unattainable standards

Nevyn

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/bikini/index.html

---

How badly are we being brain washed with unreasonable and often unattainable standards by the media?

How fussy and picky are we when faced with a real person and not an airbrushed image of one?

The cult of image is all, is spreading rapidly in this country and
Unless you are perfect you cant be happy or accepted. A bad hair day is a bad day and why inflicts looking at your hair on anyone.
It is the ages of 12 to 20 that seem to be impacted on the most by this.

from the preteen glitter and gloss make up market with dolls and a very Californian be pretty , be popular, be happy message to the unreal images of men and women in porn from skin mags to movies .

Recently I sat and listened to group of guys who after a few beers sat talking about how pussy never looks like what is should as in a real life ladies they have been (un)lucky enough
to encounter compared to what they have seen in porn.

Are we becoming as bad as Eddie Murphy’s character in Boomerang?

skittishkitten

Unfortunately today society would like for all women to be "perfect" . That is why so many have chosen to starve themselves into walking twigs and applying enough makeup to weight themselves down in order to achieve or come closer to that "perfect" standard I was always surprised to see the "really pretty" girls without their makeup as one could have sworn they were completely different people . The bad thing is as Thaed pointed out ..... people see pictures that have been drastically aletered like this and believe that these women actually DO look like this . Sorry Boys ...... very few women actually do look like this ......and if they do most likely they are total B*tches !!

xx

Hey Thaed, you've hit my ultimate niggling point ever. Please don't get me started, I could go on for weeks about this.
So instead, I'll synopsise my argument with a little quote from fight club - "We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't".

canker

I think the media should be given a break. Theres no harm presenting an image most agree to be nice, no harm in people aspiring to be like that. You can not blame the media, and you certinally cant call it brain washing, that a number of people take such drastic action to acchieve it (cosmetic surgery, eating disorders etc). Anyone who feels they MUST look like that at any cost must be either stupid or grossly misinformed. No one in the media and I'm quite sure almost nobody in society anywhere expects people to look the same as the airbrushed images in magazines.

buttons malone

canker, I disagree.
The media is responsible in a BIG way for causing women to feel insecure about their looks.

womens magazines for instance- bombarding us as they do with 'revolutionary diets' that just don't work. not to mention numerous other diets and articles on how to banish that cellulite (which i find bloomin hilarious considering that women are biologically predisposed to have cellulite).

Being fat is highly stigmatised and women everywhere use their weighing scales to evaluate their physical attractiveness regardless of the fact that they might have great hair or nice eyes or perfect skin. I'm sure you remember when Kate Winslet was berated over her weight- she was "too fat to be attractive". Also rachel hunter wasn't allowed pose on the cover of a mag because she was deemed too fat! she was only a size 12!! What kind of message does that give to young girls and women??

not to mention cosmetic surgery...

Seraphina

i remember one magazine i saw, it had a huge banner saying
'christina piles on the pounds!'
it showed a picture of christina aguilera squatting on the stage with a tiny bit of pudge sticking out over her skin-tight painted on trousers

what the **** is any normal sized woman supposed to think?

Nevyn

k but this is not only about how this sort of thing can effect women it also effects men.
Boys grow up with these over idealised images and will then feel like they cant settle for anything less then that.
As a result they end up in sudo realtionship with women who do preen them selves to an absurd level and spend silly ammounts of money to look that way.
And becouse they know how much money they and there look costs to achieve and maintain they expect to be compensated
by having stuff bought for them .
And well very very few of those types are going to treat anyone well.

Pigman II

Originally posted by Seraphina
what the **** is any normal sized woman supposed to think?

'I'd better get mah fat assh down to the gym!'

Just kidding. Personally I wouldn't have time for any woman who lived her life based on what the glossys dictated to her so no matter near or far she was from the 'airbrushed-ideal' it would be automatically irrelevant once I'd discovered her slavish drone nature.

seamus

Originally posted by Thaed
k but this is not only about how this sort of thing can effect women it also effects men.
Boys grow up with these over idealised images and will then feel like they cant settle for anything less then that.

