# Fat AND Beautiful



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

one issue i see a lot of discussion of is the separations between fat/beautiful. i was reading another thread and the op shared a fantastic link. in it a fairly well known fat community comedian said that some one told her she was just beautiful and she wondered why she couldn't be both fat and beautiful. a poster in the thread noted that she was beautiful and it was not necessary that she be a fetish to be beautiful. it does seem that the world would like to compartmentalize who fat people are. we are either fat or we are beautiful. we don't often see the sentiments put together in one place. like succinct Ms Wiley said " Why can't I be both?" do you feel there is a resistance both inside and outside of acceptance for fat people to be both? if there is a resistance why? if there isn't a resistance why not?


----------



## bigmac (Apr 1, 2014)

Not every thin person is beautiful. Likewise, not every fat person is beautiful. Indeed if we're honest with ourselves well admit that only a small faction of the population (fat or thin) is actually beautiful.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Not every thin person is beautiful. Likewise, not every fat person is beautiful. Indeed if we're honest with ourselves well admit that only a small faction of the population (fat or thin) is actually beautiful.



that may be true, but you don't see smaller people separating the possibility of being beautiful altogether from being thin


----------



## FatAndProud (Apr 1, 2014)

Phew. I'm so lucky to be beautiful.


----------



## CastingPearls (Apr 1, 2014)

FatAndProud said:


> Phew. I'm so lucky to be beautiful.


Phew, me too. 

*beauty privilege*? 

*beauty guilt*?

*betraying* my awesome fatness by just feeling *beautiful*? 

*impunitive overuse of star thingys*?


----------



## Paul (Apr 2, 2014)

Hang on a second: this fat woman was told she was "beautiful" and complained that she wasn't told she was "fat *and *beautiful"??? Are thin women told they are "thin and beautiful". No, If they are complimented they are simply told they are "beautiful" without adding "thin and....." So can a fat woman simply accept the compliment when told they are beautiful without jumping to the conclusion that the compliment included the unspoken "in spite of being fat?" 



superodalisque said:


> one issue i see a lot of discussion of is the separations between fat/beautiful. i was reading another thread and the op shared a fantastic link. in it a fairly well known fat community comedian said that some one told her she was just beautiful and she wondered why she couldn't be both fat and beautiful. a poster in the thread noted that she was beautiful and it was not necessary that she be a fetish to be beautiful. it does seem that the world would like to compartmentalize who fat people are. we are either fat or we are beautiful. we don't often see the sentiments put together in one place. like succinct Ms Wiley said " Why can't I be both?" do you feel there is a resistance both inside and outside of acceptance for fat people to be both? if there is a resistance why? if there isn't a resistance why not?


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 3, 2014)

Paul said:


> Hang on a second: this fat woman was told she was "beautiful" and complained that she wasn't told she was "fat *and *beautiful"??? Are thin women told they are "thin and beautiful". No, If they are complimented they are simply told they are "beautiful" without adding "thin and....." So can a fat woman simply accept the compliment when told they are beautiful without jumping to the conclusion that the compliment included the unspoken "in spite of being fat?"



i personally like being referred to as just beautiful. but i know what she is talking about. it's when someone actually says you are NOT fat but you are just beautiful. i can be beautiful without somebody trying to go really far to try and diminish my fat body. if someone says you're beautiful and leaves it at that i think that's a good thing. it's the going out of the way to try and say you aren't fat somehow that's odd -- like your beautiful in spite of being fat. but i do agree. just being beautiful is great for me personally. i don't think the rest should have to be said or mentioned at all.


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 3, 2014)

Here Some people will probably object to one thing she says (in the video at the bottom.) But I think it's really cute. Wonderful.


----------



## AuntHen (Apr 3, 2014)

I think, to a lot of people, being beautiful is null and void *if *you are fat. How many times have we heard the old adage "you have such a pretty face, if only...". My own mother said that to me haha 


@Paul, I agree. He called her beautiful (which I would assume included *all *of her). Why does she need the fat part pointed out too/separately?

And I join K and Lainey on the *phew*


----------



## snuggletiger (Apr 3, 2014)

Reading this thread made me think of the whole MLK thing
"Judged for the content of their heart not the color of their skin". 
Just sad that 50 years later, we still have people getting their kicks on dividing people.


