à la Mode St. » philosophy

Posts tagged ‘philosophy’

Woman of a Thousand Faces

December 12th, 2012

eleanorparker1

Fifties actress Eleanor Parker, most known for her role in The Sound of Music as the baroness, was praised for her on-screen versatility and was rightfully dubbed “Woman of a Thousand Faces” by her biographer Doug McClelland. Look through the photos of her in each of these collages… amazing! Some people think that “ordinary” or “common-looking” people can sometimes look indistinguishable from one another, because they don’t stand out from the crowd. When you think about it however, if beauty is symmetry, isn’t that more conventional? To me, a runway model looks indistinguishable from the model next to her if I take off my contacts. I had personally been more attracted to seeing a charming flaw in a potential mate, because physical flaws contribute to giving someone a personality.

eleanorparker2

I’m not trying to make you think that Eleanor is in any way ordinary looking. Oh, that woman was a knock out. I would like to point out how we women love changing ourselves out of boredom—hair, nails, clothes, you name it. Eleanor is definitely an inspiration! I myself have changed clothing styles significantly from one phase of my life to another. I used to like wearing cropped t-shirts and shorts in the 90s, dark clothes during my metal and goth punk days in middle school, and bubble gum pop skimpy clothing late middle school to early high school. In college, I was into Victorian/Rococo styles a lot because I was inspired by my fashionable Russian professor. My latest obvious vice was probably my drastic hair color changes. I look so different every few years, I cringe when I see an old photo of me. Do you feel the same about yourself?

eleanorparker3

As much as some men don’t understand why we do it (why we pack a ton of clothes to pick from on a trip, why we do makeovers), they do admit that they like variations here and there. If you’re in a committed relationship with your man of course, you don’t want that change to happen from one woman to another! So the best that we can do to keep him guessing and interested is to do what you’ve always enjoyed any way! Do it to make yourself feel confident with your own beauty without going extreme. Extreme might have different thresholds for each person, however. For some, heavy makeup is a no-no. That is not really what I think, because makeup is my best friend. For me, it might just be cosmetic surgery. That is only because 1) I think it’s not very safe depending on the severity of the operation, and 2) if I start, I might not get fully satisfied with myself and be totally dependent on getting more done. We all need to love the closest to our natural selves as we can, because only then (and in my opinion, along with holding a solid belief in at least something worthwhile to live by or for) can we truly be fulfilled.

Have fun! Put on a fashion show in front of the mirror, wear heels at home from time to time, wear sexy underwear underneath whatever you wear, wear makeup and fragrance at home even when no one is around, treat yourself to a spa. Love yourself, and as much as you can, try not to think you that you need something to make you happy or beautiful—that includes attention or the latest MAC palette . If it comes, then it comes. If not, stay happy and believe that you’re “beautifully and wonderfully made” whether someone is looking or not. Only you can make yourself believe that—though your significant other can help you, he just can’t be the reason for your self-appreciation.

What fun things do you like to about change about yourself?

War on Women: What Would Women Do?

October 31st, 2012

So Superstorm Sandy (newscasters should’ve just continued referring to it as “Frankenstorm!”) is almost over, and election campaigning will soon be back on track. (Not to gloss over Sandy—my thoughts and prayers go out to those who were in its path and were hurt or negatively affected by it.) How do you all feel about the phrase “war on women” being tossed around? Do you feel that politicians might just be using this idea as bait to get more women voters? If you consider yourself a well-informed feminist, would you vote for a candidate primarily based on social, economic, or foreign policy issues?

I personally do not like politics for politics sake, and to use my gender as a weapon for campaigning sickens me the worst. First of all, women are part of the collective human race—the same goes for every ethnic background. To decline a person from being chosen for employment primarily based on gender or race is unjust. On the flip side, to promote a person primarily based on their gender or race is also unjust. Considering that, how do you think women are being attacked from an economic standpoint—that is, if you even believe this discrimination still exists in our country?

The second reason why I hate the appeals toward women as part of a political campaign is that I care about mostly the same things men care or should care about when choosing a presidential candidate. To say anything else would be categorizing me as a separate entity not equal to men. As a woman, I should care about the economy for the future of my children and theirs as much as my husband cares about the economy to support his immediate family. To lure me in with women-only ads belittles my intelligence, leading me to believe you think this is the only—if not the primary arena I’m concerned with. For instance, these ads say that abortion is a women’s-only issue. When has it been possible to conceive without a man (or his seed) involved?

Why is it that Planned Parenthood seems to be the only place they make you think you can get affordable “women’s services,” excluding abortion? I don’t use them, but I was able to get my BCPs for $9/mo (with no insurance)! Now that I have good insurance that my husband and I picked out, I get them for free. That’s about the same deal as Planned Parenthood, if not better.

My dear fellow women, I do not need to tell you what you must do. All I want to warn you is that your world should not be limited to what they show you in a political ad. Some politicians will bait you by scaring you, making you mad, or making you feel like a victim. That is because these politicians rely on our estrogen-fueled emotions, and you need to prove that you can be as logical as men when making rational decisions. That kind of thinking, as well as our abilities, should determine our employment and our salaries—not because we are women. If your being hired is just because of your gender (or race), then you are merely part of a quota that needed to be filled.

