’ve seen Tik Tok/Instagram follower ratio that suggests age group of audience. Anyone know how they do on TT? (Sorry to bring in numbers, this is all fascinating.)
It's both funny and possibly scary to me how much this type of backlash will only grow further obstinant and deranged the more secular, and I guess nihilist, culture becomes. I like how you frame it at the end: "naturalize the objectively bizarre parts of the status quo." Naturalization is at the heart of conservative arguments, but the more culture progresses, the more they will have to force these arbitrary truisms on us, all under the guise of "it's just the way things are." In order for things to stay the same, things will have to change.
So well put. Thank you. Would you mind if I use this as a perspective for the “outrage” expressed by conservatives every time an alternative is reported or presented? It’s always called bias but it’s not.
Of course! Go right ahead. If you also want to understand the "In order for things to stay the same, things will have to change" angle of conservatism, I highly recommend Corey Robin's "The Reactionary Mind." IMO, it's the best analysis I've read on Trumpism; from his perspective, conservatism can be best understood as anti-left or anti-progress, and they defend and rationalize existing hierarchies, from aristocracy to oligarchy.
Also, to shamelessly self-plug, I've written about how their worst fears of socialism are already a reality under capitalism:
Thanks, Guy From the Internet. I’ll put in the order for the book tonight. Unfortunately, as an academic in Idaho I’ll go to prison if I follow any link with the word ‘Socialism’ in it. I’ll check it out next time I get to Washington. So, tomorrow.
Brooklyn and Bailey are both awoved Liberals and Feminists, they even released a "female empowerment" song a couple of years ago for fucks sake.
Similarly to Elizabeth Taylor, Jesica Jimpson and the wacho leader of Scientology Tom Cruise, all of them part of your ilk.
You Reactionary Liberals, hellbent on whipping up moral panics and witch hunts, over the so called "hypersexualisation" of popular media, should not even have nerve to push judgment on others in regards to the aforementioned issues.
The following video represents your ideology and movement swimmingly:
Thank you so much for this. Purity culture is such a foreign concept to me being from and living in Denmark. To an outsider, teen sex in general in the US seem like such a delicate or vexed thing and your piece really shed light on how religion and conservatism and patriarchy all have part in how it plays out in that particular demographic.
Here only a small, mostly muslim, minority adhere to abstinence. Most parents know teens will have sex and educate them and most often the parents of older teens expect the boyfriend of girlfriend to stay the night from time to time when the kids are still living at home.
Also, thank you for your newsletters – they are always a pleasure to read.
How come you are able to formulate an opinion about an entire country, based on the personal opinion of the author, however biased she may be, even though you have never visited said country yourself?
Are you even aware that according to the CDC, a whopping of 90% of Americans have premarital sex, including the vast majority of self-proclaimed Christians as well, considering 60% of U.S. population subscribes to that religion?
Or that the median marriage age in the U.S. is actually 28.6 for women in addition to 30.4 for men, comparable, if not slightly lower, to most other developed countries, debunking the implied narrative that individuals marrying at a very young age is a common occurence in the U.S.
Or even in regards to teenage sex as well as the necessary precautions about it taking place, where most Americans not only lose their virginity between the ages of 15 to 16(comparable rates to many other western countries), but they are significantly more likely to utilise contraceptive pills since they begin puberty, an occurrence that is not even common for adult women in many European countries.
Listen, I am not going to proclaim that "purity culture" does not exist in the U.S., because it obviously does, however it is not a prominent part of the overall American culture as the data indicated above.
Not to mention the whole irony of the entire situation, is that most celebrities the author listed are awoved Liberals and Feminists themselves.
From Elizabeth Traylor, an ardent Democrat as well as a supporter of both Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, Jessica Simpson and Tom Cruise, formely a Christian and now a wacko leader of Scientology and even Brooklyn and Bailey themselves being actual Feminist, even writing a song dedicated to "female empowerment".
It appears it is actually your side promoting purity culture, and it definitely jives well with the undertakings of Feminists in various Scandinavian countries, from pushing to outlaw prostitution and strip clubs in Sweden, Norway and Iceland, even collaborating with the freaking Catholic Church to prohibit gestational surrogacy in Sweden.
As far as I am concerned, they are coming for your country as well.
The puritanical and moralistic Feminists will not rest until the entire female body is either covered up or entire works of art and avenues are censored so as to please their proclivities.
I had a VISCERAL reaction to seeing the phrase "ring by spring" again. My conservative Christian college campus had the same expression (although we also added "or your money back).
What's interesting is that my college was a liberal arts college and in the same town there was a Bible College and the joke on our campus was that the girls that went there only went there to get married to a pastor but somehow the guys from the college were always trying to date girls from our school because there couldn't be "two pastor's in the marriage" it's all so crazily fucked up when I think about it.
I was lucky that the majority of my friends out right rejected that narrative but I definitely saw on my periphery girls who I just knew were making a huge mistake. and I just wanted to scream "JUST HAVE SEX! DON'T GET MARRIED!!!"
hahaha, same - I went to small liberal arts Lynchburg College, which is across town from the huge evangelical Liberty University. "Ring by Spring" and "MRS Degree" were just huge tropes that the local newspaper did a front page story on them each year! I was an RA for a semester and hated it because I was consistently dealing with Liberty students coming onto our campus and going crazy over alcohol and girls.