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 3, 2014)

Didn't realize that what I linked to above was already a thread topic itself. Maybe better to comment on it in here.



bigmac said:


> Not every thin person is beautiful. Likewise, not every fat person is beautiful. Indeed *if we're honest with ourselves* well admit that *only a small faction of the population* (fat or thin) *is actually beautiful.*


More complicated than that, in the same way of how people talk about art (or pornography) being something that they know when they see it better than they could meaningfully describe what makes it so.

This whole question is an entire discipline onto itself. I think, when you're truly open, aware of your own surroundings, ect...you're able to see (profound) beauty all around you and in things that other people readily dismiss. Just like they are able to observe or bear witness to competing truths that, necessarily, are not quite as accessible or real for you.

As far as "_10 things..._," I think it's important to keep in mind that people who do this kind of stuff (Slam Poetry) often put a lot of editing and revision and preparation into it that's (intentionally) obscured by the enthusiam & "spontaneity" of it's delivery. So, down to the seemingly most minute word choices or even something as apparently straight forward as a the title of a work is done in a somewhat precise way for reasons.....

As such, I don't look at that as just 10 wholly separate ideas chosen at random, but more like a logical progression or flow of thoughts, the narrator's. It's not really, at all, about the boyfriend, outside of the simple point of his loving her; so, in this context, that's basically a prop to support her own realizations about (simply) being fat, but yet somehow escaping being defined by that. So, when the boyfriend says "_No.._," he's as much responding to the context of what she's saying ("_but_") as the literal substance.


----------



## Surlysomething (Apr 3, 2014)

I used to have this clip of a cartoon from some newspaper (I can't remember which one) taped on my fridge and it was a woman standing in front of a mirror and the bubble over her head said:

"You're so pretty there should be MORE of you"


I love that so much.

:happy:


----------



## Extinctor100 (Apr 3, 2014)

Overall, I believe the "beauty doesn't have a size" -type campaigns have been pretty effective, maybe moreso than we give credit.

Sure, movies and media still make fun of fat people. They also make fun of short people, poor people, blondes, gingers, minorities, gays, virgins, Christians, and nerds. Life is kinda like Middle School: if you had a face, you got teased for _something._ No one is immune to the undercurrent of society that we all tend to make jokes about other people purely because they aren't you and therefore are fair game for your humor. The subjective nature of people's criticism is much like the observation made about drivers: "anyone slower than you is an idiot and anyone faster than you is a maniac."

To reiterate the point though, body acceptance has become more fashionable with time, and has had good effects. The horrendous amount of Photoshopping done on magazine models has been exposed like a scandal, for example. Plus-size women have been dared to walk out their front doors every bit as fashionable and well-maintained as a women half their weight, and people notice. One of the main reasons men "don't like" fat women is because the image in their mind has always been a woman with baggy men's clothes, hair and makeup not done, a day behind on showering, sitting on a couch with a moat of food wrappers around her guarded by cats, posting art of her Middle School tormentors' deaths on Deviantart and Tumblr. That image is drastically changing over the last 5 years or so, where men's perceptions have changed and you aren't "lowering your standards" to date a fat woman anymore.

Not everyone is on board with it yet, but I for one hope that the positive trends continue to gain momentum and popularity. It's got a lot of resistance, true, but I take heart seeing how much progress has been made.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 3, 2014)

I was thinking that she does make a mistake similar to a lot of other people's though--thinking that beauty is dependent on the rise and fall of a penis. it's not something you have to do or be for other people. then you can define it however you like.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 3, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> I was thinking that she does make a mistake similar to a lot of other people's though--thinking that beauty is dependent on the rise and fall of a penis. it's not something you have to do or be for other people. *then you can define it however you like.*



Sort of. You can have a beautiful personality or a beautiful mind but when it comes down to it there is indeed such a thing as physical beauty. And its quantifiable. Show a series of ten photo graphs of demographically similar women to a random group of men and ask that the men rank the women in the photographs be ranked from least to most attractive and there will be surprising unanimity.


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 3, 2014)

But beauty and attraction are not really the same. Attraction is more specific to the relationship between two things, how they're motivated toward one another. Beauty, just as a very basic concept, seems as if to transcend all of that.

