Friday 13 May 2016

27th Autism Birthday Special -- Break!



Welcome back, for the last time in a good while, to the Randomizer.

How DO I even begin to say goodbye for perhaps a short while after over three and close to a half years and 50 articles of doing this? There’s probably no easy way to doing so. Maybe a nice silence will do…or making fun of Justin Bieber. The latter seems more tempting. It will come up in due course. Anyway, I will be going more into wrapping up final thoughts at the end of this. For now, let’s continue talking about something I’ve talked about two years since I had brought it up: Autism.



I have gone through talking about different aspects of autism, my personal experiences with autism in the past, and my own different traits expanded on, that if you wish to read on you can find on the links to your right. So what else is there to really talk about? Well…plenty.

Autism is always worth talking about in different subjects, a few which have become so important over recent years they are impossible to ignore, to me anyway. I don’t mean to make this article into a rallying point for a position later on, and you’ll probably see why, but it is important to talk about as a matter of trying to find out what is the truth, and what isn’t. The stigma that surrounds autism won’t be going anytime soon. There’s so much to sift through with understanding, it’s a feeling that unless you come across someone with autism you’ll never experience it. Isn’t that kind of a metaphor for life?

Yes, autism is as difficult to break into as a bagful of money locked in a safe, encased in a box made out of titanium, locked in a bigger lead box, and buried in between the Marianas Trench and the Earth’s core and a good chance you’ll be drowned and burned and pressurised at the same time. BUT…it’s not impossible. The difficulty is the perception and ignorance of autism, much like encasing the whole subject in a safe, and then just responding with indifference or annoyance, particularly when an autistic child or adult have a meltdown.

Can you guess what's not labelled along those labels?


This is what we need to break down, and explore an issue that still surrounds autism worldwide. We need to understand how perhaps the stigma works, and how much this does affect those who have autism, bringing up a few points that have been discussed as well in recent times. So get the hammers out and start breaking!

This is my hammer


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First off, I’m going to talk about the three main points recognisable in autistic people, like I have done for the last two articles, as a refresher for those who have read the articles and those who don’t have a clue what autism means. But as usual the first question isn’t, What is Autism?, it should be, Where do you start with autism?

Autism is a lifelong developmental disorder, sometimes known as a hidden disability because it’s not on show as much as someone, for example, in a wheelchair. We’re an odd species aren’t we? Autism effects people in a number of ways: the way we can communicate, how we relate to people, and making sense of the world around us. In addition, Autism is also a spectrum, in that autistic people have many traits that are similar and differentiate from each other.

The three main points relating to autism are:

-          Social Communication


‘For people with autistic spectrum disorders, body language can appear as foreign as if people were speaking Ancient Greek’ (autism.org.uk)

One of the main problems autistic people have can be broken down into different points itself, hence the spectrum side of it.

One trait we might have is literal interpretation, taking what is said on the nose. It’s a problem I still have, and it’s not going to go away much as I would like it too. In conversation, I could go in one direction just from listening to one word, and interpreting it in a manner accidentally as ‘that doesn’t make sense’. It’s not exactly a big problem I have, like with certain jokes from comedians I will understand, but like I said, there’ll always be a little part of me that will think, ‘that doesn’t make sense’.

Another difficulty we might have is speech patterns. Some autistic people may never say a single thing in their life, or say very little, and still understand what is actually being said having different ways of communicating, using sign language, visual symbols etc to communicate. Some may talk just fine, but won’t always understand the give-or-take nature of conversation, where one might speak about their favourite subject at length, instead of accidentally not giving interest to the other person they’re talking to. I would say this has happened before in the past, but now it’s not as pronounced as it was, and I can share the conversation with friends and family if I can.

A third part of this can be non-communication with people. I am definitely like this at times, whenever I put my head phones on to listen to music, or even not answering the phone for a number I won’t readily recognise. Some may misinterperate this as being rude but it’s not that being an attempt to ignore someone at all. It’s because I like listening to music, and to be honest feel afraid of answering the phone because I hate talking to people over the phone. Nothing to do with ignoring someone or anyone else, at least it’s not an attempt to anyway.

See what I mean about it being a spectrum?

-          Social Interaction



The second point is social interaction with people. This may connect with communication to a point because it shows how we can interact with each other, and show ourselves to a point who we are, in addition to recognising the emotion states in people.

