We have commercials and ads for everything nowadays. Ever get that not-so-fresh feeling? (Massingill) Feeling bloated and irritable because of your period? (Midol) Ever gotten a leak when you're wearing white pants? (Always) Afraid you might have gotten pregnant last night and want to get rid of it? (Plan B) Did you know you can mix two personal lubricants and get a more amazing result? (KY) Do you have fine lines and wrinkles? (Olay) Need to get rid of stretch marks? (Strivectin)
Nothing is too personal anymore, nothing is taboo for TV commercials, magazine articles, or "news" stories, right? Nothing? I think not.
If we live in such an open society where we can talk about all of the above, why are there still things we have to learn about by experiencing them? I'll give you my favorite example. I'm 38. About 5 years ago, my eyebrows started disappearing from above my eyes and reappearing on my chin. I thought: "I'm a freak!" I thought that I had some serious hormonal condition. I couldn't tell anyone, show anyone.... People would ostracize me!! I'd be a societal outcast!! I'd end up as the bearded lady in a traveling circus.
Now, I know living in Los Angeles, home of any plastic surgery you could imagine (did you know some men get calf implants?) has tarnished my view of what is "normal." However, imagine my surprise when I gave up caring what people thought and started mentioning it to other women my age -- they had the same concerns!! I have a friend whose entire chin is covered in a beard if she doesn't shave it! I went to have electrolysis done and found out that it's incredibly common for women to grow facial and neck hair (always darker and coarser than their regular hair)! Another friend even shared with me that she grows the occasional long dark hair on her nipples!! I'm not a freak!!
But why -- why??? -- in a world of 24/7 douche, tampon and stretch mark commercials -- isn't this talked about? I've mentioned it to several women who also feel that no one else but them suffers from this! Shouldn't Oprah be covering this or something? What about all the "beauty" mags -- what better way to make a woman feel she's not ugly than by letting her know she's not alone?
Ok, off my soapbox. If you're a woman starting to grow beard hairs, there's nothing wrong with you. Even the occasional nipple hair isn't bizarre. It's normal. But why didn't anyone tell us?
Do you have any "why didn't my mother tell me this would happen to me?" items? Let's all share so we all know we're not freaks!
Showing posts with label society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label society. Show all posts
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Susan Boyle
From the moment I saw Susan Boyle on YouTube, I loved her. She has a sharp wit and shy nature at the same time, a rare combo. There can be no dispute that her voice and singing ability are amazing.
Why is it, then, that every single news report about her has to point out that she's not lovely? I've never heard the words "homely" and "dowdy" so many times in my life! How rude! What kind of society are we (the US and the UK) that someone who is not stunningly attractive is not expected to have any talent?
Her performance should have been no shock at all, other than in comparison to the less-talented performers who went before her. Yet the judges, the audience, and the media all implied that her exterior (which is by no means ugly) should dictate her worth, but ... shock!... it doesn't in this rare case! What a backhanded compliment. If I were her, I'd let them know where they can shove their discussions of a "make-over" and all that. She's an enormously talented woman, and her appearance -- good, bad, or mediocre -- shouldn't matter an iota. After all, there are tons of people considered "attractive" who have no talent at all (Jonas Brothers, Playboy bunnies, etc.). And yet we aren't "shocked" when they suck at anything but looking good.
Why is it, then, that every single news report about her has to point out that she's not lovely? I've never heard the words "homely" and "dowdy" so many times in my life! How rude! What kind of society are we (the US and the UK) that someone who is not stunningly attractive is not expected to have any talent?
Her performance should have been no shock at all, other than in comparison to the less-talented performers who went before her. Yet the judges, the audience, and the media all implied that her exterior (which is by no means ugly) should dictate her worth, but ... shock!... it doesn't in this rare case! What a backhanded compliment. If I were her, I'd let them know where they can shove their discussions of a "make-over" and all that. She's an enormously talented woman, and her appearance -- good, bad, or mediocre -- shouldn't matter an iota. After all, there are tons of people considered "attractive" who have no talent at all (Jonas Brothers, Playboy bunnies, etc.). And yet we aren't "shocked" when they suck at anything but looking good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)