Beauty is, I think, necessarily reaching at something more universal.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 3, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Sort of. You can have a beautiful personality or a beautiful mind but when it comes down to it there is indeed such a thing as physical beauty. And its quantifiable. Show a series of ten photo graphs of demographically similar women to a random group of men and ask that the men rank the women in the photographs be ranked from least to most attractive and there will be surprising unanimity.



how men rank women sexually doesn't have much to do with what beauty is.

beauty has pretty much nothing to do with what men even find sexually attractive. they even find things that are personally repulsive to them sexually attractive. so i'm not sure what it is you are trying to measure--maybe the impact of the media and social conditioning on what men think they should say about the subject. but as far as their actions go, sex has absolutely nothing to do with beauty whatsoever except for how they compete with each other. when they are actually reaching for sexual pleasure they generally can get that with absolutely anyone or even anything as long as the eyes of society isn't watching. so as far as using male sexual attraction as a measure of beauty, i would say one has very little or nothing to do with the other. white males used to say that black women were sexually unattractive. were they? of course they were not. that is what society expected of them. did it make those black women any less beautiful? of course not. real beauty exists independent of public sexual scrutiny, social norms etc... artists understand that because they are trained to see at is really there and not what they think they see because society told them to.

men don't have to want to have sex with something for it to be beautiful.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 4, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> ...
> 
> men don't have to want to have sex with something for it to be beautiful.




If the thing of beauty is a female homo sapien you're quite mistaken.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 4, 2014)

bigmac said:


> If the thing of beauty is a female homo sapien you're quite mistaken.



i hope not. men often find their mothers sisters and daughters beautiful in a way you might not get but i think a lot would be turned off with the idea of having sex with them. i'm so glad i know lots of men who aren't so base. what a sucky world you describe sometimes. i'm so happy i don't have to live there.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 4, 2014)

Actually its been my experience that repressing base instincts makes people angry and mean spirited.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 4, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Actually its been my experience that repressing base instincts makes people angry and mean spirited.



actually what really makes people mean spirited is being abused by people who won't control their baser instincts to the detriment of others. being victimized by sociopaths and narcissists who screw up their otherwise normal emotionally healthy lives really seems to damage and piss people off somehow


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 4, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> "_...how men rank women sexually doesn't have much to do with what beauty is..beauty has pretty much nothing to do with what men even find sexually attractive._"


Ah...I dunno. I think the two things have *something* to do with each other. But they still aren't necessarily the same thing, hence we have different words for them, i.e._beauty_ versus _physical attraction_. Just like _law_ and _morality_. Or _honesty_ and _truth_.



superodalisque said:


> "_...they even find things that are personally repulsive to them sexually attractive._"


Well, it's complicated. Yes, I can see anyone, man or woman, can have that kind of experience. But, as you reflect on things, become more clear on who you are & what you want that, and resolve whatever issues; you can approach some measure of resolution on this type of internal conflict. Put under some more manageable perspective.



superodalisque said:


> "_...as their actions go, sex has absolutely nothing to do with beauty whatsoever except for how they compete with each other. when they are actually reaching for sexual pleasure they generally can get that with *absolutely anyone or even anything* as long as the eyes of society isn't watching._"


Nah...I don't think so. I can see what you're getting at, as far as how sexuality can lead to a certain kind of situational behavior. But it's really not reducible in that way of all things being equal. I don't really believe that's how it is for most people.

People, in general, respond to beauty, physical beauty probably most demonstrably, even when they're out of competition. Probably even on a deserted island. Or if they were the last two people on earth. 



superodalisque said:


> "_real beauty exists independent of public sexual scrutiny, social norms etc... artists understand that because they are trained to see at is really there and not what they think they see because society told them to._"


This, I can agree with. Beauty is real, with our without anyone's personal recognition of it. But I would add that even non-artists have some insights on beauty. That not just anyone can take for granted. 



bigmac said:


> "_Actually its been my experience that repressing base instincts makes people angry and mean spirited._"


Yes, that's true, in a certain sense. But not necessarily any less than repressing so called _higher-instincts_, thoughts towards self-actualization, ect....All of these things are part of what make you a human being. So, I think, part of the key to achieving real happiness involves some basic recognition of all of these drives. And keeping them in the right perspective, a balance that works for you.


----------



## Extinctor100 (Apr 4, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> Ah...I dunno. I think the two things have *something* to do with each other. But they still aren't necessarily the same thing, hence we have different words for them, i.e._beauty_ versus _physical attraction_. Just like _law_ and _morality_. Or _honesty_ and _truth_.



