The Beauty Backlash

December 2nd, 2007, 08:13 AM

Therein lies the problem. I won't do the research; I don't care. I don't believe that media is responsible for low self-esteem among females. The reason I don't believe this is because females of all cultures generally suffer from low self-esteem and pressure to be beautiful in order to attract a mate. Like I said previously, this is also true in cultures where media has no role. So the influence comes from somewhere else.

That depends on the culture. Different cultures have differing ideas on what is and is not beautiful. So you're right in a sense. It's not just about makeup. It's about being beautiful. Where you're wrong, is in your assertion that media is at fault for the pressure applied to women. Like I said, women who live in cultures without media receive the same pressure.

So where does the pressure come from if not from media? Is it from men? Is it men that decide what is or isn't beautiful? Nope! Men are just horndogs. They just want to screw. And they'll screw anything that is available -- beautiful or otherwise.

The simple fact of the matter is that men have only two choices: Take what's available or settle for nothing. I personally settle for nothing; I'm not happy with what's available. So we can eliminate men as the culprit.

Men are out. Media is out. What's left? Ah, other women! It's a jungle out there. The pressure comes from other women. The spirit of competition is alive and well in the mating game. So I really feel no sympathy for women who whine about how they're expected to be beautiful. Besides, women are getting fatter and fatter by the day. Have you noticed the number of fat assed hags in your town lately? Pretty funny, huh?

Women have what some refer to as "pussy power". It's really the only power women have. If men want you in their bed, you have power over men. As you get older, your pussy power fades. So it's not about feeling less beautiful. You hit the nail on the head when you alluded to cheating and abuse as being fears of aging females. And I'm sure that in some instances, the fears become realities. So it's more about becoming powerless. And to generally paint all men with the same brush is absurd.

Why do you suppose that is? Is it because of media? Is it because of men? No! It's because of women. Women choose to gain their place in society through their tits and their twat. As long as women identify themselves as sex objects, they will be forever cast in that role. Sucks, I know, but you did it to yourselves. C'est la vie, as they say in the olde country.

As a matter of fact, I do. And it's much more prevalent than you suggest.

Girls are taught by other girls. Although that's slowly changing. I see a lot of girls now that really don't give a crap about how men or other girls perceive them. But this is coming from a guy who typically views females as losers.

So in other words, you became a s-l-u-t and you wondered why people treated you like a s-l-u-t. You probably needed a mirror for something other than applying makeup. You needed to see yourself and ask yourself why you were portraying yourself as a promiscuous s-l-u-t.

I've never heard that. This would be a good time to provide examples.

Makeup is not a part of the problem at all. The problem is not that women apply makeup to their faces. The problem is not that women have eating disorders. The problem is not that women age or are expected to be attractive. The problem is that women make the conscious choice to sell themselves as s-l-u-t-s. If that's the image you present, that's the image people expect. Remember, if all women refused to get breast implants... If all women refused to wear makeup... If all women refused to be thin... If all women refused to wear suggestive garments... Men would still find them attractive enough to f-u-c-k, date, and marry. You can't blame men or media for a problem that is one of women's own creation. And it is women, and women alone, who perpetuate the problem.

I apologize for the vulgarity in this reply, but I'm just sick and tired of listening to the feminist bullcrap that has become so much of my daily life.

December 2nd, 2007, 08:27 AM

Intro:
1. Sentence one - delete. Show, don't tell.
2. Sentence two - delete. Show.
3. Third sentence may be compressed, deleting the subjective 'young', which is either redundant or erroneous.
4. Fouth sentence refers to a less thorough analysis. What other analysis?
5. Fifth sentence: What does the writer mean by "elementary articles"? This is a conclusion before demonstration, or is it a hypothesis? Showy anyway.
6. Sixth sentence: You are solely addressing women. This buddy tone contradicts your immediately preceding pretense to objectivity. The proposition (question) itself is old, obvious and uninteresting.
7. Seventh: Are you really going to present a credible answer, or is this the standard journalistic trick of asking questions with profound implications, and never delivering, only teasing? Again, all tell, all promise, all boast. And we've all seen it done too many times.
8. Eighth: Preposterous proposition, the punishment of the feminist movers, entirely unaddressed by the essay and patently rediculous. Self-respecting feminists don't even read this junk. As for the "ring a bell?" reference, we are not that familiar yet. The reading list is optional. Everybody knows that Glamour is not the only magazine. The unmade point is that women consume mountains of this tripe.