My husband and I are not employed, but we are now proud small business owners—thank God for capitalism! Part of the reason why we felt a need to start a business together was because of his having been laid off by his job. Some of the people who weren’t laid off were arguably less qualified, but they were also definitely minorities. Maybe the company should’ve taken note that he was married to a then-jobless student minority before laying him off. I don’t need the government to make special arrangements to force employers to hire me even if I am a slacker or somehow less qualified than other applicants. I hope you get my point, despite my harsh tone.

Some time ago, during the height of my involvement with college, I used to buy into Marxist ideals. I have to say, they were always just ideals and never a plausible reality to me. Milton Friedman’s Capitalism and Freedom won me over. It is scary to see an America unfolding into a communist country, without the majority of its people even realizing it. A tactful politician can mask the ugliest thing you can think of and make you eat it up like cake.

I think the only war on women that exists (at least in the coming election) is the way that politicians make you think there is one and use it to their advantage. It’s like somebody’s trying to hypnotize us by waving pretty pearl necklaces in our faces, distracting us from all other issues and covering up huge past and pres(id)ent blunders.

You might not believe me if I say that I am not writing this politically to support a specific candidate. You’re partially right. I do know who I want to win (and so should you by now, being so close to election day). However, writing for women and as a woman, I want to preserve the integrity of our women as much as I can by telling you not to vote for a candidate because of our women’s issues. Our issues may be very important, but wise people (and even crafty terrorists like Bin Laden) know that to destroy a nation’s economy is to destroy a nation completely.

Cindy’s Centerfolds

November 14th, 2011

Cindy Sherman is an American photographer who is currently based in New York and whose most famous work involves conceptual photography. Besides her multiple-persona-style-type self portraits in all their glorious absurdness, I like her best for her centerfold photography. No, I haven’t gone out of my mind.

Sherman is perhaps most noted for her Centerfold Series from 1981. Without leaving any metallic taste in her mouth, the irony in portraying her fully dressed body (as if showing the aftermath of being raped) in centerfold speaks volumes.

“In content I wanted a man opening up the magazine to suddenly look at it with an expectation of something lascivious and then feel like the violator that they would be. Looking at this woman who is perhaps a victim. I didn’t think of them as victims at the time… But I suppose… Obviously I’m trying to make someone feel bad for having a certain expectation.” – Cindy Sherman

Above is the photo of Cindy’s that caught my eye first. It also happens to be the most expensive photograph in the world—it sold for $3,890,500 at a Christie’s auction. You know what? Modesty is money… or gold… whatever sounds better.

If you plan on looking at Sherman’s other series, I must warn you that some of them are not for the faint of heart. The sexuality series might be a bit offensive to some, so if you want to spare your eyes from Christmas on Mars type of images (I’m sure there is a better movie to explain this, but I really am not into genitalia art), I’d stay away from that particular one. I must say, I must applaud her for this very bold and clever endeavor. Although she doesn’t consider herself a feminist or a spiritual person (as far as I know), I find her advancement against women’s objectivity attractive.

The other day I was flipping through (sealed) vintage magazines of all kinds at our local vintage treasure trove, and it’s incredible to see how drastically different the pre-war Playboy magazine covers were in comparison to today’s. I saw nothing but somewhat modest clothes on the cover (of course, that is always subjective). I really hate to think about what adult entertainment is going to be like in the future. “Adult” is just a euphemism used by the sex industry to justify what kind of audience X-rated material is intended for—that’s most of us I presume. Child pornography then is a euphemistic oxymoron (with emphasis on the second half of the latter word).

I didn’t realize how strongly didactic photography could be until Sherman came along. The trendier, flashier, and more digital photography has become, the more it has begun to leave a bad taste in my mouth. For me, photography has to be more than just the irony of capturing the still “beauty” of life while manipulating it, or enhancing reality to make it attractive to an agreeable majority. Truth be told, we are all guilty of distorting our own realities, of wanting to make ourselves or anything that reflects us better than our actual selves. When does it become unhealthy or even just plain commercial? I think that if your goals are noble and truly (not in an amoral sense) benefit more than just yourself (like in Sherman’s case), then a different projection of yourself is justifiably art in action.

Mothers of the Same Fate: Plath & Sexton

September 28th, 2011

Well, I’ve disappeared again. It seems like I have been opening my posts with the same “apology” (almost as pathetic as Qwikster), but I’ve learned so much while I was away. I have been burying myself in tons of life-shaking literature that I couldn’t get away from, and I’m happy to share with you what I have picked up.

I withdrew myself some time ago from continuing to read the Bell Jar, a semi-autobiography by Sylvia Plath, because it hurt me so darn much to read it. It was like revisiting my nightmares—nightmares that more often than not creep into my waking life and torment me. Some people can read a piece of literature for the sheer enjoyment of it, observing a fictional account of a life from a distance. This novel in particular, however, grabbed a familiar, stale knife from my quiet kitchen and insidiously stabbed me with it. It is a funny feeling, however, to want it but at the same time hate it. Plath is like crack to my brain, but I’m making the best out of my experience with her writing by using this whole personal attraction to tragedy for good.