Totally right. Bigmac and SuperO are arguing over two extremes of what beauty "isn't": SuperO contending it isn't 100% determined by male attraction, and Bigmac contending it isn't 100% subjective idealization. Beauty _is_ in the eye of the beholder - you're just arguing now over whether the beholder is the a stranger in the street looking at you, a biased family member or lover, or yourself looking in the mirror. So let's not debate over whose fraction of the puzzle is the whole.

I've personally always upheld the principle that no matter who you are and how you look, there is someone in the world who thinks you're beautiful. It may sound idealistic, but I firmly believe in this. That said, some people share characteristics that a greater majority of the human race finds appealing (note that I did not use the word "attractive"). This is simply a fact, and yes, people are free to disregard the majority and etch out their own style of beauty. You may find yourself in a small minority or even alone in your view, but that's okay! Self-satisfaction and contentment are rare commodities!  This doesn't mean however, that the majority won't slowly take notice and convert. The masses are moved by many catalysts, and those catalysts change over the years and decades. Minds can only be changed one at a time, and those changes start with the bravery of some truly beautiful people.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 4, 2014)

as a woman in wouldn't ever wait on anyone to tell me i'm beautiful before I was beautiful.

I think a lot of people outside of us give themselves way too much credit.


----------



## Extinctor100 (Apr 4, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> as a woman in wouldn't ever wait on anyone to tell me i'm beautiful before I was beautiful.



And "ideally," people _shouldn't_ want or need the approval/acceptance of other people... if self-satisfied happiness is a virtue you're promoting.

But for many/most people, they thrive by appealing to others. For example, I'm a good writer, but my writing skills do nothing for me if I don't write something others will read, enjoy, and buy. If I write something incoherent and random, others may look at it and go "wow that's poorly written" and I suppose I possess the artistic license and freedom to reply "that's fine but I didn't write it for you." That won't get me far as a writer.

Similarly, beauty may be - for some - so personal a concept they simply reject others' opinions altogether. But for most people, they want to impress others and look appealing and attractive. It's not fair to say someone is bad or mentally-enslaved, just because they enjoy positive attention from others.

So while it's nice to dream of nirvana, we all still live in the real world. And while it isn't all black-and-white, the shades of grey can be pretty dark sometimes. It's just how it is.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 4, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> actually what really makes people mean spirited is being abused by people who won't control their baser instincts to the detriment of others. being victimized by sociopaths and narcissists who screw up their otherwise normal emotionally healthy lives really seems to damage and piss people off somehow



Satisfying ones base instincts is not synonymous with abuse. As the song says we're _nothing but mammals_ and as such have the same basic drives all mammals share. People, especially young people, go out, get drunk (or stoned) and have sex. That's the way the world works. Women are willing participants in this -- many times women really do what it!


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 5, 2014)

Also one doesn't have to be a narcissist or sociopath to be mean spirited


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Apr 5, 2014)

FatAndProud said:


> Phew. I'm so lucky to be beautiful.



I try not to hate you because you're beautiful :bow:


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 5, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Satisfying ones base instincts is not synonymous with abuse. As the song says we're _nothing but mammals_ and as such have the same basic drives all mammals share. People, especially young people, go out, get drunk (or stoned) and have sex. That's the way the world works. Women are willing participants in this -- many times women really do what it!



true, it's only abuse i it is at the expense of someone else. but often refusal to evolve into more as a human is always at someone's expense.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 5, 2014)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I try not to hate you because you're beautiful :bow:



she already knows i hate her for it


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 5, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> Also one doesn't have to be a narcissist or sociopath to be mean spirited



true. as far as beauty goes simply insisting that others are not beautiful is often enough.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 5, 2014)

Extinctor100 said:


> And "ideally," people _shouldn't_ want or need the approval/acceptance of other people... if self-satisfied happiness is a virtue you're promoting.
> 
> But for many/most people, they thrive by appealing to others. For example, I'm a good writer, but my writing skills do nothing for me if I don't write something others will read, enjoy, and buy. If I write something incoherent and random, others may look at it and go "wow that's poorly written" and I suppose I possess the artistic license and freedom to reply "that's fine but I didn't write it for you." That won't get me far as a writer.
> 
> ...



that would work but only considering if one knows what someone's real world is. the real world is the one you make around yourself and is a construct of who and what you choose to surround yourself with. 

your argument does not follow. you are taking it for granted that both beauty and writing has to be an approved public commodity and that *societal judgment is furthermore correct*. you somehow have the idea that both good writing and beauty must necessarily be supported by public opinion. there are many instances of beauty and writing that were not recognized by pop culture during their time. does that make either less. no it doesn't. and the people who created either created something of worth despite that simply because it come out of them as something they were compelled to do.