I suggest that you harden up the intro. Discipline yourself. Do not reject or forget a word of it though. Deliver it all - in good style - and you've got one hell of an essay. You may be inspired to go back and rewrite the intro.

December 2nd, 2007, 10:50 AM

How very interesting that most, if not all of you, are men. I wonder what the women of this forum have to say about the matter?

Warrior: I wonder what it is about your f*cked up life that makes you think an 11 year old girl, raped by her father, is a ****. Were you rejected as a child, did your mother forget to hug you? No wonder you're such a conceited a**hole.

December 2nd, 2007, 11:55 AM

You said that you "believed" when you were young that girls had to be beautiful. You said that being beautiful lead to you being abused.

This is what you didn't say:

You didn't say that you were eleven years old.
You didn't say that you were raped by your father.

So what was I thinking? I was thinking teenage skank that dressed like a w-h-o-r-e and went to a party. She proceeded to get drunk and conduct herself in a promiscuous manner. She was subsequently raped or sexually assaulted. Doesn't that description pretty much coincide with the typical "sexual assault" or "date rape"?

I was responding to the implied assertion that being beautiful meant wearing mini-skirts or low cut shirts. So my question to you is the following: What were you doing at age eleven that caused you to think that you were "being beautiful"?

That's a rhetorical question. I neither care nor have any interest in the answer.

December 2nd, 2007, 12:49 PM

Warrior!! OMG, I sure hope there aren't many of you out there!! Whooee!!

Amber, I enjoyed your article and agree with it's overall content.

I DO NOT and have not read any of those magazines. Just perusing them in a doctor's office is enough to turn me off! Having said that, women do have to take responsibility for themselves and their actions. I am neither "skinny" nor "fat" and never have been either. I do occasionally question how I look but I just do the best with what I've been given. Would I like smaller boobs? Yes. Would I like to have a flat tummy? Yes Would I like a smaller nose? Yes. But I feel that how I look, how I act, how I am as a human being towards others is much more important. I have experienced being both a "wall flower" and "semi-popular" and while I prefer the latter, it was a good experience being the former. I am not considered "good looking" but have more often been referred to as "cute". What I realized as a grew into 'teenagehood' was that it was how I treated my peers, how I stood up for my friends etc., that gradually attracted both sexes to become my friends.

Now, happily married, my mate isn't necessarily considered "good looking" in a physical way. In fact, when we met initially, I didn't think he was attractive at all. But the more I got to know him, the better looking he got. If you ask anyone if he is good looking, they will say yes because of his personality, his laughter and even more importantly, his heart. We all have to re-think this whole self-image, for sure.

JMO

December 2nd, 2007, 12:49 PM

The issue is far too complex to attribute 'blame' to one gender or the other. We all own the problem, and we all own the solution.

Suggesting that women 'ask' for it though, is a pretty archaic evasion of personal or societal complicity imo. In fact the bulk of the comments in Warrior's post come off as a textbook example of that tired old cliche "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."

December 2nd, 2007, 01:38 PM

I don't know what Warrior is on about, but it's getting pretty close that the time that I too sink down, down, down and start slinging mindless B.S. from my sexually confused alter ego, the self-hating lesbian with male genitals person.

I think that Warrior hates beautiful women. Women hate beautiful women. Warrior comes for the kill. The women stay away, perhaps because of the picture of the beautiful essay author, who has nerve and maybe some brains besides - the picture probably taken on her 16th birthday.

As for the topic, wasn't it something about English? Hey, how about that punctuation!

December 2nd, 2007, 01:39 PM

Excuse me, but I fail to see how media has to take responsibility for what women do. I fail to see how men have to take responsibility for what women do.

Is it a man't fault that a woman dresses like a w-h-o-r-e? No! Is it media's problem if a woman gets drunk and gets sexually assaulted? No! So whose problem is it? Obviously, it's the problem of the woman and ultimately law enforcement.

I just don't buy into the argument that this person offers. It sounds a lot like, "I'm fat, and it's the men that don't like fat women that are to blame," or, "I'm not as attractive as the woman in the magazine, so the magazine has to stop printing pictures of attractive women," or, "My boyfriend raped me when I took off my top and started flashing my pussy." Give me a break!

As tired as the old cliche may be, it's one hundred percent accurate. Come on, use your brain for crying out loud.

December 2nd, 2007, 01:47 PM

It's rather hard to take you serious, warrior, when you make assumptions. You assumed I was a skanky *****, which was wrong of you.