I was an evangelical myself and friends with some women at Liberty and most of them couldn't wait and got married while they were still students! There was a fear that if they waited that it wouldn't happen. One of my close friends who waited until after graduation ended up ending her engagement, but for good reason - her ex-fiancé later came out as gay. At the time I remember being so angry at him, but now I'm glad he was able to embrace who he was after graduation (once he was out of the Liberty bubble) before they tied the knot.
I was with my husband for three and a half years before we married, which in the evangelical world was an eternity. Funny enough, I ended up becoming a Unitarian Universalist, where everyone was shocked that we married so quickly, lol!
If you had told 18 year old me that I would be 34 and single I would have been shocked. I just expected that while I probably wouldn't get married in college or right after college that I would at least meet my future my husband in college. I'm so glad I didn't just "settle". I would tell my 18 year old self how happy you can be at 34 and not married...believe it or not 🤣
100% same. That whole thread of educational regrets a while ago? Mine was 100% I focused on the wrong things in college (desperation to find "the one" being chief of my mistakes)
Yep! Upon graduation I felt like such a failure because I didn't meet my husband in college (I ended up meeting him less than a year later). I remember my evangelical friends being concerned because I was a stronger Christian than him, but thank God he was more "basic" because he has been there for me through my ex-vangelical journey. My 18 year old self would have been shocked and so upset at 34 year old non-Christian me and how much healthier I am without the toxic theology.
Purity Culture is such a shit show... and apparently, I have some deep-seated body-level healing to do from it. I figured that out a few days ago because Pastor Nadia had a podcast with Josh Harris, who wrote the 1990s PC bible, "I Kissed Dating Goodbye." That damn book not only spawned a plethora of further reading material (including his own gloating courtship & marriage follow-up), but it codified what conservative Christian women were supposed to do. I went to a conservative university, which also had lots of rituals built around getting engaged (**freshman*** year, which 40-year-old me is horrified about now and 18-year-old me thought was completely nuts) that I luckily didn't get roped into. The Podcast was amazing, particularly for the level of grace that Nadia brought to the conversation. I am putting her book Shameless on the top of my "to read" pile once the semester ends. https://nadiabolzweber.com/303-joshua-harris/ (And I WISH she'd release the IGTV follow-up she did with him on Monday. There were some INCREDIBLE gems that I need to unpack more, but fear I'll forget them too quickly. I was particularly struck about when she left the Church of Christ she became militant in social justice, using the same tools she'd learned to evangelize. She had to re-learn how to NOT use those tools as she did her social justice work.)
As a New Englander who is too old for these kids, this is entirely foreign culture to me, and as many have said, thank you for this really thorough and engaging dive into a truly American phenomenon. I've been thinking about influencers a bit lately too. One I used to follow so closely, Jessica Quirk from What I Wore, fascinated me with the way she tried to reconfigure her brand to be wellness for a while, then stepped out of the limelight almost entirely to focus on crafty things, and has been stepping back in bit by bit. Compared to another one I followed pretty closely, Sarah Vickers of Classy Girls Wear Pearls (I know I am dating myself by referring to their blogs, as this was pre-Instagram domination.) She is still 100% the face of the blog and the family clothing brand. I'm really interested in the different paths there, in what burnt out Jessica that hasn't burnt out Sarah.
The paths people are describing in the comments for how they expect B&B to split up their account going forward just sound so dystopian and Truman Show esque...
I'm also still trying to digest the recent dialogues around millennials and Gen Z and I think there is SUCH a disconnect between how people talk about gen z as being so much more aware of how curated social media is vs what we're seeing in actual mental health outcomes of exposure to this stuff. Anyway. AHP did a great job synthesizing thoughts about these things. I'm so happy to be here
I think Sarah Vickers has always been playing a specific character that doesn't necessarily have a ton to do with their actual life. KJP and Sarah seem to have an understanding of boundaries that a lot of influencers lack--for a long time they didn't show their own house at all, and interior shots are still rare (and I'm never 100% sure that the ones they do show us are legit, rather than just staged). Neither of them use their real name on the blog/Instagram. (I don't even know if their kid's real name is actually Harry or if that's a pseudonym!) There's just a level of distance there that probably helps with not taking things too seriously or personally. They're selling an obviously contrived fantasy, not trying to sell their real lives (or fantasy passed off as their real lives).
It probably helps that they're trying to use social media to sell their own products, not just serve as ads for other people's products ... They have a measure of control over how they do that advertising that most influenceers don't.
Splitting up the account reminds me of the Sticklers, the TikTok family who got pregnant after 3 months of dating, so they got married (and she got baptized), who now split up and SHE got to keep the TikTok/IG. The name was changed to KatStickler instead of TheSticklers.
Blogging is a weird thing. Seeing who has lasted/stuck around is interesting. Sarah Vickers has the upper hand in a way that Atlantic-Pacific or Julia Berolzheimer do because they do not really share much about their personal lives. It's all about us looking into their perfectly photographed lives and building envy. While the bloggers who get deeply personal seem to burn out more. I have a very limited scope of who I follow (and still follow!) but that's been an observation of mine.
