<g id=”cross”>
<line class=”cls-1″ x1=”7″ x2=”25″ y1=”7″ y2=”25″ />
<line class=”cls-1″ x1=”7″ x2=”25″ y1=”25″ y2=”7″ />
</g>
Brigitte Bardot: Beauty, Bigotry and the Complexity of Legacy
<circle cx=”10.5″ cy=”10.5″ r=”7.5″ />
<line x1=”21″ x2=”15.8″ y1=”21″ y2=”15.8″ />
<nav class=”fo-navigation pos-r” itemscope itemtype=”http://schema.org/Navigation”>
Sections <circle cx=”10.5″ cy=”10.5″ r=”7.5″ />
<line x1=”21″ x2=”15.8″ y1=”21″ y2=”15.8″ />
Search
<circle cx=”10.5″ cy=”10.5″ r=”7.5″ />
<line x1=”21″ x2=”15.8″ y1=”21″ y2=”15.8″ />
Search
Support Fair Observer
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
</nav>
</header>

<header class=”entry-header”>
Brigitte Bardot: Beauty, Bigotry and the Complexity of Legacy
</header>

French actress Brigitte Bardot posing for a photoshoot at the Imperial fora, Rome. Reporters Associati & Archivi, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.
Saved Successfully.
This article saved into your bookmarks. Click here to view your bookmarks.
Can we take pleasure in the art of someone we know has committed deeds we now regard as despicable? And even if that artist once enchanted us, can we ignore the bigotry that may have been festering for decades? For over 20 years, Brigitte Bardot was unquestionably the most celebrated object of heterosexual male desire, not just in cinema but anywhere. Yet for much longer, Bardot, who has died at 91, embodied both sweetness and cruelty in roughly equal proportions.
At the height of her global adoration, Bardot was revered in France. President Charles de Gaulle famously remarked that her contribution to French exports rivaled that of French automobile manufacturer Renault. From 1969 to 1972, she served as the model for Marianne, the symbol of French liberty and the Republic. And in 1985, she was awarded France’s highest honor, the Légion d’Honneur. As her looks faded and film roles dried up, however, she morphed into a very different kind of figure — one some continued to adore, but others found deeply repugnant.
And God Created Woman
Parisian Bardot grew up in a Roman Catholic family. Her father was an industrialist; her mother, a dance enthusiast, enrolled Brigitte in classes. She performed well enough to gain admission to the National Superior Conservatory for Music and Dance in 1947. As a teenager, she began modeling for fashion magazines. She married film director Roger Vadim in 1952 and made her screen debut in Jean Boyer’s Le Trou Normand that same year. Among her early appearances was a small role in the British comedy Doctor at Sea (1955).
The following year came And God Created Woman (Et Dieu… créa la femme), Bardot’s breakthrough. A decade before Raquel Welch in One Million Years B.C., Bardot played an uninhibited 18-year-old, widely labelled a “nymphet” at the time. She soon acquired the epithet “sex kitten.” This was the mid-1950s, when the term “objectification” was used almost entirely in literary criticism rather than feminist discourse. (As in “the author objectifies the character’s emotions perfectly.”)
Nothing succeeds like scandal, and the 1950s were no exception. Religious and censorship groups, especially in the United States, were outraged by Bardot’s on-screen sexuality — outrage amplified when it emerged she was having an affair with her married costar Jean-Louis Trintignant. Parallels with her contemporary Elizabeth Taylor, whose affair with Richard Burton made her tabloid prey, are obvious. Both women were vilified.
Bardot herself acknowledged that her fame rested more on image than craft: “I started out as a lousy actress and have remained one,” she once remarked. Perhaps this is why she turned briefly to singing. In 1967, she recorded Je t’aime… moi non plus with her then lover Serge Gainsbourg — a provocative song that seemed to eavesdrop on lovers in flagrante. Bardot asked for the track to be withdrawn; the version released — and made notorious — was recorded later by Gainsbourg and Jane Birkin in 1969.
Bigotry
In the 1970s, Bardot devoted herself to animal welfare. A committed vegetarian, she fulminated against what she regarded as needless cruelty in practices ranging from seal-culling to the horsemeat trade. Halal slaughter, which does not require stunning, became one of her particular targets.
She campaigned vigorously, founding the Brigitte Bardot Foundation for the Welfare and Protection of Animals in 1986 and raising substantial funds, including half a million dollars from auctioning her jewelry. She wrote protest letters to world leaders, including China’s Jiang Zemin and Denmark’s Queen Margrethe II. Today, celebrities regularly wander into ethical and political terrain; at the time, Bardot’s activism felt more startling. And she didn’t stop there. In 1992, she married Bernard d’Ormale, a former adviser to Jean-Marie Le Pen of the far-right Front National, and began publishing her views.
Bardot repeatedly attacked France’s immigration policy, with particular hostility toward Muslims. She was convicted five times of inciting racial and religious hatred. Like Taylor, Bardot was an independent, self-willed woman who cared little whether she was loved or hated. Unlike Taylor, Bardot veered into far-right politics and unapologetic Islamophobia. As the only French celebrity openly to defend the far right, she must have realized how much this damaged her reputation. Perhaps this motivated her decision to live her final years reclusively in St Tropez, where she died.
