BURNINGBIRD
a node at the edge  


September 04, 2002
ConnectingSkin Deep

Dorothea is on a roll! And aside from the fact that she rolled over my foot (in the nicest possible way) I like what she has to say. I, also, want nothing more than to be valued because of me, of what I am, rather than how I look.

When people look into my eyes I want them to see gentleness, or love, or intelligence rather than their color, or their shape, or the length of the lashes. When they look at my face, I hope they see humor, sadness, or joy rather than the shape of my face or the height of my cheekbones or the width of my mouth and the thickness of my lips. And when people look at my body, I would hope that they see pride and strength and determination and compassion rather than curves and breasts and skin color and height.

Dorothea writes:

    Fundamentally, though, redefining pretty is not my fight. I want to be ugly and not have it matter. I want my sexual attractiveness to remain a private affair between myself and my sex partner, rather than being speculated upon by every person who so much as passes me on the street or wants to toss my blog a quick compliment. I want “bonita” and “fea” alike paired with “estar,” not “ser,” and even when the pairing is “estar bonita” I want the reaction to be fleeting and tacit, not character-defining and public.

If I disagree with Dorothea, and I think disagreement isn't the correct term, it's on the whole concept of ugly. Am I ugly? No. Well, then, am I beautiful? No. I don't think there is any standard for absolute beauty or absolute ugliness, so how can I be one or the other? And as for our fit within today's slide rule of physical conformity, does it really matter? For myself, I like me, and isn't that what's important?

Anne McCaffrey, popular Sci-Fi and Fantasy author, has about the best bio I have ever seen, for anyone:

    My hair is silver, my eyes are green and I freckle: the rest of me is subject to change without notice.

That about sums all of us up: subject to change without notice.

We are each of us what we are, and we should be happy being what we are, the best of whatever it is we are. I would hope that those who care for me would see beyond how I look --regardless of perceived 'good' or 'bad' physical characteristics -- to what I am and realize to themselves that this is truly what's important.

Is this the same as Dorothea's statement:

    Permission to be plain, even in my own eyes. That, to me, is the self-acceptance that Burningbird wants to instill in me over coffee.

I think it is.

Added:

My mistake in previous readings of Dorothea's posts, and for which I received gentle chastisement, is that when I read Dorothea's statements about seeing herself as plain or ugly, I immediately wanted to say, "Dorothea! How can you say this about yourself?" Yet, Dorothea wasn't making statements about her self worth only her perceived view of her appearance. I mixed the two up in my mind, and I put a value assessment on 'plain' and 'ugly' -- the very thing I just got through saying wasn't important.

Now I think I know what Dorothea's saying. There are times when you do have to hit me in the face with a wet mackerel for me to get the point.

(And Dorothea, Castilian hot chocolate still works for me.)



Posted by Bb at September 04, 2002 01:12 PM




Comments

I'm afraid it's working the other way 'round; now men have to look pretty too. More here

Posted by: Harald on September 4, 2002 01:32 PM

Hmmm. That didn't work. I meant here; http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=healthnews&StoryID=1373713&fromEmail=true

Posted by: Harald on September 4, 2002 01:33 PM

Yes, Harald, true -- and just as regrettable for men as for women.

Yep, Bb, update covers it. *grin*

And now I have another nifty anonymous email to respond to. Probably tomorrow -- I'm close to scribbled out.

Posted by: Dorothea Salo on September 4, 2002 02:02 PM

"When they look at my face, I hope they see humor, sadness, or joy rather than the shape of my face or the height of my cheekbones or the width of my mouth and the thickness of my lips."

Both sets of attributes (physical and inner) are important. Your writing conveys the humor, sadness, and joy. So does Dorothea's and Jonathan's, etc. But, it's nice to see the person too - I always have a mental picture of what someone looks like as I read their writing. If I don't know what they look like, I make it up. But, the real thing is so much better. I've seen your picture as well as Dorothea's and it helps personalize the very personal things you write about. It has nothing to do with 'good' or 'bad'.

Perhaps I'm being too simplistic, but, for me, having a face to put the words too makes it more real and not just a combination of bits formatted on a screen.

I'd love to see a picture of Jonathan (or anyone else I read)...I know my mental image of him is so wrong. Not knowing what he looks like doesn't make me appreciate his writing any less, but I'm curious.

I don't know if I'm making any sense, but there it is. I'm certainly not saying anyone must post a picture - you won't find mine directly on my weblog. I just wanted to point out that noticing some physical charcteristics of a person doesn't have to be bad or cause the grunch.

Posted by: Bill Simoni on September 4, 2002 04:30 PM

No, it doesn't, Bill, you're quite right. Unfortunately, innocent curiosity is one of the grunch's casualties.

Even so, I tend to support people who choose to be formatted bits on screen and nothing more.

More on this tomorrow, I hope.

Posted by: Dorothea Salo on September 4, 2002 05:09 PM

Plenty of photographs of me to be found out there on the Web, Bill. Much to my chagrin.

Posted by: Jonathon Delacour on September 5, 2002 08:54 AM


Post a comment

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?