My favorite blog is not only still around, it still updates regularly! Long live www.Frockflicks.com!! Also, see www.laineygossip.com and www.gofugyourself.com. I wonder how much of the longevity can be attributed to the fact that most of these are two or three friends or a whole crew in Lainey's case?
Lainey and Go Fug Yourself are not lifestyle or "personal" blogs, they are focused on celebrity red carpet style and, in Lainey's case, gossip and how gossip reflects society at large. It's more difficult to maintain a lifestyle/family blog because life can get stagnant and there is a line that you have to decide early on over how much you are willing to share and if you want pull that line in later in your blog life, your readership often turns on you. If you are constantly projecting a patina of perfection when that perfection is marred, you are often pilloried for "lying" or concealing the less savory portions of your life. I can see how people can get burned out on that and give up on it entirely.
Loved reading this piece! It is taking me back to being around Baylor Christian culture in a big way. This paragraph is real:
"If you think this is weird, well you have obviously not been around college-age Christians desperate to have sex and/or desperate to keep having sex but not feel bad about it!"
Even though the people I was friends with at Baylor were not the stereotype of Baylor (the stereotype being Bible-study, Wednesday night church, maybe sorority) the desperate horniness and repression remained! Nobody was having it, everybody wanted it. We scorned "ring by junior spring" and yet.
That was one of the most powerful things Josh Harris said on the podcast with Pastor Nadia - you spend your whole life as a teen and young adult thinking sex is this bad thing that you shouldn't do... and then you're expected to flip a switch on your wedding night. It's... jarring... at best. https://nadiabolzweber.com/303-joshua-harris/
Excellent piece as always. One question I'm left with re: the twinfluencers (and all of the people who grow up in the spotlight) - how do they adapt as adults?
You highlighted the well-worn path to the domestic influencer, which seems like the obvious next step for Bailey, but how does Brooklyn fit in? They both can do "being in a wedding" content in the coming months, but after that? Where does Brooklyn go when Bailey holds up that ideological next step of "house and husband"? What happens to their brand as Brooklyn and Bailey? Really interested to see what comes next.
As someone who has been following the Duggar Family (19 Kids and Counting) for years, there is a Duggar Family account and all of the older kids (and some of their spouses) have accounts. It's weird to think about but I've watched these people from the time they were kids - through their courtships and marriages - to them now having kids who are themselves growing up! I particularly follow Jill and her husband Dereck, who have somewhat broken away - they have become more mainstream evangelicals that have only 2 kids that they are sending to public schools!
I was wondering about this too - but does this actually allow them to essentially split their roles / target audiences a bit more than if Brooklyn was still with Brooks and (presumably / theoretically) headed towards marriage - so while Bailey's off doing wedding sponcon targeted towards their older followers, Brooklyn's off dating related content which might be more relatable to their younger fans / those of their fans still dating? It seems like a more versatile approach to take at least. I am interested to see how this pans out in terms of their "Brooklyn and Bailey" brand though!
Someone asked about this on one of their recent posts and I guess in a previous video B&B said after one of them gets married they'll probably start their own separate Insta accounts. It'll be interesting to see what happens!
Yes, I am so confused by what is next for them....do they split identities? Swap days? Also what happened with that other influencer who got engaged in high school? The modest dress one whose name escapes me?
Spot on write up (along with its precursor). I’ve seen this same ring-by-spring photo dozens of times, usually on one of those green and gold benches.
| “I’m not saying that women in these situations don’t love their future husbands. I’m saying it can feel like a massive relief — which ultimately says less about the specific relationship and more about the way society conceives of women’s sexuality and general value, both in and outside of devout religious communities.”
My mind also jumps to the prism that there’s a lot of men seeking conformity/relief in these marriages. I think every class of BU grads has at least one ring-by-spring marriage end when the husband comes out of the closet (usually within a few years). Lots of pain for all parties, driven by this massive pressure from the evangelical establishment for people to fit into a certain mold.
Yep, I mentioned this in another comment - against the trend of the rest of my Liberty friends group (who all rushed to the altar during college or right after graduation), a friend of mine and her fiance waited to marry until a year after graduation. It was good that they did because he ended up coming out of the closet and they called off the wedding. It was so painful for them both because of the narrow evangelical mold placed upon them from the youth group-to-Liberty pipeline and being taught that gayness was a sin.
It is so true - as someone who has been happily married for almost eight years, it was a massive relief to get through all of the expectations of the teen years and twenties because of women's perceived value as a pure virgin and then good wife and mother. Men have expectations placed on them, too - they need to be the masculine head of the house monetarily and religiously. My evangelical friends were concerned that my husband didn't fit this mold.
Anne Helen Petersen: "higher ed’s marketing of itself as a lifestyle. (Every lifestyle needs ambassadors — it’s just that some, like NCAA athletes and the people of color recruited to be on the cover of the school magazine, don’t receive monetary compensation, and others, like Brooklyn and Bailey, get “paid partnerships.”)
Wow. I've seen that transition to higher-ed marketing by the U in my town.,as well as its ad-like display of images of non-paid students OC.
Yes! I have literally been waiting for this since the minute I saw the Insta, and really appreciate the way you offer us context for influencers and how they're really just another form of advertising, with the internet allowing a divorce from the traditional celebrity machine.