Arts and artists
So how do we parse La Bardot? In the 1960s, she had few, if any, rivals as a symbol of female sexual liberation, and at the time, this felt revolutionary. Simone de Beauvoir called her “the locomotive of women’s history.” Today, many would say she also played too willingly into male fantasy. Her animal-welfare campaigning achieved real legislative impact; her bigotry caused real harm. Both statements are true.
Can anyone who lived through the 1960s remember Bardot simply as the cinematic siren without wondering whether the bigotry was always there, merely lacking expression? And even if it was, would it have provoked the same response then as now? Simply “backtracking,” as Chappell Roan has done, is an easy option. The harder question is whether we can meaningfully separate art (in the broadest sense) from the artist. Bardot emerged at a time before women were widely encouraged to free themselves from domestic subservience. The Feminine Mystique appeared only in 1963, yet the values she later embraced leave her firmly on the wrong side of history.
Read more, think deeper and become smarter, perhaps even wiser, one article at a time. Sign up for our free newsletters now.
Perhaps the more unsettling truth is that Bardot forces us to confront our own complicity. We didn’t merely consume her image; we helped manufacture it. The erotic fantasy she embodied was fed by studios, journalists, politicians and audiences who thrilled in her transgression while quietly accepting the cultural status quo that made such fantasies necessary. Bardot didn’t invent misogyny any more than she did spectacle, but she allowed herself to be a convenient vessel. In reassessing her, we are not only re-evaluating an individual’s life; we are examining the culture that first exalted her, then recoiled in horror when she revealed that the conservatism and cruelty embedded in that culture were hers as well. We arrive at similar conclusions when listening to Michael Jackson, R. Kelly or Sean “Diddy” Combs.
[Ellis Cashmore is the author of the book Elizabeth Taylor: A Private Life for Public Consumption.]
[Kaitlyn Diana edited this piece.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.
Comment
Most Voted
Commenting Guidelines
Please read our commenting guidelines before commenting.
1. Be Respectful: Please be polite to the author. Avoid hostility. The whole point of Fair Observer is openness to different perspectives from perspectives from around the world.
2. Comment Thoughtfully: Please be relevant and constructive. We do not allow personal attacks, disinformation or trolling. We will remove hate speech or incitement.
3. Contribute Usefully: Add something of value — a point of view, an argument, a personal experience or a relevant link if you are citing statistics and key facts.
I have read and agree to the above commenting guidelines.
</label>
Please agree to the guidelines before proceeding.
I
Agree, Proceed to Login
Cancel
Related Reading
Charlie Chaplin and the Christmas Legacy of Laughter and Exile
Charlie Chaplin’s legacy transcends his cinematic genius, embodying the power of laughter and social critique amid exile and adversity. His…
by
Baptiste Monnet,
December 23, 2025
Ken Loach: Auteur as Agent Provocateur
Ken Loach, a veteran British filmmaker known for political drama and social realism in his films, objected to labor practices…
by
Ellis Cashmore,
August 19, 2025
Richard Wagner and the Twilight of Western Civilization
The once-dominant Wagner phenomenon can tell us a lot about what we have become.
by
Peter Isackson,
October 2, 2020
Support Fair Observer
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire
owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other
publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether
they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.
In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality
of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through
a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of
noise.
We publish 3,000+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs
on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This
doesn’t come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost
money.
Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a
sustaining member.
Will you support FO’s journalism?
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
Donation Cycle
<label for=”donation_cycle_one_time”>One Time</label>
<label for=”donation_cycle_monthly”>Monthly</label>
<label for=”donation_cycle_yearly”>Yearly</label>
Donation Amount
<label for=”amount_11″>$11</label>
<label for=”amount_111″>$111</label>
<label for=”other”>Other</label>
The IRS recognizes Fair Observer as a section 501(c)(3) registered public charity
(EIN: 46-4070943), enabling you to claim a tax deduction.
Make Sense of the World
Unique Insights from 3,000+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
for=”Your email will be shared with fairobserver and subject to its Privacy Policy”>I
agree to receive emails and other content from Fair Observer. I understand
that I
may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy
and Terms of Use
for further
information .</label>