That's only in very extreme cases. There is also a protrayal of the ideal man (square chin, blond hair, blue eyes, 0% body fat, perfect muscle structure), but by the same token, all women don't sigh when they can't find a man that looks like that, but maybe *some* do.

The biggest issue for men with this whole perfect body thing is "What will my mates think?". In actual fact his mates won't say a thing, unless she's a once-off. A man's girlfriend is sacrosanct. I've found that other guys will say anything about someone else's girlfriend except "Gawd she's a minger". No-one's mates are expecting them to bring home a supermodel, but everyone thinks they should, to save face.

I find it quite sad (in the boohoo sense) that some people get so obsessed about this perfect body image. Case in point; MTV were showing some program about women getting breast implants. They were all under 30, and extremely attractive. Needing a boob job? God no. But something had convinced them they did. Even the language from one of the nurses - "When you wake up, you'll feel a little weird, but you'll be so much more attractive and so much more appealing...." - had me thinking WTF? Who was this nurse to be saying "Your boob job will make you more attractive, just like taking a little pill that suddenely makes you better"?

IMO, it's individuality that makes people attractive, conformity takes away from attractiveness.

Sangre

Originally posted by buttons malone
canker, I disagree.
The media is responsible in a BIG way for causing women to feel insecure about their looks.

womens magazines for instance- bombarding us as they do with 'revolutionary diets' that just don't work. not to mention numerous other diets and articles on how to banish that cellulite (which i find bloomin hilarious considering that women are biologically predisposed to have cellulite).

Why would any self respecting woman read those magazines anyway? If you go out and buy them, then you have no arguement that you are being bombared with perfect images of beauty. There aren't that many beautiful people on T.v anymore, well British/Irish, its just not politically correct anymore. Nowdays imo, there are just the odd sex Gods/Women blah blah blah...

I also agree with Seamus on his girlfriend point.

canker

I dont believe that any woman or man can read a magazine article with a picture of a good looking person "piling on the pounds" like christina aguelera supposedly was and think, "oh crap! better start vometing, if she's fat I must be really ugly!". So for that reason you can not blame the media. They have to assume that people reading their articles at least have some minute bit of intellegence. They cannot be held responsible for the stupidity of a few who take the words of Hello magazine or the Sun newspaper as gospel.

skittishkitten

It's not just the magazines and TV that give the girls the opinion they need to look like Ms. Twiggy with the layers of makeup. Unfortunately guys don't help with this opinion either. It's rather hard to say we don't want to look like the females that we see you all drooling and frothing over . Wheather it's walking down the street and you give yourself whiplash to look at that "perfect " girl that just walked by or reading you guy magazines with the stick girls draping themselves over whatever items your fascinated by .... and we KNOWWWWWW your not just looking at the items with those bulging eyes and panting tongues . Or the movie or rock stars that you just can't seem to get enough of. It's only female nature to want to be the one to give you whiplash ( and that's not from a beating from looking at the OTHER girl ) , or have you looking at the draping twig and say .... "AAAAAwwww.... my girl looks better than that " . Of course we're going to be competitive , if they use tons of makeup and cosmetic surgery to look like that , then it's always there flirting in the mind ...."Well if I had that done I'd look more like that too" That's not to say that we'd have cosmetic surgery or wear tons of makeup but still.... if it makes YOU look then why wouldn't we want YOU to look at us .
As for guys ..... I'm not inclined to be drawn to a muscle bound body. Actually it turns me off . I do like a body that is toned and in good shape but if that person does not have the ATTITUDE then don't bother. ATTITUDE is everything for me , there is nothing more attractive then a confident self assured attitude on a male. I will gravitate to that person like a duck to water. I like a man that can be strong without being cruel. He doesn't have to be in shape , he doesn't have to be neccessarily handsome , but if he doesn't have attitude then I'm not attracted.
Oh.... and I heard on the TV awhile back that SHORT FEET are "IN" this season .... there are women ( and I'm sure some men ) that are having their feet surgically shortened !! Sounds like alot of pain for something so stupid.

bonkey

Originally posted by canker
So for that reason you can not blame the media. They have to assume that people reading their articles at least have some minute bit of intellegence. They cannot be held responsible for the stupidity of a few who take the words of Hello magazine or the Sun newspaper as gospel.