A couple weeks ago they did an open Q&A and one of the questions was whether Bailey was engaged...her response was a coy "not yet", and I immediately assumed that there was something in the works, but even in my deep cynicism I didn't go to "sponsored ring".
Also have to assume that the jeweler was involved in the content, given that Bailey is actually wearing a full wedding set in all the photos. It's a very achievable and aspirational look for an outdoor, distanced wedding-and explains why everything is white, where a pink flower sitch would have played up the trendy rose gold of the ring. Interesting to consider the semiotics of this as product advertising separate from the B&B brand building; if it were just Bailey, the focus would have been purely engagement. The presence of a wedding band in the grid photos and, frankly, continuing to be worn in some stories in which the jeweler is tagged raises an eyebrow for me-because why wouldn't they try and double-down on the exposure with a wedding band reveal later on?
oh this is SO interesting and reveals my general ignorance when it comes to rings/bands/sets etc — thank you!!
I'm both recently married and a brand manager, this is basically my niche!
As a former marketing guy, I can't not analyze this from that lens. You obviously want to point people to big-ticket items, but if I were lining this up I would also plot out some smaller things down the line to get people in the door. Think "omg, my fiance just surprised me with this little thing" and show a bracelet or some shit that costs $200 and can be financed super easily. Maybe I'm in awe of the cultural ramifications of this microtargeting and offended by the quality of marketing.
Wedding-day gift watch for Asa and bridesmaid jewelry gifts are obvious options that fit with the demo of their followers, but are slightly aspirational. The microtargeting in digital is literally the only way it "drives value" but also few brands budget appropriately for the volume of content required so influencers are necessary
See, that's why you get them in the door for something small and to sign up for credit before that day. Give them a few small and easy things to say "yes" to and before long - with retargeting and direct marketing - you've created a permission structure to $2,500 of presents on the store credit that you already have. Coordinate your platforms with your influencers for decent cross-promotion (in addition to the sponcon posts), and I think you could really move the needle here.
WOW I did not even notice she's wearing a wedding ring too. That is so odd, you're right.
Hey, Asa here. I somehow came across these and I wanted to clear some things up. Firstly, I would like to clarify that Bailey truly didn’t know when the proposal would be. She knew that it was coming at some point in the future but had no clue for the specifics. I had over 20 people from both of our families helping out to create a scene that we would both enjoy. So then you ask, “why was she wearing white? She must have known?” Well, that was also part of my plan. I convinced Bailey that we were having a large family dinner to celebrate Easter and my great grandmother’s 90th birthday. I told every one of my female cousins to subtly drop hints that they were also wearing white. But the time we had to leave for the “family dinner”, she put herself in that white dress.
As for the sponsorship for the ring. Bailey and I had already been dating for over four years by the time we were approached by the brand. We were already deeply talking about marriage and we were starting to evaluate possible options. I planned on proposing with a $500 ring and Bailey had no true preference. However, we were blessed by the opportunity to work with James Allen and I was able to custom-make her dream ring.
As for the ring itself. Let me clarify. What you see in the images is not the wedding band. It was a personal choice to go the non traditional route because I knew that that look and style was something she liked. So when ordering the ring, I had it customized to have the bands fused together. She’ll be getting another band for the wedding.
I hope that clears some of it up!
I was raised LDS, which meant from about the age of 11 on, every lesson focused on the idea that marriage was not optional. (We were taught that our entrance to the highest level of heaven depended on marriage to a worthy LDS man in the temple, and having children.) My teenage years were a weird blend of being desperately unhappy and depressed, while also feeling bad because being LDS was supposed to make you happy. I really don't miss that culture.
I didn't want to go too deep into this, but I have such strong memories of the discourse around LDS men before their missions (only quasi-eligible) and the feeling of almost feeding frenzy around RMs
Oh my goodness, yes. Like sharks scenting blood in the water.
I can't stop thinking about how "cute" is the descriptor for their account and content (I take no issue with this, and completely agree!) while at the same time there's something unsettling and jarring about how young B&B look and act while also trying to appeal to consumers around their own age?
First thing I thought about the engagement photo was "how old are they, again?" and remembering they're my own age was so destabilizing. Makes me reflect on how B&B and co. have to project/perform youth and innocence while also be eternally prepared for "adult" things like marriage. I also can't help but wonder about how actual real life contrasts so much with all the imagery here, and really have a hard time picturing Bailey and Asa doing normal-people things like managing laundry, cooking, and the less photographable parts of life that are also part of marriage. This is less a criticism of them and more my own struggle to put into words how disturbing this cultural intersection is for me. What a great piece that I'll be thinking about all day.
This makes me want to talk about "cuteness" for a second. (Riffing off of Sianne Ngai's work--good summary of her book here: https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-zany-the-cute-and-the-interesting-on-ngais-our-aesthetic-categories/) I think the unsettling and contradictory thing about cuteness as a marketing tool is that, as Ngai says, cuteness is an aestheticization of powerlessness, so it's made to be disarming or innocent. Which doesn't square well with the fact that a hyper-aestheticized entity like these influencer twins is also attempting to sell us, well, something, whether that's a purchasable commodity or, as AHP writes, an ideology and set of received aspirational narratives that go along with that ideology--not that they'd say that's what they're selling; I mean, they, like us, are consumers of that ideology at the same time that they're producers of it. All of this makes the whole thing at once mercenary and helpless along multiple lines, which is what makes it both effective and disturbing.