My picture has nothign to do with this, btw. It was taken when I was 19, I am 22, so it is a three year old photo. I did not post it for "attention" or whatever, rather I posted it because I dislike the idea of posting something that does not accurately reflect who I am. A photo reflects who I am.

I appreciate the replies that, even though may have disagreed with my view, were intelligent enough to create a serious discussion. It IS an issue, and I'm glad some of you were able to recognize that.

December 2nd, 2007, 02:07 PM

Not true! Warrior hates women who feel that warrior has an obligation to be attracted to them. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder," as one person's avatar reads. Just because you think that you're beautiful, doesn't mean that I have to think that you're beautiful. The logical extension of that position, is as such: Just because nine men think that one woman is beautiful, doesn't mean that the tenth man has to agree.

Isn't that what I said? I said that women are competitive. They're beyond competitive, they're downright nasty when it comes to outdoing their fellow femmes. That's not an opinion, by the way. It's a statement of fact. Women are far more critical of other women than men are of women.

Women look at another woman's breasts and say, "They're fake."

Men look at the same rack and say, "Who cares?"

Warrior comes far too often. Warrior needs a hobby.

Nerve? Brains? Pray tell!

First of all, you're making an inconclusive assumption that the author is in fact female.

Second, you're making an inconclusive assumption that the avatar actually depicts the author.

Third, you're making an inconclusive assumption that the person in the avatar is sixteen years of age.

What I see, is a person that is blaming everyone but themselves for their woes. What I see is a person who is telling a tale that is neither convincing nor substantiated. And it doesn't require brains to point fingers, and it certainly doesn't require nerve to say I'm doing an English project.

December 2nd, 2007, 02:14 PM

"A photo reflects who I am." Amber Eyes.

Come, come! After 'reading' those women's commercial comic books, you think you're a two dimensional sensory image? Your picture is beautiful, but it's not you. If you grow more beautiful until you die, will the picture still be you?

You are way too close to your subject matter, in fact trapped just as you suggested. You are typical of what you decry. So your essay is self-explorative, self-critical. Your screen name was my first clue as to your conflict, Amber Eyes, but I ignored it - just a screen name, not neccessarily reflective of you... but it is your choice, as much or moreso than your picture, and it's all how you look darling, not how you feel.

This isn't really about English at all is it? Do you want to write or just batt your eyes?

December 2nd, 2007, 02:20 PM

Really? You thumbed through Glamour magazine and stated that doing so made you feel drained. Perhaps you should elaborate on that.

I did not say anything about your picture. I did not assume that you were actually female, nor did I assume that it is indeed you depicted in your avatar.

Relevance?


Do you feel that that photo accurately reflects who you are? Because I gotta tell you, I look at that picture and know nothing about you.

I might also remind you that you are contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you want the picture to mean nothing. On the other, you want people to believe that the picture accurately reflects who you are.

Well you know what they say? A picture is often worth a thousand words. And ya know what? I look at your picture and conclude that they are the most ambiguous 1000 words I have ever read.

How is it an issue? Someone exercises their constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression, and you find this objectionable? Why do you find it objectionable? Because, in your words, "it leaves you feeling drained"? That's a pretty flimsy argument.

But wait! There's more! It's because of magazines like Glamour, you were raped by your father at the age of eleven. Shame on Glamour magazine! Don't they know that they are promoting sexual assault and child molestation?

So why do you feel drained when you read Glamour magazine? Jim seems to think that you have a brain. Prove it by telling us why it is media's fault. Prove it by telling us why it is men's fault. Prove it by telling me why it's my fault! Don't hold back! Let it rip!

December 2nd, 2007, 02:36 PM

You seem to have come to the conclusion that I'm blaming the woes of women on a magazine, when in fact that is not true. I see it as part of the problem (media) but I do not see it as THE problem. THE problem is that our society is obsessed with beauty and sex, rather than something more productive, like science.

Do not think I speak only to you, warrior. The photo comment was in reply to jimshort.

Not all men feel attacked by the essay I wrote, but it seems I did hit a nerve with you, doesn't it warrior? Otherwise you wouldn't feel the need to bash everything I say. So I wonder what the real thing bothering you is. Is it my essay - or is it me?

December 2nd, 2007, 03:17 PM

But you are... Let's take another look at your essay, shall we?

So you ask, "Is media responsible for the competition among women in the mating game?" Sounds like finger pointing to me.

So you asked the question, and you answered it. Media is part of a backlash against the feminist movement in your opinion. Who else is part of this alleged backlash?