So let me get this straight.....when the media (which is increasingly pervasive in our lives) starts spreading messages overtly or subliminally which have a noticeable effect on society....you are arguing that the media is not to blame, but rather the public for being stupid enough to believe it?

So...for example...if the media started showing smoking ads again, you'd have no problem? You would see no wrong with our media pushing the "smoking is cool" attitude which was purveyed in its advertising hey-day? After all - people would have to be stupid to believe that smoking was cool....wouldn't they???

As a matter of interest....how would you solve the problem? Have you some miracle way of removing the stupid-gene from future generations so that this problem goes away? Do you perhaps believe the problem is not even worth sorting???

jc

canker

I wouldn't have a problem with smoking adds, theres no problem in a company marketing their product and of course they're going to portray it greater than it actually is, people have to be intellegent enough to know what advertising is, to know what crap magazine editors cram into their product to shift copies. As for a solution, education. Kids need to be thought these things either at home or at school.

DadaKopf

Don't get me started on fake tan.

buttons malone

Why would any self respecting woman read those magazines anyway? If you go out and buy them, then you have no arguement that you are being bombared with perfect images of beauty. blah...

I read those magazines for other features such as true life stories and celebrity interviews.

To take another example, the Sunday World is a very informative newspaper. The fact that the bimbo Amanda Brunker, who would not win journalist of the year, to put it bluntly, is a regular contributor to the paper would not stop me buying it as the writing talents of excellent journalists such as Paul Williams and the witty sports commentator Roy Curtis more then make up for the rubbish that she writes.

JohnnyBravo

I saw That show on mtv about the boobs it almost turned me off boobs for life

Victor

I think that particular example is over done. I was at a bus stop today and soem cosmetic company had an ad. It was on about rouge, but I get the impression the product was actually lip-stick. The photo had the model's head about 4 feet high and your could see all the little blemishes - a melanoma, a spot of some kind (not acne), downy facial hair - all of which have been erased you the above link.

Sangre

Originally posted by buttons malone
I read those magazines for other features such as true life stories and celebrity interviews.

*shudder*

What did crazy old Britney Spears get up to on Tuesday morning? Oh she walked her dog, lets take photos...

Those true life stories are just as bad as the 'perfect images' people complain about. Oh that woman saved hew husband, now I want to jump off a bridge....

Anyway, the 'stick figure' is usually not seen in Lads magazines, skinny is ugly*, curves are what men want to see. The only reason we still have the skinny image in society is because of women imo and gay fashion designers** who like the way the clothes looks on them.

*skinny=anoerexic
**im allowed to generalise, im jumpy and getting my results tomorrow

Memnoch

I think at the end of the day its a viscious circle. To pinpoint the finger at the media would be like blaming the internet for your lack of social life.

Its society as a whole thats responsible here. Take the brainwashing that starts at a very young age. Young boys are given GI Joe's and young girls are given Barbies, boys are blue, girls are pink. It goes on and on. Its an attitude thats pushed from before your a sperm/egg upon you. Of the type of person you are expected to be. This is done by the parents, by the media and by society as a whole. Why do they print pictures of slim women and women with make up etc etc etc. Because people PAY for them. Just like a democratic society is IMO responsible for the actions of their elected representatives. So are WE the consumer collectively responsible for the rubbish the media churns out. Because WE BUY it. Therefore WE want more. All the media are doing is supplying the demand inherent in society. Unfortunately its all chicken and egg, and its hard to decide exactly how to give that damn chicken its vasectomy.

As for this thing affecting only women I would definately like to point out that it affects men just as much. Being a bloke myself I always had the image of the perfect guy in mind. Being someone who was really tall and really muscular. Of which I was neither.
So I would have never considered myself good looking. But then out of the blue one of the hottest girls in my class wants to be my gf because she thinks i'm amazingly good looking! (yes i'm a cocky bastard now). It certainly changed my perspective on a few things. In the end attractiveness is a very personal thing. And this is one of the places where women do deserve a LOT more credit than men. Because if you think every woman likes a "certain" type of guy, then your wrong. Different women find different kinds of guys attractive. Whereas a large majority of guys you speak to do have certain set parametres in mind, ala waist size, boob size and so on and so forth.