Van Gogh was never recognized during his lifetime except by people who knew and loved him. are his works any less of a masterpiece? no. what about other people who never had a tireless wealthy art dealer as a brother whose works we don't know of ? i'm sorry your idea is limited and limiting. looking at life that way cheapens the whole experience of living. if Van Gogh had been able to appreciate what he was doing without worrying about fame and societal approval his life would have been wonderful and goodness knows how many more amazing works we would have. but, he was extremely depressed. he suffered a great deal emotionally. he was always wanting. that focus on what others think about worth of self or the worth of your creative work is a distraction that can lower it's quality and is often can become a mental disorder of some sort. you're better off focusing on the work itself and then the rest will come or not come as fate would have it. it's the process you should be after and that makes a person feel good. otherwise you've probably missed the whole point anyway.

people who look for approval outside of themselves are probably going to suffer a lot because they don't understand the nature of the world they live in. always WANTING something whether it comes from others, someone else or anything outside of ourselves is always going to lead to some kind of frustration. 

the real reason some people don't find certain other people beautiful is because they present some kind of a problem or conflict that angers them and challenges their ideas. people who are often said to be beautiful have regular consistent features and don't usually put forward any contradictory ideas. if they do the public tells them to shut up or stay hidden. being fat, black etc... is/was a socially contradictory idea as beauty can't be attributed to people whose ideas or existence conflict with the accepted norm. so what you are actually doing in accepting the norm is trapping a whole lot of people in the unbeautiful mode that has absolutely nothing to do with real beauty. by your reasoning us fat folk or black folk or jewish folk etc.. could never have be considered beautiful since at one time it was socially/politically important for us not to be even though we were are and will always be.

since you mentioned Nirvana, i thought the Dalai Lama's writing on the nature of suffering would explain more clearly what i'm getting at. it's true NIrvana might be unachievable for many people but it definitely doesn't help to go in a totally opposite direction where you're pretty much going to feel dissatisfied and not approved of anyway. there isn't anyone even who is perceived of in the public eye to be beautiful who really actually feels that way. maybe you should take note of that. even "beautiful" people are made to feel somehow ugly by this society/public you seem to be so worshipful of and dependent on. this quest for beauty is really the quest for happiness. has fame for beauty really brought people happiness?


A very poor, underprivileged person might think that it would be wonderful to have a car or a television set and, should he acquire them, would at first feel very happy and satisfied. Now, if such happiness were permanent, as long as he had the car and the TV set he would remain happy. But he does not; his happiness goes away. After a few months he wants another kind of car; if he has the money, he will buy a better television set. The old things, the same objects that once gave him much satisfaction, now cause dissatisfaction. That is the nature of change; that is the problem of the suffering of change...

The truth of the cause of suffering

... what is the cause of suffering?

Generally, the ultimate cause is the mind; the mind that is influenced by negative thoughts such as anger, attachment, jealousy and so forth is the main cause of birth and all such other problems. However, there is no possibility of ending the mind, of interrupting the stream of consciousness itself. Furthermore, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the deepest level of mind; it is simply influenced by the negative thoughts. Thus, *the question is whether or not we can fight and control anger, attachment and the other disturbing negative minds. *If we can eradicate these, we shall be left with a pure mind that is free from the causes of suffering.

*This brings us to the disturbing negative minds, the delusions, which are mental factors.* There are many different ways of presenting the discussion of the mind, but, in general, the mind itself is something that is mere clarity and awareness. When we speak of disturbing attitudes such as anger and attachment, we have to see how they are able to affect and pollute the mind; what, in fact, is their nature? This, then, is the discussion of the cause of suffering.