The first is a non-understanding of the social rules most people pick up easily, but autistic people don’t to varying points. This could involve standing too close to a person, invading their personal space or starting an inappropriate topic of conversation, amongst other examples, that will show how an autistic person won’t always ‘fit’ into society, and accidentally come across as ‘weird’.

The second is, unintentionally, we may appear insensitive due to how we don’t always recognise how people are feeling by their facial expressions, and we may appear inappropriate with reactions. In my first blog about autism a couple years ago, I had mentioned a video about an autistic man joining some co-workers for lunch, one of which was upset about a break-up with her boyfriend, and comforted by her co-workers. The autistic man says, innocently enough, that perhaps the boyfriend thought she was ugly, prompting stares from his co-workers. It’s a well-meaning suggestion, but to others it will feel like an insult.

The last point I will make on this is some want to have time alone, opposed to hanging out with friends and whatnot. While there will be many autistic people like this, I do enjoy company with my own friends. If I didn’t have any friends, I’d feel really lonely. I’m happy to have such close friends, I wouldn’t know what to do without them. Well I have a PS4 but that doesn’t really count.

-          Social Imagination



The final point I will talk about is social imagination.

First is, connecting with social interaction, how difficult it can be for an autistic person to understand another’s thoughts and feelings and what they will do next. I have had a few problems with this, especially on Facebook when someone can write a sarcastic comment for fun, and I won’t always understand it, even if I am somewhat sarcastic myself. Least I think to a point I am sarcastic. But I do understand how someone else can be feeling, and give out a hug if needed.

Secondly, some will find it difficult to engage into imaginative play. I remember vividly watching a documentary from HORIZON about autism, called Living with Autism, and one segment showed a difference between ‘normal’ kids and autistic kids. They were shown a box, with a red ship placed inside, and then they had to tap three times on top of the box to get it out, shown by Professor Uta Frith. Autistic kids just took the red ship out of the box, but that was because they knew the ship was already in there, and sometimes unable to use imagination. Personally this hasn’t always been a problem, since I used to play spy games with an old friend at Primary School and of course writing stories.

Lastly, and more obviously, some autistic people like to have a set routine to help focus on what will happen each day. For some, change can be a difficult thing, if not downright unacceptable, and need to have a steady plan to deal with different issues. I will say this doesn’t affect me too much, because I’ve never found the need for a routine as I’ve gotten older. As a kid though, it seemed to be a little stronger that way, because my parents remember strongly that whenever they went a different way into Bury St. Edmunds, I cried that we wouldn’t go a route I was familiar with, and so they always had to go a different way. Not that I remember that much.

-          Other characteristics

Apart those three main points, there are a few others that need to be mentioned.

First is sensory sensitivity. This affects any one of the five main senses: Touch, Smell, Sight, Taste and Sound, and can range from hypersensitivity (overfeeling) to hyposensitivity (underfeeling). Examples of either one can come from an autistic person finding a particular sound unbearable to listen to or feeling sick, or to the latter’s case not feel it at all. This can include as well clothes that one may feel unbearable to wear against their skin.



Second is finding specialist interests some autistic people have close to their heart. Ranging around Science fiction to music, films to computers, no subject is off limits. I have had many different interests myself over the years ranging from films to music to wrestling. There might be one person whose one personal subject can dominate their entire life.

Thirdly is a term some of us know about: Asperger’s Syndrome. It’s a form of autism that shares many of the three main points, except the crucial main difference is people with Asperger’s tend to have fewer speech problems as opposed to those with autism, and have above or average intelligence. The issue here is that there is a fine line in between the two so you need to be an expert in knowing, and I have some difficulty in knowing the difference myself.

The one thing I haven’t mentioned with the other two blogs, which I should’ve done, is the point that autism isn’t just centred on boys. Girls and Women with diagnoses of autism have been growing substantially in recent years, in how much they are getting those diagnoses more and more, women slipping through the net as it were. A consensus is that the diagnoses for women centres around:

-          Increased social imitation skills (following the social rules)
-          Desire to interact directly with others
-          Tendency to be shy or passive
-          Better imagination skills (more setting up scenarios rather than acting out)
-          Better inguistic skills developmentally
-          Interests that can focus on animals or people

One woman in particular that might be a good example is autism advocate Temple Grandin, who has worked with cow livestock in the past and helped to reduce their stress before being slaughtered. She studied how they would react to ranchers, movements, objects and light, then designed curved corrals to reduce their stress, panic and any blatant injuries. She has been criticised by animal activists apparently for such methods, despite her respect and compassion for such livestock. Gradin has been quoted as saying:

"I think using animals for food is an ethical thing to do, but we've got to do it right. We've got to give those animals a decent life, and we've got to give them a painless death. We owe the animal respect."