I think i'm rambling again so I'll stop here. I guess the million euro question is?
What can we do about it?
I think for a start, if you feel a magazine is spreading/encouraging this kind of attitude then vote with your pocket, and encourage your friends to do the same.

Is individualism dead and burried?
is it with O'Leary in the grave (sorry YEATS).

buttons malone

Those true life stories are just as bad as the 'perfect images' people complain about. Oh that woman saved hew husband, now I want to jump off a bridge....

May I ask, how often do you buy women's magazines or do you just take a sneaky flick through them when your sister/girlfriend/mother's back is turned??
I was just reading a story in Company magazine about a girl who had a hysterectomy at 19. She had been having severe cramps and went to the doc. She unknowingly had cancer for a year. She would have died had she not got it checked out. Personally I thought it was v.interesting in that it happened to a girl same age as moi.

JohnnyBravo

Yeah T1ts are grt so are a few curves if she can get away with a belly top she has a hot body ps how superfical am i

skittishkitten

OH yea ....... stick girls with inflatable boobs ....... real curvy :rolleyes: , not a true curvy women ...... man made ..... lotsa upkeep on those !!!

JohnnyBravo

iF I WANTED PLASTIC ID BUY A BARBIE DOLL REAL BOOBS ARE BETTER I SHOULD START A CAMPAIGN

Specky

In a way you might think this is slightly off topic but I don't think so so I'm going to blabber on about it anyway...

This strange desire/need people seem to have to aspire towards what is being portrayed as "the perfect image" was once again beautifully illustrated in the wedding of the daughter of our illustrious leader and that bloke from the "young persons musical combo" this week.

Can anyone please tell me why Hello magazine and all such similar publications exist?? Do people really want to see what's on the mantlepiece of the rich and famous or are they actually buying these publications so as to indulge their envy?

Are people really so shallow these days that they need to see what they believe they're missing out on in order to develop their own sense of self worth?

See a celebrity's house....bitch to the boss about a pay rise so you can buy a jaccuzzi.

See some skinny model in Cosmo.....head for the toilet and yakk up your lunch.

The debate rages about whether it is the fault of the media that we have these distorted images of perfection. Personally I'd like to be able to go into Easons and stand by the magazine racks and give anyone who trys to buy one of these things a good shaking and a stern "would you ever cop yourself on" type talking to, but that's not going to happen 'cos I would now be in the minority of people who see anything wrong with the attitudes that have made these sorts of publications acceptable, ie greed and envy.

It's like soap operas...the public didn't ask for soap operas, the TV companies decided to make them and show them SO MUCH that they become part of accepted culture. Now you can't get away from them even though they swallow huge unrecoverable patches of people's lives (ban smoking because it can make you die 10 years early? OK, so ban Corrination Street because half the population will waste 10 years of their lives sitting watching the crap....ok, I exaggerate but you see my point?)

Oddly enough style and fashion are somehow seen as being linked....strange really because I thought style was about being an individual and fashion was about being the same as everyone else...Free thinkers are in the minority

It's easy to slip into hypocricy when talking about the whole body image question, we all sometimes want to look "a certain way", smart, clever, respectable, whatever, and whatever we might say we are pretty much all influenced to some extent by the way others look. We (most of us anyway) want to be clean and healthy, but that's generally a relative thing. The cosmetics industry contributes to that for us all, even if it's just soap, deoderant or shampoo. so it's hard to slam the whole industry for the excesses of the high fashion make up end of things.

There is (to some extent) a natural tendancy of clothes stores to want to stock only certain sizes so as to minimise their stock holding. The sizes they stock are likely to be those that sell the most so if you're way outside that size then you can't really complain that the shop is discriminating. They may not accommodate you but it's a business. I can't buy shoes in some shops because they don't go big or wide enough (and my feet aren't really all that big). I don't chain myself to the railings or hold a "dirty protest" outside, I just don't go to those shops.

Yes, children are influenced by the impressions of "norms" in the media. Simple answer....don't park your kids in front of the telly all day to keep them out from under your feet. Take time to go places with them and talk to them so they get a feel for the real world not the idealised one of the TV.