Also, though, dovetails beautifully with gender norms around owning/running a business (I recommend Meg Conley's recent essay on the Beanie Baby market for a much more insightful version of this point). The cuteness is kind of what allows them to effectively sell anything, because it renders them perceptually powerless. So there's no threat and it declaws the capitalist underpinnings.
Yeah, really excellent point. Makes me think in general about the gendering of capitalist enterprise as a form of obfuscation, like how MLMs are frequently articulated as being about care or wellness or other female-coded transcendent values.
Those girls can sell anything.
Can you link to the article? It sounds fascinating!
https://megconley.substack.com/p/the-beanie-baby-boom-the-influencer
Oh, this is fascinating. Thank you for sharing it! I think there's an some kind of an extension of this in 'hating on things that teen girls like'. I can't quite articulate it, but there's an intersecting track some place -- have you seen Lindsey Ellis' video essay apologizing to Stephanie Meyer? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O06tMbIKh0
This is exactly what I was getting at, but written out better than I could have! (Also want to read her book, have it on my shelf and excited to pick it up soon!) I think it's that under capitalism, they're bound by the very thing they're using to market themselves and supposedly benefitting from, even though ultimately "cuteness" ultimately shrinks/neutralizes their power.
I mean, it's strange how cuteness is so frequently accompanied by feelings of it being fake, or even "icky," right? Someone should write about "icky" as an aesthetic category. It's not the horror show of abjection that "disgusting" is; it's the "cute" version of disgusting.
What you say about "bound by the very thing they're using to market themselves" reminds me that in the last week, when attempting to find a sample scholarly article that I could use with students in a library instruction session, I came across and decided to use one on selfies that articulates them as a form of "conspicuous prosumption" (production + consumption in a single act). Still trying to wrap my head around the layers of prosumption that influencers are engaging in--what they're producing, what they're consuming, all in the singular act of posting.
Oh this is very interesting — do you think that they're still appealing to their own age group? To me they strike me more as appealing to a younger audience, but I know a lot of college students do follow them out of....interest? Fascination?
Honestly, I don't know who the target audience really is, beyond the one you've identified—I would guess they're trying to, seeing as they do wear crop tops/fashionable apparel that 21 year olds would wear, and have really nailed the combo of girl next door/beachy waves/effortlessness/skinniness that white female culture seems to prize, especially in college. So they definitely have the look, and I think fascination is really the right word, because that's what they inspire in me (as I can't relate to a lot of what I'm seeing on their instagram, even though I'm the same age as they are and also a white woman). I think the appeal for women my age could be a specter of relatability, but it's really deeply buried below the way purity culture vibes are much more their thing.
I also think about it in terms of, what is appealing about them to younger women/girls, beyond their conventional attractiveness and fake cheeriness? They're vaguely aspirational for younger girls, perhaps? But what they aspire to is also elusive and complicated by their own ages, partnerships, and clear premium on getting married asap. That's what's so weird about all of this, is that they absolutely look 16 but are definitely not 16 in terms of marriage/outfits/general influencer shrewdness. Which is why it was so freaky for me to see the image and think "is that a 10 year old getting married??" It was the dress and headband that did it for me.
That's it exactly! They look like two children having a pretend backyard wedding.
I teach middle school and I could ABSOLUTELY see my students following/emulating them.
I've recently been really fascinated with how they kept their audience young, yet there were always comments asking Bailey when she was going to get married, which feels like something children don't necessarily talk about?
They've managed to somehow bring the "college" experience to youtube in a 100% PG (probably G) way, while still keeping their close ties to their family and family channel. I think their audience ties in a lot with their mom's channel, which I would consider a family channel. Also I think the fact they've grown up on youtube brings a whole other level of fascination. Just knowing that they've been around on youtube for that long makes me want to watch to try to figure out what the appeal is.
I’m sure anyone here knows more than me, but I’ve seen Tik Tok/Instagram follower ratio that suggests age group of audience. Anyone know how they do on TT? (Sorry to bring in numbers, this is all fascinating.)
These two were all I could think of during the NCAA--it drives me nuts that the players aren't paid but they are.
Same, especially when they had video of themselves watching the finals *in their own stories*
It's both funny and possibly scary to me how much this type of backlash will only grow further obstinant and deranged the more secular, and I guess nihilist, culture becomes. I like how you frame it at the end: "naturalize the objectively bizarre parts of the status quo." Naturalization is at the heart of conservative arguments, but the more culture progresses, the more they will have to force these arbitrary truisms on us, all under the guise of "it's just the way things are." In order for things to stay the same, things will have to change.
this, EXACTLY this. beautifully put.
So well put. Thank you. Would you mind if I use this as a perspective for the “outrage” expressed by conservatives every time an alternative is reported or presented? It’s always called bias but it’s not.