Let's break that closet with the hammer!


Autism then really encompasses a number of people on the spectrum, regardless of gender, colour or creed. It’s like a description I made last year: Imagine if your brain was like Lego made, coloured blue, but for a few red pieces in and around the brain. Those red pieces are representative of autism. Different for anyone who is autistic. Some media have shown how autism works to a point, but that’s it, just up to a point.

Thus, we come to the main point of this article: Autism and the MMR Vaccine.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This might be a difficult subject to talk about, as it’s not just a case of knowing that autism is a developmental disorder, but also finding what are the factors involving the arguments, and looking for the truth, especially in a country that has had many issues with the subject of autism in general: the good old US of A. I say good…(insert joke here). The major issue concerning the MMR vaccine started in Britain oddly enough.

In 1998, Dr. Andrew Wakefield published a paper in the Lancet, now officially fraudulent, that claimed the Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine had links towards the symptoms of autism and bowel disease. The controversial findings grew in the early 2000s, when Wakefield continued publishing findings to add to his argument, but added nothing new to the original findings, as the British public became more fearful about the prospect of giving their child autism. The controversy ebbed away with the lack of further findings, and a few points made by John-Walker Smith about how the MMR is safe, but if there was a subtype of autism caused by the vaccine, research would address that question, and so far it seems have proven negative.

A disturbing man called Andrew Wakefield


Wakefield lost more credibility, The Sunday Times journalist Brian Deer revealed in 2004, when he had been paid a sum by Richard Barr to conduct research in finding a “new syndrome” two years before Wakefield made his announcement, instead being a front to attack MMR and drug companies that manufactured the MMR, and help a litigation of families recruited through media stories to claim that their children had been damaged by the vaccine. Nine months before Wakefield made his announcement, he filed a patent of products including a single ‘safer’ vaccine against measles, which would only stand any chance if credibility of MMR was done. In addition, for the 12 patients that had been used as part of the study, Wakefield had manipulated the evidence from their histories and diagnoses, and lied of conducting different experiments to prove his theory. In effect, Wakefield had lied about his theory for simple gain of money.

Moving toward the late 2000s and 2010, Wakefield attempted and abandoned a two year “gagging” lawsuit, and created a conspiracy theory video, also promoting his work from Thoughtful house in Austin, Texas, holding a $280,000 a year job, and refused to co-operate while Deer and Channel 4 would press for a trial against Wakefield. In 2010, a panel of doctors and lay members found Wakefield guilty, branding him “dishonest”, “callous”, and “unethical”. Lancet retracted his paper fully, he was ousted from his Texas business, and erased from the UK Doctor’s registar ending his career as a doctor. Deer received a specialist journalist award in the Press Awards for his work for his “outstanding perseverance”. 

Brian Deer


In USA, Wakefield is still working with his theory against the MMR vaccine, including new claims that a vaccine including mercury based thimerosal lead to the development of autism, and a documentary film called ‘Vaxxed’ directed by Wakefield -- that looks into the CDC (U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) apparently manipulating and wiping date of a study looking into autism and vaccines – due to be shown but pulled from Robert De Niro’s film festival Tribeca this year for not furthering the argument for ‘vaccines causing autism’, De Niro himself the father of an autistic son. His support in America seems to be just as prolific, if not more than in Britain. In addition to reading up on this, there has been an American scientist called H. Hugh Fudenberg who claimed – as well – that the MMR Vaccine caused autism as early as the 80s, and that he had developed a cure, oddly, using his own bone marrow. This theory was used in the original Lancet paper.

Sorry you're too intelligent to continue watching this documentary anymore, please read the tabloids to lower brain power.


However again, a few things are amiss that seemed to be explained properly by the CDC. The point that thimerosal lead to autism are unfounded because thimerosal, used for many decades, had been taken out of vaccines in 2001, bar certain flu shots, and the MMR Vaccine never contain thimerosal inside, with autism rates continuing on the up even so, and thimerosal disapparates into the body soon as it enters the body, breaking down completely to not harm anyone who’s had a vaccine containing it. Even the NHS explain that they have stopped using thimerosal in vaccines, and according to a recent study last year, updated this year, from JAMA of Autism Occurance from the MMR Vaccine along children with siblings with or without Autism, results show that the MMR Vaccine did not increase a risk of autism, regardless of older siblings with autism, and thus no further risk of autism is made in-between the two.