Flame away.

skipn_easy

Originally posted by Specky
Can anyone please tell me why Hello magazine and all such similar publications exist??

Because people buy them. If there wasn't any interest in them then Hello magazine would turn to fishing or porn (or whatever else people want) to get readers.

Are people really so shallow these days that they need to see what they believe they're missing out on in order to develop their own sense of self worth?

Yes, people like to see what others have, to compare against, to aim for or to bitch about. Thats the way (a lot of) people work.

See a celebrity's house....bitch to the boss about a pay rise so you can buy a jaccuzzi.

See some skinny model in Cosmo.....head for the toilet and yakk up your lunch.

Maybe people who do this have such empty lives and no opinions of their own and thats why they look to magazines/tv for guidance.

It's like soap operas...the public didn't ask for soap operas, the TV companies decided to make them and show them SO MUCH that they become part of accepted culture.

I don't think its a matter of people being forced to watch soaps until they became so used to them that they like them now. The reason there is about 5 hours of soaps every evening is because people like to watch them. Television companies work on the idea of showing the most popular watched shows and give them primetime airs, so this would suggest that people wanted to watch them and wanted MORE soaps on tv.

Specky

Television companies work on the idea of showing the most popular watched shows and give them primetime airs, so this would suggest that people wanted to watch them and wanted MORE soaps on tv.

Hmmm...actually I'm not sure that's actually true, speaking from someone of the vintage to remember before the airwaves were actually covered with soaps.

There was a time when each soap was only on once a week and there were no omnibuses.

The change came (in my opinion) with the arrival of the Australian soaps, "Home and Away" and "Neighbours" both of which arrived simulaneously on BBC and ITV in the UK, both shown twice a day. What attracted many viewers was the hype around the novelty of having the same programme shown twice on the same day, 5 days a week!!! (scandal)

I don't think anyone asked them to show these programmes, there was nothing similar prior to them. I think the TV companies showed them because they were cheap and filled in time (a bit like.....oh let's say "Strike it Lucky" or for that matter pretty much any other programme produced by RTE).

If I remember rightly, programmes like Corry were losing viewers prior to that, Emmerdale was called Emerdale Farm and was a lot like the Archers (zzzzzzzzz....) Crossroads was about to be cancelled etc.

Modern soaps seem to me a lot more to do with pacifying the masses than providing entertainment...where is the population? Out rioting? No, their in front of the telly for those all important hours of dusk....

Looking at the rte guide site a few weeks ago I noticed on one night (can't remember which night) you could watch:

Home and Away
Emerdale
Corrination Street
Eastenders
Fair City

all back to back with just a little channel hopping. That's 2.5 hours of soap without a break in one night not counting any of the afternoon crap.

Anyway this is off topic

Victor

Then again, for the amount of magazine coverage she's getting, I wish that Ahearn one was a bit^H^H^H lot pretty. I just worry about the children.

Specky

I just worry about the children

Hmmm...if they want their children to have any talent they'd better adopt

Kell

One slight idiosyncrasy that bothers me about the "enlightened" women folk who complain about advertising and society demanding that they should be stick thin. Most women that I have met who complain about such things, still womble into boots of a saturday and buy the most expensive make up they can lay their petite little hands on.

Whats that all about then?

K-

skipn_easy

Most women that I have met who complain about such things, still womble into boots of a saturday and buy the most expensive make up they can lay their petite little hands on

Some more expensive make-up definitely looks better than cheap make-up and its fair enough that a woman might want to make herself look and feel prettier.

Seraphina

in the end kell, alot woman still wants to be attractive to the opposite sex, and if society says stick thin is attractive and these blondes with the big boobs are getting the men then they're going to aim for that, no matter how much they dislike it.

Specky

Actually Seraphina I think the majority of women do it for the women not the men, it's about fitting in and not being talked about more than anything else.

That's the sad part of all this.

Sure, men like to look at attractive women...and can be swayed by fancy clothes and makeup, but that's not going to last if the lady in question turns out to be a self obsessed bimbo with more hangups than......erm....something with lots of hangups.....