Read more, think deeper and become smarter, perhaps even wiser, one article at a time. Sign up for our free newsletters now.
</main>
Fair Observer, 461 Harbor Blvd, Belmont, CA 94002, USA
<footer class=”mart70 fo-black-bg padt50 padb30″>
Sections
Support Fair Observer
We rely on your support for our independence, diversity and quality.
</footer>
<footer id=”fixed-footer” class=”support-footer”>

Support
independent, crowdsourced, nonprofit
journalism.
Fair Observer is a 501(c)(3) independent nonprofit. We are not owned by billionaires or controlled by
advertisers. We publish nearly 3,000 authors from over 90 countries after fact-checking and editing each
piece. We do not have a paywall and anyone can read us for free. With your vital donations, we can
continue
to do our work.
Please make a recurring (or even one-time) donation today. Even $1 goes a long way because
a
million donors
like you mean one million dollars. Thank you for keeping us independent, free and fair.
Monthly
Yearly


</footer>
Sign into your Fair Observer Account
<label class=”tml-label” for=”rememberme”>Remember Me</label>
Forgot
Password
Forgot Password
Enter your registered email address or username. You will receive a
link to create a new password via email.
Please enter your username or email address. You will receive an email message with instructions on how to reset your password.
Or
Return to
Login
Forgot Password
We have sent a link to your registered email address to reset your password.
<circle cx=”12.5″ cy=”12″ r=”12″ fill=”#414141″ />
Back to
Login
Become a Member & Enjoy Exclusive Benefits!
<circle cx=”12.5″ cy=”12″ r=”12″ fill=”#414141″ />
Access to comments feature
<circle cx=”12.5″ cy=”12″ r=”12″ fill=”#414141″ />
Bookmark your favorite articles
<circle cx=”12.5″ cy=”12″ r=”12″ fill=”#414141″ />
Exclusive invitations to FO° Talks & FO° Live
<circle cx=”12.5″ cy=”12″ r=”12″ fill=”#414141″ />
Access to all of our e-publications
Login
NEWSLETTER
Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
for=”Your email will be shared with fairobserver and subject to it’s Privacy Policy”>I
agree to receive emails and other content from Fair Observer. I understand
that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy
and Terms of Use
for further information.</label>
NEWSLETTER
Make Sense of the World
Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
for=”Your email will be shared with fairobserver and subject to it’s Privacy Policy”>I
agree to receive emails and other content from Fair Observer. I understand
that I may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy
and Terms of Use
for further information.</label>
Make Sense of the World
Unique Insights from 2,500+ Contributors in 90+ Countries
for=”Your email will be shared with fairobserver and subject to its Privacy Policy”>I
agree to receive emails and other content from Fair Observer. I understand that I
may repeal my consent at any time. You can review our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for further
information .</label>
We Need Your Consent
Close
Edit Cookie Preferences
As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media.
Necessary
<label class=”form-check-label” for=”wt-cli-checkbox-necessary”>Necessary</label>
Always Enabled
Social Media
<label for=”wt-cli-checkbox-social_media” class=”cli-slider” data-cli-enable=”Enabled” data-cli-disable=”Disabled”>Social Media</label>
Performance & Functionality
<label for=”wt-cli-checkbox-performance” class=”cli-slider” data-cli-enable=”Enabled” data-cli-disable=”Disabled”>Performance & Functionality</label>
Analytics
<label for=”wt-cli-checkbox-analytics” class=”cli-slider” data-cli-enable=”Enabled” data-cli-disable=”Disabled”>Analytics</label>
SAVE & ACCEPT
</body>
</html>
Total Views:
Source: World Politics - fairobserver.com