A bigger issue opened up when Deer worked with the British Medical Journal in 2011, revealing how one case had developed symptoms of autism a month before he received his MMR jab, and two cases showing that they had bowel problems before their vaccine, one when discharged from hospital was summarised not to have autism. A third showed how they received their vaccine at four years after developmental delay early in life. Many similar cases have been written up in the essay for the journal, and in effect create a massive discrepancy in the theory undertaken.

Today, Wakefield still pursues his theory and campaigning against vaccines in America, with continued support from many supporters.

Otherwise known as 'completely bananas'



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This whole idea of MMR causing autism, to me as a moot point, is genius crap in the making. I do feel, as an autistic person myself, that the forethought of manipulating a study for making ends meet, to gain money off those who blame a medical procedure out of possible genuine fear - or different reasons - to understand how their child got this, and develop a lie then continuing that lie and serve one’s own purpose to gain out those desperate and weakened – perhaps emotionally – a vast amount of money, is self-proposing a destructive method of how autism works, and needs to be broken down completely.

The few questions that opened up in my mind are these: 1) If the MMR vaccine really did lead a raise in autism rates from when it was introduced in 1988, a number of people of my generation would be greatly affected by autism, in fact perhaps many people in secondary schools over ten years ago would be autistic. 2) I had the jab myself at perhaps the same age as anybody would have gotten it, which leads the question how far on the autistic spectrum would I be? Would I have been further down, or would I have not been autistic at all? 3) If people claim vaccines have given their child autism, what about those in the past who didn’t have vaccines, and thus we can only still assume based on their outward characteristics that they are autistic?

Andrew Wakefield can claim all he wants that the MMR vaccine is bad, the manipulation is there pure and simple. It could also be fairer to say that because of his work, rates of measles had increased back in the UK, in a few years after he showed his theory, and perhaps an increase of over 2,000 cases in 2012 alone, some I think I’m right in reading have even died from it in those times, reported by the Oxford Vaccine Group. This may suggest, in theory not practice, Andrew Wakefield has blood on his hands, from a perspective of greed. Perhaps if true, it gives rise to a moral and ethical question to a man – who has stopped vaccines for a money made purpose – plus, and I’m being honest here, a degenerate horrible human being, who deserves this gif, with an extended prison sentence.


This is a disturbing trend that needs to be halted in its tracks fast, though it won’t anytime soon and it’s a disturbing way to show. I’ll admit it has made my blood boil to a point from researching this myself, because it’s grounds for showing how far manipulation goes. People desperate for help are seemingly sucked into this world of how vaccines will make your child different from any other normal child, such as if autism is a disease. Autism is NOT a disease, it’s a different way of looking at the world. Emphasis on NOT!

That kind of stigma still stays high around autism, the thought that perhaps it is a disease. Autism is still an unknown subject, only seemingly for those who have had the experience of knowing and dealing with someone who has autism, or being autistic themselves. Now and perhaps still in future, it will be seen as something different and taboo, not to be heard of unless you don’t know or ignore it. The only reason it’s seen as a negative thing, is because no one understands what’s seen on the outside more than the inside. It’s the same for people with dyslexia, bipolar disorder, dyspraxia, anyone that deals with mental issues every day. Few really know the happening in our heads, certainly many do not understand because of a number of reasons.

Autism has been turned into a dirty word to a point, and it never should be, but from majorly one man’s twisting charming work it has been turned into such, a discord to be afraid of turning your child into something inhuman. Let me say this: Autism is NOT A DISEASE, it’s a lifelong developing condition that stays forever, there’s no cure. It is treatable, but no matter how much you look up online for any dietary tips, pills, or crackpot scam artists, it’s NOT curable. The help is out there, but it needs to be seen in the right place, by experts who know and see the symptoms, people who spot it from experience, and others who do help bring better understanding to you so you can help yourself or child.

Autism is a great word, but it needs all the support it can get. Start a tug a war that Wakefield and those who believe otherwise cannot win.

Not a bad metaphor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is it, perhaps for the moment. It’s where the Randomizer stops, on a good message I reckon.