Of course! Go right ahead. If you also want to understand the "In order for things to stay the same, things will have to change" angle of conservatism, I highly recommend Corey Robin's "The Reactionary Mind." IMO, it's the best analysis I've read on Trumpism; from his perspective, conservatism can be best understood as anti-left or anti-progress, and they defend and rationalize existing hierarchies, from aristocracy to oligarchy.
Also, to shamelessly self-plug, I've written about how their worst fears of socialism are already a reality under capitalism:
https://thatguyfromtheinternet.substack.com/p/our-biggest-fears-of-a-soviet-dystopia
Thanks, Guy From the Internet. I’ll put in the order for the book tonight. Unfortunately, as an academic in Idaho I’ll go to prison if I follow any link with the word ‘Socialism’ in it. I’ll check it out next time I get to Washington. So, tomorrow.
Ugh, so much for academia being left-wing lol. Appreciate it Rick, and hope you enjoy the read.
Brooklyn and Bailey are both awoved Liberals and Feminists, they even released a "female empowerment" song a couple of years ago for fucks sake.
Similarly to Elizabeth Taylor, Jesica Jimpson and the wacho leader of Scientology Tom Cruise, all of them part of your ilk.
You Reactionary Liberals, hellbent on whipping up moral panics and witch hunts, over the so called "hypersexualisation" of popular media, should not even have nerve to push judgment on others in regards to the aforementioned issues.
The following video represents your ideology and movement swimmingly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blY5SGWEVY4
Utterly ridiculous.
Thank you so much for this. Purity culture is such a foreign concept to me being from and living in Denmark. To an outsider, teen sex in general in the US seem like such a delicate or vexed thing and your piece really shed light on how religion and conservatism and patriarchy all have part in how it plays out in that particular demographic.
Here only a small, mostly muslim, minority adhere to abstinence. Most parents know teens will have sex and educate them and most often the parents of older teens expect the boyfriend of girlfriend to stay the night from time to time when the kids are still living at home.
Also, thank you for your newsletters – they are always a pleasure to read.
And I even forgot to mention the proposed probition on pornography, that fortunately never materialised, in Iceland as well.
Making the track record of your movement even worse.
You are literally embarrassing yourself, do not take this any further.
How come you are able to formulate an opinion about an entire country, based on the personal opinion of the author, however biased she may be, even though you have never visited said country yourself?
Are you even aware that according to the CDC, a whopping of 90% of Americans have premarital sex, including the vast majority of self-proclaimed Christians as well, considering 60% of U.S. population subscribes to that religion?
Or that the median marriage age in the U.S. is actually 28.6 for women in addition to 30.4 for men, comparable, if not slightly lower, to most other developed countries, debunking the implied narrative that individuals marrying at a very young age is a common occurence in the U.S.
Or even in regards to teenage sex as well as the necessary precautions about it taking place, where most Americans not only lose their virginity between the ages of 15 to 16(comparable rates to many other western countries), but they are significantly more likely to utilise contraceptive pills since they begin puberty, an occurrence that is not even common for adult women in many European countries.
Listen, I am not going to proclaim that "purity culture" does not exist in the U.S., because it obviously does, however it is not a prominent part of the overall American culture as the data indicated above.
Not to mention the whole irony of the entire situation, is that most celebrities the author listed are awoved Liberals and Feminists themselves.
From Elizabeth Traylor, an ardent Democrat as well as a supporter of both Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, Jessica Simpson and Tom Cruise, formely a Christian and now a wacko leader of Scientology and even Brooklyn and Bailey themselves being actual Feminist, even writing a song dedicated to "female empowerment".
It appears it is actually your side promoting purity culture, and it definitely jives well with the undertakings of Feminists in various Scandinavian countries, from pushing to outlaw prostitution and strip clubs in Sweden, Norway and Iceland, even collaborating with the freaking Catholic Church to prohibit gestational surrogacy in Sweden.
As far as I am concerned, they are coming for your country as well.
The puritanical and moralistic Feminists will not rest until the entire female body is either covered up or entire works of art and avenues are censored so as to please their proclivities.
Did Brooklyn leave her boyfriend for his better-dressed sibling, Brooks' Brother?
I want you to know I spent an hour crafting this joke.
I had a VISCERAL reaction to seeing the phrase "ring by spring" again. My conservative Christian college campus had the same expression (although we also added "or your money back).
What's interesting is that my college was a liberal arts college and in the same town there was a Bible College and the joke on our campus was that the girls that went there only went there to get married to a pastor but somehow the guys from the college were always trying to date girls from our school because there couldn't be "two pastor's in the marriage" it's all so crazily fucked up when I think about it.
I was lucky that the majority of my friends out right rejected that narrative but I definitely saw on my periphery girls who I just knew were making a huge mistake. and I just wanted to scream "JUST HAVE SEX! DON'T GET MARRIED!!!"
hahaha, same - I went to small liberal arts Lynchburg College, which is across town from the huge evangelical Liberty University. "Ring by Spring" and "MRS Degree" were just huge tropes that the local newspaper did a front page story on them each year! I was an RA for a semester and hated it because I was consistently dealing with Liberty students coming onto our campus and going crazy over alcohol and girls.