Then you looked for someone to agree with your position. You found that corroboration in the form of a study(?) allegedly conducted by MacKinnon and Moore. So your essay goes something like this:

1) Is media driving the issues that afflict modern women?

2) In my opinion they are. At least in part, but I'm not going to bother speaking of the remaining parts.

3) See, MacKinnon and Moore agree with me. Therefore I must be right.

But is it an obsession? Is it even a problem that afflicts our society? Or, is it just a problem that exists solely in the minds of insecure women and young girls?

People are predisposed to prefer things that are pleasing to the senses, regardless of whether it be visual, audible, or what have you. This is by no means an affliction. It is a condition of the human element. We're biologically programmed to reject that which we find unpleasing. And this certainly isn't the result of media manipulation, nor is it some concerted backlash against feminism in their position that it's okay to be ugly.

Shouldn't we look at why girls have low self-esteem? Somehow I think it has more to do with the nature of females and the human species in general. And it's hardly a condition found only in the human species. In almost all species of mammals, the female is subordinated to the male. There's a dynamic role reversal in the insect world, for example, but let's not kid ourselves.

Is that what I think? Actually, I was commenting on how you accused me of jumping to conclusions, but not others. With Jim you merely elaborated. With me, you accused me of making erroneous assumptions.

How perceptive of you. Ya know, I did mention that I had grown "sick and tired" of all of the "feminist bullcrap" that has become so pervasive in my life.

Is that what I did? When a male disagrees with a female, it's bashing?

Do you really want to know? Or, are you as uninterested in what is bothering me, as I am in what's bothering you?

I don't know you. So, it's obviously not you. It could very well be that it is people like you. But not you, per se.

December 2nd, 2007, 03:19 PM

"THE problem is that our society is obsessed with beauty and sex, rather than something more productive, like science." Amber Eyes

If you pay enough attention to the media, this impression is a natural, but the media is in the entertainment and advertising sales business, the average person does not find science so entertaining, and the scientists suck this schlock on time off too. You can just turn the channel. It's not real anyway. Better still, turn it off.

A very large percentage of public expression is of a commercial nature. You'll hear more words, see more people and spend more time on commercially distributed information today than listening to real people. Are the real people that you know obsessed by beauty and sex? They are your real society, not Superman, Brittany Spears, or Marilyn Munroe. They aren't even in your country, and are not genuinely real. As for their consumers, perhaps most don't buy in as deeply as you.

You have succeeded in identifying the problem, and it is everyone else. Perhaps you have the solution as well. I think that you need to spend more time on your real society, your friends neighbours and family, on yourself, because you're out of touch, or pretending to be so. If you don't need this crap, why not drop out? You know that our entertainment scene is pretty hot stuff. Can you pass it up? I bet not. I'll bet you're hooked on this junk so bad that you don't know what you think because you don't control your own mind anymore. You are an entertainment junkie. When the radio is off, the tunes just keep playing in your head, because you've lost your mind. And now you think you are a picture.

I don't have a problem with beauty or sex. In fact, I think I'll turn on the food channel right now because if I eat any more I'll just have to barf again.

December 2nd, 2007, 04:40 PM

You got some grade A blowback Amber, you should persue the thread further. I't is a very important topic. It's a lot older than slick mags. It's not bothering just one gender though is it?

December 2nd, 2007, 07:07 PM

Dear Amber,

Nice to meet you. You are a good sport - never lost it for a moment. I hope that you are not so fat as to be unrecognizable. If you look like you, the babe in the picture, that is wonderful, but if your beautiful face is grotesquely deformed, inflated and stretched, and you look like a Halloween pumpkin with lipstick, and you can't get up, and your feed bill is more than your rent, then you are given to gluttony for what?

I should follow Warrior to the next female victim now. That dude can really dish it out. But you can really take it! With good style! Good luck with your essay. You can nail it. We're happy to help.

Love, Jim

December 2nd, 2007, 07:24 PM

I think we can make some safe assumptions here. I think we can safely assume that the author of the essay does not fit into the "ideal" that she accuses media of perpetuating. If she did, she would find little reason to be critical of media for their role in portraying "beauty". After all, she would be one of the relative few that media allegedly deems attractive.

What basis do you have for believing that she is a victim of anything but her own grandiose delusions?

I've dished out nothing. Nothing that I haven't first received, that is.

She can?

I suppose, if avoidance and denial can be construed as good style.

She never did mention who she was doing this essay for. At 22 years of age, I would assume that she is probably in college. And if that's the case, she will need luck.

Maybe that's what's bothering her.

Definitely!

Get a room.