Thursday, November 20, 2008

Suck it and beat it

i know aware has been around for umpteen years but i still do not know what it stands for. but it really is not because i am chauvinistic. since i have become really free i went to their website. after navigating around i still do not know what it stands for. but i think W stands for Wo-man. (volunteer to wo-man the phoneline. hurhur) hurhur. probably has A for association or action somewhere.

anyway i came across some beauty redefined campaign. where they are trying to get women to be happy about the body their in, or so i glean. they are encouraging people to widen their definition of beauty and they are pointing to healthy bodies being beautiful bodies. and then at the side of their nauseous pink page there is this ad saying, "$50 can teach a teenage girl how to love her body".

beauty has been and always will be subjective. beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. different cultures emphasize different attributes and prize different qualities of the female form. i know among orientals, porcelain skin is very highly prized. in surfer-dude paradise, probably healthy tanned skin. but up to a certain point, some biological features are more appreciated than others, because it is inherently the way people have been wired.

it is a biological function, really. in the prehistoric times, you look for a mate with whom you can produce healthy offspring and then fend for them. so women have been wired to look out for well built men to live off, and men have been wired to look out for fertile women to conquer. nice breasts and decently sized hips pointed to child rearing and producing ability, and full, healthy looking lips indicate youthfulness and vitality. of course, some idiots would tell you that this is all cultural. it isnt. and then there are always exceptions. but we know that evolution will weed these exceptions out. and on exceptions, yupp, some people are wired to be attracted to flat chested women for whatever reason, and some people are homosexual.

whatever the reason, the mainstream of society does have beauty defined. so suck it and beat it. if a girl doesnt conform to societal norms on beauty, then it is completely right of her to feel inadequate, because she is inadequate. redefining beauty to make it more inclusive just dilutes the meaning of beauty. it doesnt spread beauty around.

at this point i would like to quote abraham lincoln. "how many legs does a dog have if you call its tail a leg? 4, because calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg."

if you are flat chested, you are flat chested, you know you are flat chested, and everyone who scrutinizes your chest when he or she loses eye contact will know you are flat chested. if you are fat, you are fat, you know you are fat and everyone will know you are fat. if you have thunder thighs, you have thunder thighs.

and saying that flat chestedness, thunder thighs, excessive weight or even excessive skinniness is beautiful wont make them beautiful. because they just are not. at least not to the mainstream of society.

of course i concede that after a certain point, if you cannot do anything about it, just accept it and move on with life. but if you want to be beautiful and youre not, then work for it. go for plastic surgery. use silicon. whatever.

the quest for beauty does not demean women.

come to think of it, parallels can be drawn with redefining beauty and redefining excellence. there are pros, and there are pussies. not everyone is pro. in fact, most are just pussies.

there is no one single definition for a pro either. u can be an academic pro, or u can be a sporting pro. but to a certain point, we acknowledge prowess. there is no niggling doubt that ylq is a pro. 2nd in the world for chem o is just below godliness. if ur a mere mortal, u have the right to pursue excellence and try to match up. i dont see any advocacy groups advocating students to leave and let leave, and psych themselves into thinking they are pros. and at the risk of sounding 1337ist, n0rmal really is not n0rmal. giving everyone A1 for cca doesnt make everyone good at cca. it just cheapens that A1.

really, its quite similar to beauty. in both cases you can choose to pursue excellence or fall along the wayside. of course, only 1 person can be beauty queen, just as only 1 person can be valedictorian.

maybe we should have an advocacy group for pussies like me. they should have a group that seeks to redefine excellence and look for excellence everywhere. The Best Cock-talker. The Best Antcatcher. The Best File Sorter. The Best Window Closer. The Best Tray Clearer. So everyone can be recognized for being Best at something.

Excellence Redefined.


Anonymous said...

lol you're just like professor x haha

Agagooga said...

If everybody is special, then nobody is.

-ben said...

Yep, sounds like the pursuit of mediocrity, all right.

Certain segments of society have been fostering this mindset: track and field races where there's no 1st, 2nd, or 3rd places -- where everybody wins; musical chairs where there are more chairs than participants; debates where no side is the winner, and every view point is relative, and equally valid; and so it goes...