I was an evangelical myself and friends with some women at Liberty and most of them couldn't wait and got married while they were still students! There was a fear that if they waited that it wouldn't happen. One of my close friends who waited until after graduation ended up ending her engagement, but for good reason - her ex-fiancé later came out as gay. At the time I remember being so angry at him, but now I'm glad he was able to embrace who he was after graduation (once he was out of the Liberty bubble) before they tied the knot.
I was with my husband for three and a half years before we married, which in the evangelical world was an eternity. Funny enough, I ended up becoming a Unitarian Universalist, where everyone was shocked that we married so quickly, lol!
If you had told 18 year old me that I would be 34 and single I would have been shocked. I just expected that while I probably wouldn't get married in college or right after college that I would at least meet my future my husband in college. I'm so glad I didn't just "settle". I would tell my 18 year old self how happy you can be at 34 and not married...believe it or not 🤣
100% same. That whole thread of educational regrets a while ago? Mine was 100% I focused on the wrong things in college (desperation to find "the one" being chief of my mistakes)
Yep! Upon graduation I felt like such a failure because I didn't meet my husband in college (I ended up meeting him less than a year later). I remember my evangelical friends being concerned because I was a stronger Christian than him, but thank God he was more "basic" because he has been there for me through my ex-vangelical journey. My 18 year old self would have been shocked and so upset at 34 year old non-Christian me and how much healthier I am without the toxic theology.
Purity Culture is such a shit show... and apparently, I have some deep-seated body-level healing to do from it. I figured that out a few days ago because Pastor Nadia had a podcast with Josh Harris, who wrote the 1990s PC bible, "I Kissed Dating Goodbye." That damn book not only spawned a plethora of further reading material (including his own gloating courtship & marriage follow-up), but it codified what conservative Christian women were supposed to do. I went to a conservative university, which also had lots of rituals built around getting engaged (**freshman*** year, which 40-year-old me is horrified about now and 18-year-old me thought was completely nuts) that I luckily didn't get roped into. The Podcast was amazing, particularly for the level of grace that Nadia brought to the conversation. I am putting her book Shameless on the top of my "to read" pile once the semester ends. https://nadiabolzweber.com/303-joshua-harris/ (And I WISH she'd release the IGTV follow-up she did with him on Monday. There were some INCREDIBLE gems that I need to unpack more, but fear I'll forget them too quickly. I was particularly struck about when she left the Church of Christ she became militant in social justice, using the same tools she'd learned to evangelize. She had to re-learn how to NOT use those tools as she did her social justice work.)
I love Nadia Bolz-Weber!!
As a New Englander who is too old for these kids, this is entirely foreign culture to me, and as many have said, thank you for this really thorough and engaging dive into a truly American phenomenon. I've been thinking about influencers a bit lately too. One I used to follow so closely, Jessica Quirk from What I Wore, fascinated me with the way she tried to reconfigure her brand to be wellness for a while, then stepped out of the limelight almost entirely to focus on crafty things, and has been stepping back in bit by bit. Compared to another one I followed pretty closely, Sarah Vickers of Classy Girls Wear Pearls (I know I am dating myself by referring to their blogs, as this was pre-Instagram domination.) She is still 100% the face of the blog and the family clothing brand. I'm really interested in the different paths there, in what burnt out Jessica that hasn't burnt out Sarah.
The paths people are describing in the comments for how they expect B&B to split up their account going forward just sound so dystopian and Truman Show esque...
I'm also still trying to digest the recent dialogues around millennials and Gen Z and I think there is SUCH a disconnect between how people talk about gen z as being so much more aware of how curated social media is vs what we're seeing in actual mental health outcomes of exposure to this stuff. Anyway. AHP did a great job synthesizing thoughts about these things. I'm so happy to be here
I think Sarah Vickers has always been playing a specific character that doesn't necessarily have a ton to do with their actual life. KJP and Sarah seem to have an understanding of boundaries that a lot of influencers lack--for a long time they didn't show their own house at all, and interior shots are still rare (and I'm never 100% sure that the ones they do show us are legit, rather than just staged). Neither of them use their real name on the blog/Instagram. (I don't even know if their kid's real name is actually Harry or if that's a pseudonym!) There's just a level of distance there that probably helps with not taking things too seriously or personally. They're selling an obviously contrived fantasy, not trying to sell their real lives (or fantasy passed off as their real lives).
It probably helps that they're trying to use social media to sell their own products, not just serve as ads for other people's products ... They have a measure of control over how they do that advertising that most influenceers don't.
Splitting up the account reminds me of the Sticklers, the TikTok family who got pregnant after 3 months of dating, so they got married (and she got baptized), who now split up and SHE got to keep the TikTok/IG. The name was changed to KatStickler instead of TheSticklers.
Blogging is a weird thing. Seeing who has lasted/stuck around is interesting. Sarah Vickers has the upper hand in a way that Atlantic-Pacific or Julia Berolzheimer do because they do not really share much about their personal lives. It's all about us looking into their perfectly photographed lives and building envy. While the bloggers who get deeply personal seem to burn out more. I have a very limited scope of who I follow (and still follow!) but that's been an observation of mine.
My favorite blog is not only still around, it still updates regularly! Long live www.Frockflicks.com!! Also, see www.laineygossip.com and www.gofugyourself.com. I wonder how much of the longevity can be attributed to the fact that most of these are two or three friends or a whole crew in Lainey's case?