The support I have had for this blog since 2013 has been fantastic, and for that, thank you all who have continued to spread the word, and for the overwhelming views I have had, though however small some of the articles could be. I may come back to this in future, and push for better viewership somehow, to bring more people toward understanding how things can change, with a few random jokes thrown here and there. Now, it’s best to come away until a time may be right to start again, when I feel properly refreshed for more subjects of importance or awesomeness. I will still be doing my book and few film reviews here and there whenever I do see a film, good or bad otherwise. But for now, here are my final thoughts:

Autism is a part of who I am, I am as human as anybody else on this planet. I wouldn’t think I could get as angry as I could finding out what I’ve researched, but finding out the truth can help show anger being good in spates. Many changes need to be sorted out, and they need to start keeping Wakefield and others away with their ideals. Autism is a great word. Please remember that.

Also, Justin Bieber sucks. ^_^

Randomizer out!

Drink up, me hearties yo oh......


Saturday 16 April 2016

Beauty Standards



Welcome back to the Randomizer!

Just to clear things up first, some of you may have read that I have decided to take an extended break from doing The Randomizer, feeling I can’t continue coming up with many more subjects to realistically talk about. I have decided to go through with that decision, and this will be my second to last blog. Really, it comes down to being the best decision I can think for the moment. With the book coming along and nearing completion of its drafts, I need more time with that. Though I do enjoy writing these blogs, I always knew it wasn’t going to last as long as I want to have a career in writing, and other things will need to take precedence. So yes, I will be taking an extended break from my blog. How long that will be exactly, remains to be seen.

Maybe I'll find the answer in here...


For the next two blogs now, they will be pretty important ones. For May, that will be a continuing of the autism theme I have going, and my last one for the moment. For this month, concerns a subject that has, like young adult fiction, bugged me for a time.

Beauty Standards.

An age old problem since the dawn of time, or maybe some point in the past, Beauty Standards are a controversial topic in today’s society. An ideal of one perception to attain, so that women, mostly women I’ll be talking about today, will feel finally beautiful, and eye-catching and comfortable. There’s so much in magazines, celebrity gossip, and much media in general that keep persisting in showing what beauty is.

Who/what are the hands on the eyes of the beholder?


Of course, we all have read the darker side of feeling “beautiful”. We have read and seen how many can be affected in unhealthy ways, leading to mental health problems and even death. It’s a big problem we have over the world, not just in our western society, but a huge number of perceptions from many outlooks: cultures, media, historical basis, the list is huge. I want to try and dispel some of the understandings that Beauty Standards put across, and show that at the end of the day, you yourself, the reader, are beautiful, no matter what beauty standards leads us to believe.

Now, I will be going a little further in extending out to include make-up into this, and understanding why some women use make-up for differing reasons. It will help show how women feel using it, and give a better understanding on whether it’s a more community aspect, or personal aspect, if that makes sense. As well, it’s fair to include men in this as well, and maybe even talk about how I feel about my body, even if I’m trying to get into the mind-set of ‘I’m beautiful too, regardless’.

These points will eventually come to the final question at the end: Attaining or Acceptance. It may be worth keeping this question in mind while you read on, as it may enlighten one somewhat.

So let’s explore the strange beast of Beauty Standards.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s start with how we perceive beauty nowadays in societies around the world.

Our own western culture is more or less focused on being skinny, with perhaps the addition of fake tanned skin that I’ve seen as popularly used, a thigh gap that I have seen a few times on Facebook, and following magazines of what is considered to be “beautiful”, despite apparent accusations and uses of Photoshop in the work. Our media focuses a lot on many women who are, by definition, thin, appearing in all sorts of music videos, television shows, and films. The only real TV show I can think of that has a, and I don’t mean this in a horrible way, “fat” protagonist is My Mad Fat Diary, with Sharon Rooney being the main protagonist. If you haven’t watched it, stop reading and watch it now. Well, watch it after you’ve read the blog please.

In different cultures, you will find some similarities against Western culture, perhaps even assimilated. In China, there have been pictures shared of mostly women and some men comparing their thin bodies, to a piece of lengthways A4 paper. To see those images is quite disturbing, to say the least, because it shows how much people are willing to go to attain, then maintain, perfection, for BOTH genders. Mibs Bayliss posted on Facebook a few weeks ago about how it’s a ridiculous challenge, and how it is damaging in our society, especially now she is the mother of a little daughter herself. It’s a fundamental point very well made.