People in general like to look their best. Personal hygene and cleanliness are important whatever argument you subscribe to. Everything else, makeup, fashion etc, is just conditioning that most people find themselves thrust into from an early age.

Perhaps I'm speaking just for myself here but I HATE makeup. Lipstick is horrible oily slime, and everything else seems to be just designed to rub off onto anyone standing nearby.

Kell

Originally posted by Seraphina
in the end kell, alot woman still wants to be attractive to the opposite sex,

Ahh, but when you're as good lookin as you are, you've nothin to worry about

K-

Shilo

The other point to bear in mind is that there are SOME women in this world who are utterly stupid. Let me give you a perfect example before anyone decides to flame me.

Hubby and I are sitting on Ye Olde Dublin Bus yesterday en route to Slane and there are 4 girls in front of us. (I say girls but I don't know it for a fact, they may well have been older than us!) Anyone who was anywhere yestderday will recall that it was a little on the warm side. So, here we all are, just settling down for the bus ride and one of the wonderful creatures in front of us is dabbing perspiration off her face with a tissue. Said tissue comes up for air covered, and I do mean covered, in foundation and other such gunk. So, I have to ask myself, what sort of a moron puts on make up of any sort to travel an hour by bus in boiling hot weather (where everyone visible to the naked eye is sweating buckets) to a concert where she'll be standing around in a big, semi-muddy, grassy field for 12 or so hours under a hot sun??? It's like wearing 7 inch heels to hike the Wicklow Way. I'm sorry, I just don't get it.

If anyone can explain it, please let me know because it's beyond me. But then, I'm a bad example because I just don't wear make up - full stop. It's invariably nasty stuff that takes forever to put on and to take off and you seem to spend all your time in between having to worry if any part of it needs patching up... So much energy to expend - and most of it is damned expensive too!

Having said that, you may all shoot me now because I have been known to buy the ocassional copy of Hello! magazine - I have no defence. I just like the pictures - it falls into the category of 'mindless entertainment', rather like watching an episode of 'Footballer's Wives' to see how attrocious it is! I'm very happy in my own little life but every once in a while, there's a photo shoot with someone that it'll make me happy to see. Case in point, recently there was one with Catherine Zeta Jones. Just looking at her makes me smile because I think she's beautiful. I don't want to be her or have her life or envy her - I just happen to think she's one of the few classically beautiful women in the public eye these days. But more than her beauty alone is the fact that she seems genuinely happy. I'm a sucker for happy faces!

These 'unattainable standards' are only standards if you hold them to be of value. If you don't, then it's not worth worrying about. If you do, then spend as much money as you want on it. It's your life and you have the right to spend as much of it applying lash thickening mascara and fake tan as you see fit. Should you be looking for me, you'll find me at home in tracksuit bottoms and t-shirts, being used as a climbing frame by my two small children!

simu

Hubby and I are sitting on Ye Olde Dublin Bus yesterday en route to Slane and there are 4 girls in front of us. (I say girls but I don't know it for a fact, they may well have been older than us!) Anyone who was anywhere yestderday will recall that it was a little on the warm side. So, here we all are, just settling down for the bus ride and one of the wonderful creatures in front of us is dabbing perspiration off her face with a tissue. Said tissue comes up for air covered, and I do mean covered, in foundation and other such gunk. So, I have to ask myself, what sort of a moron puts on make up of any sort to travel an hour by bus in boiling hot weather (where everyone visible to the naked eye is sweating buckets) to a concert where she'll be standing around in a big, semi-muddy, grassy field for 12 or so hours under a hot sun??? It's like wearing 7 inch heels to hike the Wicklow Way. I'm sorry, I just don't get it.

As you said, some ppl are just stupid!

The same goes for women with orange faces from makeup, men with "tashes" and women who buy clothes in too-small sizes even if it means you can see their flesh bursting out.

I think it's normal for both sexes to want to have a reasonably pleasant appearance and I think it's important for ppl to feel good about how they look but these desires are being manipulated and distorted by advertisers in a bid to fool people into parting with more of their earnings to buy products that will supposedly make them "better" people.