*If we ask how attachment and anger arise, the answer is that they are undoubtedly assisted by our grasping at things to be true and inherently real.* When, for instance, we are angry with something, we feel that the object is out there, solid, true and unimputed, and that we ourselves are likewise something solid and findable. Before we get angry, the object appears ordinary, but when our mind is influenced by anger, the object looks ugly, completely repulsive, nauseating; something we want to get rid of immediately—it appears really to exist in that way: solid, independent and very unattractive. This appearance of “truly ugly” fuels our anger. Yet when we see the same object the next day, when our anger has subsided, it seems more beautiful than it did the day before; it’s the same object but it doesn't seem as bad. *This shows how anger and attachment are influenced by our grasping at things as being true and unimputed.*

- See more at: http://www.lamayeshe.com/index.php?sect=article&id=380#sthash.mjldSgLE.dpuf


The Dalai Lama


----------



## bigmac (Apr 5, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> true, it's only abuse i it is at the expense of someone else. but often refusal to evolve into more as a human is always at someone's expense.



Evolution is over rated. I'd have been much happier living in a cave and chasing mastodons over cliffs.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 5, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Evolution is over rated. I'd have been much happier living in a cave and chasing mastodons over cliffs.



you can always go back. here. you dropped your club


----------



## FatAndProud (Apr 5, 2014)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I try not to hate you because you're beautiful :bow:





superodalisque said:


> she already knows i hate her for it



Ladies, you can hate me for being beautiful, but it will not change the fact that I am stunningly so. Lol!


----------



## AppreSheAte (Apr 5, 2014)

I wonder if simply saying someone is beautiful goes beyond whether they are fat or skinny? Actually I think it goes beyond physical aesthetics. I can find someone extremely appealing, attractive, and beautiful based on their characteristics, or even their flaws. So, I don't think it's wrong to simply say someone is beautiful. However, I think it would say that someone that is fat can't be beautiful, just as much as it would be to say that all thin or skinny people are. 

Of course, to me, someone that is fat is more inclined to be beautiful to me. Thus, beauty IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER. :smitten:


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 5, 2014)

FatAndProud said:


> Ladies, you can hate me for being beautiful, but it will not change the fact that I am stunningly so. Lol!



don't start none won't be none  

View attachment images (8).jpg


----------



## swordchick (Apr 5, 2014)

I hate you for that. LMAO! 



superodalisque said:


> don't start none won't be none


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 6, 2014)

made you laugh though lol


----------



## Extinctor100 (Apr 6, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> the real reason some people don't find certain other people beautiful is because they present some kind of a problem or conflict that angers them and challenges their ideas. people who are often said to be beautiful have regular consistent features and don't usually put forward any contradictory ideas. if they do the public tells them to shut up or stay hidden. being fat, black etc... is/was a socially contradictory idea as beauty can't be attributed to people whose ideas or existence conflict with the accepted norm. so what you are actually doing in accepting the norm is trapping a whole lot of people in the unbeautiful mode that has absolutely nothing to do with real beauty. by your reasoning us fat folk or black folk or jewish folk etc.. could never have be considered beautiful since at one time it was socially/politically important for us not to be even though we were are and will always be.
> 
> since you mentioned Nirvana, i thought the Dalai Lama's writing on the nature of suffering would explain more clearly what i'm getting at. it's true NIrvana might be unachievable for many people but it definitely doesn't help to go in a totally opposite direction where you're pretty much going to feel dissatisfied and not approved of anyway. there isn't anyone even who is perceived of in the public eye to be beautiful who really actually feels that way. maybe you should take note of that. even "beautiful" people are made to feel somehow ugly by this society/public you seem to be so worshipful of and dependent on. this quest for beauty is really the quest for happiness. has fame for beauty really brought people happiness?



I'm not worshipful of or dependent on society. I simply prefer to live _in_ society instead of _outside_ it. You may have a semblance of nirvana where self-satisfaction is enough, where you shut your eyes and ears to society because you decide it isn't worth your time, energy, or attention anymore and it makes you feel bad, so you decide you're gonna do you and let the world screw itself. Like I said, that's okay and that's your right to do so. But you've done what I said it isn't fair to do, which is say that people who like the attention and approval of others are bad, weak people. We all find fulfillment in life different ways. Simply stated, *your way isn't best for everyone just because it's best for you.*

I prefer to accept things for what they are than hate them for the way they aren't. Society, despite how you and others may characterize it, is _people._ By its very definition and origin, it is the collective community of individual people. Society changes as individuals change other individuals. It's called _memetics_: the reproduction of an idea or opinion. It's the basis by which a point of view is popularized throughout society by spreading from person to person. Giving society the self-justified middle finger and walking away, won't change society for the better. I prefer to accept the realities of society's mechanisms and then use those mechanisms to change it because I believe it can change. Just because I believe in an optimistic future doesn't mean I love the present state.