However, that myth of being skinny as “beautiful” can be trounced on by some of the other perceptions around the world. Some of you will have heard about how Superdrug Online Doctor had created a page called ‘Perceptions of Perfection’. Those who don’t know, Superdrug asked a number of women in different countries to Photoshop a picture of a woman, to suit what they think is attractive to people in their country. The results are intriguing, with China and Italy being the skinniest, Spain and Peru being the most voluptuous. So the word “Western” just applies to the U.K. and the U.S.A then. Logical. 




Those same people also did a male version, with again interesting and contrasting results. China again and from the looks of it Bangladesh have the thinnest bodies, while this time Nigeria and Serbia have the biggest bellies, and U.S.A and Egypt have the most six-pack abs. Again, the word “Western” just applies to the U.K. and the U.S.A. seemingly, and just destroys the conception of what is “beautiful” in our faces.

 

“Beautiful” then, it can be argued, doesn’t really have a definition in any society, as more of a conception of opinions, that we have created ourselves. Throughout history from the Egyptians, to the Romans, to the Medieval, to the Georgian, to the Victorian, to the 20th century, to today, the idea of something “beautiful” has changed so many times, it’s like swapping out a jigsaw puzzle piece of a country that says “thin”, for the same piece that this time says “voluptuous”. “Beautiful” has become a byword for differing social constructs, which means that there’s no one definition, even going further that many people in those countries selected will have different perceptions, to the majority. That’s what beautiful is, perception of preference, and that could even be a problem itself.

Beautiful....and tasty!


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The next thing I’m going to talk about is make-up.

Make-up has been around for a very long time, around 7,000 years ago in Mesopotomia, now southern Iraq. Possibly ever since then but nevertheless, it has become a massive industry, allowing women and men to use lipstick, foundation, eye-liner etc, for whatever reason they saw fit for use, remaining big to this day. The big question is when using make-up is: Why? Why wear make-up at all?

Again, like our perceptions of beautiful, there is no one standard. A question from the site Buzzfeed asking 14 women why they make-up got varied responses, from ‘I wanna see all the versions of myself I can possibly find’, to ‘I think I just look better with it, tbh’, to ‘because it’s fun’, to ‘It’s a form of performance and gender play’. They are interesting responses because they show on a personal level how much each one values make-up, as either a confidence boost or finding who you are. The last answer is intriguing because, to me, it’s a mask to boost up femininity in that woman’s life so to speak.

This does lead to another more poignant question: When some women wear make-up, are they masking themselves to their own insecurities, in that they can’t feel comfortable in their own skin? Also, just as importantly, is make-up just a mask itself?

Yes, I believe, because for a number of reasons. One is, perhaps some women feel incomplete without it, in that they don’t feel like themselves until they have completed their beauty regime, then they can face the day head on. That answers the second question as well to a point, because make-up helps complete the image of completion. Another reason is, quite obviously, confidence boosting. Having make-up that hides the winkles, blemishes and other “imperfections”, would make one feel better about themselves, and help attain some form of perfection, feeling “beautiful” in the process.

For the second question, again I do think make-up is just a mask, a tool to help ourselves, a delaying tactic. Make-up doesn’t really help to make us feel comfortable, if we really think about it. It just does its job of covering up for women to feel comfortable, a discord to mislead us into being confident and “beautiful”, and being in control of our appearance when really, and I don’t mean this in the wrong way, it gives women an easy out and not in control thanks to make-up companies, who ask for your attention to their products that will make you beautiful. It’s an invisible double-edged sword that hangs over your head.

This is the sign for Drogon to destroy the make-up companies.


I’ll bring men in here for a minute because some do wear make-up as well for different reasons, much like some women. Some may wear it because they’re transsexuals (though some may not), acting in a role that requires it, sport fans, wearing a costume, or because they feel like it. Of course, you don’t see that many make-up for men commercials, only for women. You could argue that is a gender divide, since in mainstream culture men tend not to have much reason for wearing make-up socially.

Socially is the point here, because it seems more directed toward women to have that confidence in products, while men perhaps need not worry so much, unless they want to use make-up. Historically through to today, there have men and women wearing tribal war paint on faces, like Native Americans, Maori, and popularly, though inaccurately, the Celts. Perhaps overtime or never, it become socially unacceptable for western men to wear make-up, for various reasons. That is my opinion until I can ratify that with fact, which would take a while.