In general, our society places too much emphasis on appearance, not enough on personality, creativity, thought and individuality.

Nevyn

Originally posted by simu
In general, our society places too much emphasis on appearance, not enough on personality, creativity, thought and individuality.

And this leads to huge disatisfaction with oursleves and how we judge others.
This gets more and more prevelant with those in there early to mid twenties and can be even seen in teens as we get closer to the american situation of getting nose jobs ect for 18 birthdays .

It is not that far fetched considering perms for 10 year olds and stiking kids in tanning booths for confirmation .

simu

It is not that far fetched considering perms for 10 year olds and stiking kids in tanning booths for confirmation .

I have *no* respect at all for parents who put their kids through this sort of thing. Superficiality aside, tanning booths expose kids to dangerous UV rays:( It should be made illegal for under 18s to use sun beds.

Shilo

Originally posted by Thaed
And this leads to huge disatisfaction with oursleves and how we judge others.

Like I say, it's only a standard if you hold it to be true. Surely, if you have the intelligence to see it purely for the marketing that it is, the whole thing becomes ludicrous and you just stop buying into it? That way, you've taken away the 'power' of the marketing wo/men and it's just not an issue any more. You may not be able to change the whole of society but you can affect what goes on under your own roof and we all have to begin somewhere.

I won't even pretend that I can claim not to judge others, but I know myself well enough to know that my judgements will always be predominantly based on how people think (as in the methods they use to come to a conclusion) rather than how they look.


As for the children in tanning booths etc., unfortunately, this only strengthens my opinion that some people just shouldn't have children. The only thing I desperately long for for my children as they grow up is that I can provide them with a balanced enough environment for them to learn that they are more important that what they're wearing. Then, once they know that, ultimately, they can make their own decisions. As long as we have given them all the information we can, we have to let them make their own choices. That doesn't mean subsidising those choices, however. If my daughter decides she hates her nose in later life, she'll have to wait until she can pay to have it 'fixed'. Likewise with hair dyes etc. We have to learn, before it's too late, that educating our children is infinitely more important than dressing them in the latest fashion trends. I don't mean all work and no play by any means, but I do mean that a dose of common sense is long overdue in young people as a whole.

STaN

Ask as so called beautiful person how they feel to have people look at them, and they will say it feels amazing.

Beauty is there to be appretiated and I think beautiful people inspire some of us to take better care of ourselves because other people DO judge on looks and maybe they want other people to like them for how they look AND how they are as a person. To me thats the ideal not one or the other.

Then again it does have the negative effect of creating self conciousness and self loathing.

PeterODonnell

Had we stayed in the caves it could have been so very different (and fairer)! I read online that when we were all cave-people, men (hetersexual presumably - though did gayness exist that far back? ) looked for bib breasts and wide hips in a woman, as this was viewed as advantageous to fertility, whereas women simply wanted the man to be tall and with broadshoulders for carrying things around. Then when the human race departed the caves, suddenly men wanted the women to have nice faces etc. Women want this too but to a slightly lesser extent than men. I think that women are a little less visual than men. My mother told me recently of a hideously ugly man who had married a beautiful woman. Also, in a local village I saw an ugly man and a goodlooking woman kissing. Furthermore, on the Jerry Springer Show (I think), a few years ago, I saw a lesbian couple, one of which was beautiful and feminine looking, but the other being, well, kinda dull-looking. Someone in audience asked something along the lines of "Do you like her cos she looks like a man?".

The only parallels I can find for this in male homosexuality (parallels with the female less visual thing) is the Sugardaddy scenario where the younger 20-something yo man has a relationship with someone in their 50's or even older. Except where cash or drink gets involved that is.

I think we'd be far more comfortable with ourselves imagewise if we had stayed in the caves, way back when. Maybe when a time-machine is built those of us unhappy with our looks can do that!

Silent Bob

Originally posted by Shilo
As for the children in tanning booths etc., unfortunately, this only strengthens my opinion that some people just shouldn't have children.

Sometimes I think a brief return to proper Darwinistic evolution would do our society the world of good...

Specky

Sometimes I think a brief return to proper Darwinistic evolution would do our society the world of good...