Lainey and Go Fug Yourself are not lifestyle or "personal" blogs, they are focused on celebrity red carpet style and, in Lainey's case, gossip and how gossip reflects society at large. It's more difficult to maintain a lifestyle/family blog because life can get stagnant and there is a line that you have to decide early on over how much you are willing to share and if you want pull that line in later in your blog life, your readership often turns on you. If you are constantly projecting a patina of perfection when that perfection is marred, you are often pilloried for "lying" or concealing the less savory portions of your life. I can see how people can get burned out on that and give up on it entirely.
Loved reading this piece! It is taking me back to being around Baylor Christian culture in a big way. This paragraph is real:
"If you think this is weird, well you have obviously not been around college-age Christians desperate to have sex and/or desperate to keep having sex but not feel bad about it!"
Even though the people I was friends with at Baylor were not the stereotype of Baylor (the stereotype being Bible-study, Wednesday night church, maybe sorority) the desperate horniness and repression remained! Nobody was having it, everybody wanted it. We scorned "ring by junior spring" and yet.
That was one of the most powerful things Josh Harris said on the podcast with Pastor Nadia - you spend your whole life as a teen and young adult thinking sex is this bad thing that you shouldn't do... and then you're expected to flip a switch on your wedding night. It's... jarring... at best. https://nadiabolzweber.com/303-joshua-harris/
yeah. It's a huge problem!
Yes! It reminded me so much of Liberty culture and young adult evangelical church culture.
Excellent piece as always. One question I'm left with re: the twinfluencers (and all of the people who grow up in the spotlight) - how do they adapt as adults?
You highlighted the well-worn path to the domestic influencer, which seems like the obvious next step for Bailey, but how does Brooklyn fit in? They both can do "being in a wedding" content in the coming months, but after that? Where does Brooklyn go when Bailey holds up that ideological next step of "house and husband"? What happens to their brand as Brooklyn and Bailey? Really interested to see what comes next.
As someone who has been following the Duggar Family (19 Kids and Counting) for years, there is a Duggar Family account and all of the older kids (and some of their spouses) have accounts. It's weird to think about but I've watched these people from the time they were kids - through their courtships and marriages - to them now having kids who are themselves growing up! I particularly follow Jill and her husband Dereck, who have somewhat broken away - they have become more mainstream evangelicals that have only 2 kids that they are sending to public schools!
The Duggars are a whole other ballgame... and absolutely fascinating in themselves.
I was wondering about this too - but does this actually allow them to essentially split their roles / target audiences a bit more than if Brooklyn was still with Brooks and (presumably / theoretically) headed towards marriage - so while Bailey's off doing wedding sponcon targeted towards their older followers, Brooklyn's off dating related content which might be more relatable to their younger fans / those of their fans still dating? It seems like a more versatile approach to take at least. I am interested to see how this pans out in terms of their "Brooklyn and Bailey" brand though!
Someone asked about this on one of their recent posts and I guess in a previous video B&B said after one of them gets married they'll probably start their own separate Insta accounts. It'll be interesting to see what happens!
Yes, I am so confused by what is next for them....do they split identities? Swap days? Also what happened with that other influencer who got engaged in high school? The modest dress one whose name escapes me?
Spot on write up (along with its precursor). I’ve seen this same ring-by-spring photo dozens of times, usually on one of those green and gold benches.
| “I’m not saying that women in these situations don’t love their future husbands. I’m saying it can feel like a massive relief — which ultimately says less about the specific relationship and more about the way society conceives of women’s sexuality and general value, both in and outside of devout religious communities.”
My mind also jumps to the prism that there’s a lot of men seeking conformity/relief in these marriages. I think every class of BU grads has at least one ring-by-spring marriage end when the husband comes out of the closet (usually within a few years). Lots of pain for all parties, driven by this massive pressure from the evangelical establishment for people to fit into a certain mold.
Yep, I mentioned this in another comment - against the trend of the rest of my Liberty friends group (who all rushed to the altar during college or right after graduation), a friend of mine and her fiance waited to marry until a year after graduation. It was good that they did because he ended up coming out of the closet and they called off the wedding. It was so painful for them both because of the narrow evangelical mold placed upon them from the youth group-to-Liberty pipeline and being taught that gayness was a sin.
It is so true - as someone who has been happily married for almost eight years, it was a massive relief to get through all of the expectations of the teen years and twenties because of women's perceived value as a pure virgin and then good wife and mother. Men have expectations placed on them, too - they need to be the masculine head of the house monetarily and religiously. My evangelical friends were concerned that my husband didn't fit this mold.
Anne Helen Petersen: "higher ed’s marketing of itself as a lifestyle. (Every lifestyle needs ambassadors — it’s just that some, like NCAA athletes and the people of color recruited to be on the cover of the school magazine, don’t receive monetary compensation, and others, like Brooklyn and Bailey, get “paid partnerships.”)
Wow. I've seen that transition to higher-ed marketing by the U in my town.,as well as its ad-like display of images of non-paid students OC.
Oh I love a good influencer deep dive. Made my midafternoon tea break so much more enjoyable.
Kicker of a closing line, AHP. 👏