Make-up then is a great powerful tool. It may give off a sense of false self-confidence, because it allows to cover and not really accept ourselves. We buy all sorts because we want to feel “beautiful”, “powerful”, and “in control”, yet we are not in control and powerful if we’re buying these products. That power is a false entity, which some women have given themselves over to, perhaps knowingly or not. As well, it might lead to a sort of physical Identity Crisis, a feeling that you need make-up to feel comfortable, to be yourself. Bear in mind again, that latter part is strictly opinion, I’m not a doctor/therapist. Though I can give out good hugs.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So keeping those two points in mind, we come to the final question: Attaining or Acceptance? Seems to be more of a complicated answer then we imagine.

Attaining perfection, when it comes to make-up, is a continuing process, requiring a lot of money and a lot of time. You’re in a circle of trying to make yourself “beautiful” because of a number of reasons, like I’ve stated above. Coming more sort of permanent issues, like plastic surgery, it’s more difficult to get inside because you can change your appearance as you see fit, be it breasts, bum, tummy tucking etc. It may build up your self-esteem that much more having something you want, but that self-esteem may also feel like false confidence, because having something done is giving yourself an easy-out. It’s just making yourself feel better for the sake of making yourself feel better.

Now, acceptance, is sort of an continuing process as well, but it a process of being aware too of thinking, ‘I look like crap…wait a minute, that’s a thought of thinking I’m ugly…I don’t think I look that bad actually’. That is one example of how you could go about as a process. Accepting yourself is a long process of course, and requires perhaps some mental work to tell yourself, ‘I don’t look that bad, my body is the way it is’. Having big boobs is perfectly fine, having long legs is perfectly fine, and having a small penis is perfectly fine. The thing is, you have what you have, and you can use that to your advantage how much you want.

Destination: Self


I do wonder however if there’s a point about compromise, in terms of a few points. What about first impressions, if for example you’re meeting a guy/girl/applying for a job, or something along those lines? Of course, keeping yourself clean and tidy is a given. If you looked smart from wearing professional clothes, or smart casual on a date, then that’s just important to choose what clothes to wear for yourself. Feel comfortable being yourself.

Another thing that is important to note is weight loss. If you personally want to lose weight for feeling better about yourself or some other reason, it’s perfectly fine too. I’d still think it wouldn’t mean you should think yourself as ugly if you had put on a little weight, I’d be inclined to think be careful with what you’re eating for future reference. Again, feeling comfortable with yourself.

It’s a sort of hypocritical line I think I’m seeing, because you do have a choice in changing yourself to a point, with the clothes you wear and keeping your weight down if you so choose. But it’s also a point to try and see where I’m coming from. If you think your body is not nice, that might be you telling yourself that because you’re feeling low about your body. Looking yourself in the mirror and thinking that you are beautiful regardless of having weight gain, may give you a little boost in self-esteem.

Meoooooooooooor!


Of course, men do have self-esteem issues too. I myself have felt awkward about my body, from such things like being hairy, having a sort of uni-brow, and being quite big myself. There was an article I did read on the internet, about how you could look yourself naked, yes, naked, in the mirror, then making notes on the bits you like, and the bits you don’t. It might be a point to look at yourself in the mirror and just say, while being aware of what’s floating in your mind, ‘I look beautiful’. That make sense?

Acceptance goes a long way in helping you realise that you are perfect anyway, regardless of the stigmas created by social perceptions. Attaining perfection is a short-term goal with long term implications to a point, a major one being you’ll never feel fully comfortable with yourself. That’s the main thing: Acceptance = Comfortable.



---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Beauty Standards then, realistically, is a load of bull. There’s no widely accepted term of what beautiful is, because the term “Beautiful” is really just a perception, one we all individually have, and even then it’s become more of a social conception, which may lead either gender to think, ‘I’m not beautiful’, or whatever pops into one’s head.

Acceptance is perhaps the best way to see that despite what social conceptions there are, they ultimately don’t matter. I don’t deny that there may be some long term balancing to work out for certain points like I’ve mentioned, and accepting yourself will take some time, but isn’t that better than trying to attain something over a long period, that at the end, means you’ll always be chasing it, unable to catch up?

Why shouldn’t Sharon Rooney…





…be less acceptable then Jennifer Lawrence?
 




---------------------------------------------------------------

That’s it for this week.

My final blog will be coming soon, so watch this space.

Randomizer out.