Hmm...dunno about that. Surely survival of the fittest would favour all those who can afford to be a member of a health club.

Silent Bob

Originally posted by Specky
Hmm...dunno about that. Surely survival of the fittest would favour all those who can afford to be a member of a health club.

LOL!

MiCr0

Sometimes I think a brief return to proper Darwinistic evolution would do our society the world of good...

evolution is constantly ongoing - do you think we've peaked?

Hmm...dunno about that. Surely survival of the fittest would favour all those who can afford to be a member of a health club.

its got nothing to do with one individual, but the traits that a group has

Specky

its got nothing to do with one individual, but the traits that a group has

yes, the group of people who spend time abdominating each other.....they will surely eventually begin interbreeding....

Human Bean A - "oh what a lovely baby....will you have that unsightly birthmark removed?"

Human Bean B - "What do you mean birthmark? That's his logo!"

Silent Bob

Originally posted by MiCr0
evolution is constantly ongoing - do you think we've peaked?

Nope. But due to the society we live in we don't have Darwinistic evolution anymore. It isn't "survival of the fittest" when we specifically intervene to aid people.

For instance, in a "survival of the fittest" world many people with serious disabilities would not live to procreate, they would be severly handicapped when it came to competing for food etc*. As a species though we care for each other and do our best to help those who would not be able to survive to live as normal citizens. Thus we influence our evolution. Darwinism is no longer happening in most human societies.

My post about a return to Darwinistic evolution is that it would cull out most of the terminally stupid people



*please don't take this as some kind of "hate" related comment. It's not. Nor am I saying that people with disabilities are somehow not as good as others. It's just an example that shows how humans buck the "survival of the fittest" paradigm.

Havelock

Right my opinions on this are based upon my apprication of real beauty, I'm an aestheticist. I appricate the beauty of things for their beauty. But I find the "makeup" beauty of some these "things" that young women fell they should be is hidious.

Yes, there is hugh pressures on women (and men) to be tall, thin and beautiful, big breasted (in the case of women anyway) and toned. But everyone natural opinion of beauty is unique anyway. People need to be strong enought in there self belief to realise their own opinions.

Yes the media feeds the masses tons of false images and impossible aspirations, but the masses buy/watch it.

The complexity of the individuality in regards to beauty can be defined clearly by that old cliche "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". The most beautiful women I ever saw, would have been pretty by my standards but for the deep scar on her left cheek, it took my breath away. It all just worked with her nose, lips and eyes and made her breath taking.

I do believe Darwinian process should be reintroduced, quite quickly. We have past our peak and are being draged down by the weaker, slower members of the herd (The stupid, I really can't stand the stupid).

Anyway, before I am horribly belated for my appaling shallowness for the above statements, I do not only keep company with the beautiful (it would be kind of hard, there really is so very few truely beautiful people in the world), I just quite enjoy looking at them, marveling at the wonder of all the minute perfect bestoed upon them, their unbelmishable skin, its pale colour, their enchanting eyes, and soft hair...fades off for a minute...i just think its amazing. (I'm a photographer and easy distracted by pretty things and people)

GuanYin

Originally posted by Silent Bob
Nope. But due to the society we live in we don't have Darwinistic evolution anymore. It isn't "survival of the fittest" when we specifically intervene to aid people.

For instance, in a "survival of the fittest" world many people with serious disabilities would not live to procreate, they would be severly handicapped when it came to competing for food etc*. As a species though we care for each other and do our best to help those who would not be able to survive to live as normal citizens. Thus we influence our evolution. Darwinism is no longer happening in most human societies.

Actually it is. Just at a more subtle level.

Havelock

How exactly?

GuanYin

Originally posted by sykeirl
Actually it is. Just at a more subtle level.

Generally through suseptability to disease or metabolism changes (there is an Easten European Town that was discovered to treat a certain type of mushroom as a delicacy, as it turns out, the mushroom is pretty toxic to humans, but after decades of eating it, these locals had no ill effects. It was found that a slight change to one of their digestive enzymes was the reason), there are lots of examples of this type of occurance. We're a very adaptable species, remember human evolution into modern man happened in a very short time by evolutionary standards.