But thank you for again using false dichotomies about what I said and then retorting with superlatively absolute statements I noted in blue in the quote. Just pointing that out...







Returning to the original point, though, I submit again that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If you're the kind of person that perceives the only worthy beholder is yourself in a mirror, that's you. Others find their fulfillment in seeing their art appreciated and praised during their own lifetime... _not_ because they catered to the masses' flavor of the week, but because they were diligent and patient enough to pick the beholders whose opinions were of greatest value to them. :happy: It really isn't fair to demean others just because they haven't retreated into themselves as a reaction to society's unfairness.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 6, 2014)

Extinctor100 said:


> I'm not worshipful of or dependent on society. I simply prefer to live _in_ society instead of _outside_ it. You may have a semblance of nirvana where self-satisfaction is enough, where you shut your eyes and ears to society because you decide it isn't worth your time, energy, or attention anymore and it makes you feel bad, so you decide you're gonna do you and let the world screw itself. Like I said, that's okay and that's your right to do so. But you've done what I said it isn't fair to do, which is say that people who like the attention and approval of others are bad, weak people. We all find fulfillment in life different ways. Simply stated, *your way isn't best for everyone just because it's best for you.*
> 
> I prefer to accept things for what they are than hate them for the way they aren't. Society, despite how you and others may characterize it, is _people._ By its very definition and origin, it is the collective community of individual people. Society changes as individuals change other individuals. It's called _memetics_: the reproduction of an idea or opinion. It's the basis by which a point of view is popularized throughout society by spreading from person to person. Giving society the self-justified middle finger and walking away, won't change society for the better. I prefer to accept the realities of society's mechanisms and then use those mechanisms to change it because I believe it can change. Just because I believe in an optimistic future doesn't mean I love the present state.
> 
> ...



i think you're contradicting yourself quite a bit here. you might want to go back and think about what you are saying

no one has to live totally outside of society to be themselves. but they don't have to make themselves totally available to every last whim of society either especially when it comes to self worth. most of all it is not healthy to want it so badly and to be so attached to societal approval because that is unrealistic and it leads to disappointment and suffering. 

there is nothing demeaning in poking a hole in ideas you think are flawed unless you are dealing with someone so attached to being right that every critique of their ideas becomes a personal attack in their mind. i someone poked a hole in your idea the most efective thing to do is to fill that hole. but that has not been done here. 

actually i think you are the master of the strawman since you have conveniently overlooked qualifiers surrounding the words or phrases you've highlighted. 

but basically overall i could never agree with your idea that fat folk somehow should be dependent on society at large to feel or be beautiful.


----------



## Extinctor100 (Apr 7, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> no one has to live totally outside of society to be themselves. but they don't have to make themselves totally available to every last whim of society either especially when it comes to self worth. most of all it is not healthy to want it so badly and to be so attached to societal approval because that is unrealistic and it leads to disappointment and suffering.



Prettttty sure I spent my last 3 posts explaining that it's better to see society's approval molded to fit a broader model of beauty, than to mold your model of beauty to match society's. But okay. :happy:


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 7, 2014)

Extinctor100 said:


> Prettttty sure I spent my last 3 posts explaining that it's better to see society's approval molded to fit a broader model of beauty, than to mold your model of beauty to match society's. But okay. :happy:



what i'm saying is not to wait on that


----------



## AbbyJoyful (Apr 13, 2014)

It's too bad most people can't put together fat and beautiful. I've seen loads of pretty damn hot fat women. I've also seen loads of pretty damn hot thin, or average sized women. For me, beauty really comes in all sizes, from skinny to supersized. 

In my early teens, when I started to get chubby, the "sooo pity you're getting fat, you have such a lovely face"-comment got to me a lot. Society teaches us that fat, or chubby, can't be pretty/healthy/good enough. I tried every way to change my body when I was in my teenage years and never felt good enough. I'm so glad I don't feel that pressure anymore :bow: And I didn't only accept my body, but I'm really loving it now!


----------

