Why does the “girlboss” figure provoke so much backlash?

The figure of the girlboss is regularly celebrated in TV series, brand campaigns and entrepreneurial narratives. It refers to an ambitious, independent and high-achieving woman who is comfortable in spheres of power traditionally associated with men. Yet, in her video, Thaïs d’Escufon argues that this image provokes more rejection than support.

Her argument is not only about women leaders or ambitious women. It primarily targets a media model: that of a woman who is expected to combine authority, financial success, femininity, approachability, charisma and exemplary conduct. According to her, this accumulation of expectations makes the girlboss character difficult to embody and, above all, unconvincing.

The girlboss: an ideal of success with contradictory demands

In the video, the girlboss is defined as a competent and ambitious woman, presented as a modern heroine in a competitive professional world. She is expected to succeed at the highest level without giving up a feminine, smiling and approachable image.

Thaïs d’Escufon believes that the model rests on a contradiction: the girlboss must crush the competition while remaining gentle and collaborative; exercise strong authority without appearing threatening; and never show weakness while continuing to inspire other women.

This view is said to be fuelled in particular by popular culture, advertising campaigns and well-known figures from the business or entertainment worlds. The video also mentions Sophia Amoruso’s book Girlboss, presented as one of the elements that helped popularise the term.

For the video creator, the problem therefore does not lie in ambition itself, but in the expectation of reconciling everything. The girlboss becomes a fantasy of professional and personal perfection rather than a realistic representation of the constraints of work and power.

Contradictions between feminist discourse and economic success

The video emphasises what it presents as a tension between the discourse of empowerment associated with some girlbosses and their involvement in major economic structures. Thaïs d’Escufon notably cites Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s former second-in-command and author of Lean In, as an example of a figure promoting women taking their place in organisations.

She also highlights Sheryl Sandberg’s public support for Larry Summers, in the context of his controversial remarks about women’s representation in the highest-ranking positions. The video uses this example to illustrate what it sees as the difficulty of reconciling an anti-stereotype discourse with certain alliances or positions within economic elites.

The series The Bold Type is also mentioned. Thaïs d’Escufon sees it as depicting characters who defend feminist ideas while working within a media and commercial company. She interprets this as a contradiction between criticising the system and participating in its mechanisms.

This point lies at the heart of her argument: the girlboss would be valued less for her concrete skills than for her ability to become a symbol. She would embody the idea that a woman can succeed according to the codes of economic power while carrying a promise of collective empowerment.

The Elizabeth Holmes case in the video’s argument

Thaïs d’Escufon devotes part of her analysis to Elizabeth Holmes, the founder of Theranos. She presents Holmes’s rise in the media as an illustration of a system quick to manufacture success stories. According to the video, Theranos promised blood-testing technology using a single drop of blood, before the limitations and lies surrounding the company were revealed.

The video creator recalls that Theranos reached a valuation of $9 billion and that Elizabeth Holmes was widely featured in the media, including through comparisons with Steve Jobs and appearances in magazines. She then mentions Elizabeth Holmes’s indictment for fraud in 2018, the company’s bankruptcy and an eleven-year prison sentence.

In the interpretation offered by the video, the case shows the risks of glorifying image before examining the reality of a project. Thaïs d’Escufon believes that the story of the young visionary executive was particularly appealing because it met the need to showcase spectacular female success in the technology world.

Why would the girlboss be rejected at work?

The video puts forward several explanations for the rejection of this figure in professional environments. The first is overcompensation: in order to prove that they deserve their place, some women in positions of authority might, according to Thaïs d’Escufon, adopt particularly strict management styles.

She thus describes the image of a highly demanding executive, likely to create a tense rather than motivating work atmosphere. She also argues that some women may view other women as rivals, particularly in highly hierarchical organisations.

To support her argument, the video mentions a study attributed to Bloomberg according to which, when choosing a supervisor, women would prefer a man. It also refers to a 2016 study according to which men’s satisfaction would remain unchanged with a female supervisor, while women’s satisfaction would decline. These elements are cited in the video without further details about their methodology or context.

Thaïs d’Escufon draws from this the idea that some women would prefer more collaborative and less hierarchical professional settings. However, she acknowledges that a manager must make decisions, including when they displease some members of their team.

Two opposing critiques of the girlboss model

According to the video, the girlboss would be rejected by very different audiences, but for opposing reasons. On the one hand, some left-wing feminists would criticise her for advocating women’s empowerment while participating in a capitalist system they criticise. From this perspective, the individual advancement of a few women to senior positions would not address broader economic and social inequalities.

Thaïs d’Escufon notes that Sophia Amoruso herself reportedly asked in 2022, in a post published on X, for the term “girlboss” to stop being used. She presents this development as a sign of growing criticism of the concept.

On the other hand, the video creator argues that non-feminist women might reject this model because they would see it as valuing traits they perceive as masculine: competition, domination, boundless ambition and individualism. She cites Miranda Priestly, a character in the film The Devil Wears Prada, as a popular representation of this powerful woman who is both admired for her success and rejected for her coldness.

The video concludes that the girlboss finds herself in a “double bind”: she would satisfy neither critics of capitalism nor those who do not wish to make professional competition the primary measure of success.

A critique of a model presented as artificial

At the end of her argument, Thaïs d’Escufon considers the girlboss above all to be a media and ideological construction. She criticises the idea of a woman who could simultaneously be an accomplished CEO, a perfect mother, an exemplary manager and an irreproachable activist.

Her position is to reject this model of imposed perfection. Instead, she calls for recognising differences in preferences that she attributes to men and women, as well as seeking, in her words, a compromise between competition and the need for security. This analysis reflects her interpretation and her reading of the relationship between success, femininity and the professional world.

FAQ

What is a girlboss?

In the video, the term refers to an ambitious and independent woman portrayed as capable of succeeding in the world of business or power while maintaining a feminine and inspiring image.

Why is the girlboss criticised?

Thaïs d’Escufon believes that this model imposes contradictory expectations and can serve more as a symbol of success than as a realistic description of working conditions and access to power.

What central example is given in the video?

Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos are presented as a case illustrating, according to the video creator, the possible excesses of media glorification of the image of the visionary female executive.