It was just recently that I was introduced more formally to Plath’s friend Anne Sexton. Sylvia and Anne were both literature classmates, confessional feminist poets of the late 50s to early 60s, mothers of two children, and sadly, victims of the same tragic fate. For the style enthusiasts, Sylvia was a guest editor in 1953 at a prestigious fashion magazine called Mademoiselle (later bought by Glamour‘s publishing company, Condé Nas), and Anne was a model for a time. For those unfamiliar with either Plath or Sexton’s work, the themes of their poetry revolve around death or suicide, madness, hate or anger, and depression. It was interesting to read a particular poem from each woman centered on the joy of having children.

Plath wrote a poem called “Child” that may have been about her son Nicholas or daughter Frieda, while Sexton wrote “Little Girl, My String Bean, My Lovely Woman” about her daughter Linda. These two poems are not only similar in topic—they are also surprisingly off-theme and mostly delightful. We’ve all heard people sometimes say that children are glue to a troubled marriage. In this situation, for a short but significant time, children helped alleviate these women’s insanity. How marvelous was it that even for a moment in time, these women felt immense joy in their children despite their concurrent turmoil? It’s beautiful. Sadly, the women did not endure their hardships. Sylvia still separated from her husband, and she and Anne still eventually gassed themselves to death. Even when Sylvia “protected” her children from the gas by keeping them in another secure room, her protection only lasted for so long. Her children grew up not having the comfort of a mother and not having a good example to live (or die) by. Eventually, her son committed suicide himself in 2009, and her daughter got divorced three times. The mistress that Sylvia’s husband was with also took her life along with her child a few years after Sylvia died.

You can call these occurrences a genetic disorder or a venomous curse—you decide. What I was more interested in hearing about is how children can affect someone’s life—in a marriage situation or not. Do you have children or plan to have them? Why or why not? How have children changed your perspective in life when times were rough?

Dealing with Defeat & My Struggles with the Good Fight

July 25th, 2011

Disclaimer: This post has nothing to do with my college final project, but I just thought that was an appropriate graphic to accompany this post.

It’s seems so tragic to think that a lot of us women view beauty as our crown of glory—the thing that dictates our sense of value and worth. It’s interesting to think that even the most beautiful women feel insecure because they know that their beauty doesn’t last forever and is also surrounded by constant competition. Even when beauty is said to be subjective, you can’t deny the fact that the majority of people can come to a consensus as to what is beautiful and what is not. There comes a point when you’re just hit by reality, when mantras and self-help books stop uplifting your spirits, and you’re left feeling helpless, defeated by the world, and devoid of worth.

This is the kind of feeling I’ve been struggling with my whole life, and not surprisingly, many others go through the same thing. I’ve gotten a lot better since my teenage years. Wearing sexy clothes and involving myself in the beach and clubbing culture helped my self-esteem temporarily, but it also made me feel like I was only going to be happy if I were sought after for my appearance. I was rather spoiled by it. I got so used to getting compliments about my appearance that if I didn’t get any, I’d feel extremely unhappy. I got compliments left and right from different men, but I only really wanted to be truly appreciated by one.

When I got married, there began the switch in my priorities. I only wanted to please one man, and compliments from others stopped mattering. I used to bathe in and revisit the moments when other people praised me, but I am not that kind of person anymore. I don’t even really feel good about some other guy clearly expressing his approval of me even publicly and in front of my husband, which has happened a few times.

Because my source for my sense of worth has been consolidated to getting the approval of only one man, I get shattered by the fact that my husband still gets tempted by images of other women regardless of how giving I am and how much I keep up with my appearance. I sometimes reminisce about the times I used to wear sexy clothes with a group of girls when we went out or the times that I used to dance hula, which lasted for two years, all to make myself feel better (or worse), however temporarily—when I feel like I’m not good enough for my husband. Those things just never do it. They just help to keep my mind away from issues for a while, but they don’t really alter my mind for the better.

The sad reality is that everyone gets tempted regardless of how good they have it with their spouses or any other type of relationship. Some give in a little and then hold back, and some give in more and more and do not hold back. To hold back at all from temptation is a good thing. Just because temptation creeps up, it doesn’t mean the person experiencing it has done something unworthy of forgiveness and trust. However, I’ve held myself up to an impossible standard, a Utopian dream that was never meant to be and could never be a reality—a world virtually without sin, especially within my home. Even God would laugh at me for thinking that this is possible.

It’s extremely hard for me to keep writing about modesty and sexual purity with my defeatist and existentialist tendencies. The automatic response for me when I get faced with the overwhelming display of sexuality all around is my wishing to be dead or to just completely give in to sin. Neither of those thoughts are healthy or helpful in any way. I really can’t help feeling so downtrodden when I know there’s really nothing I can do to stop everything that is wrong in this world. It’s just not possible to completely eradicate everything that is bad, and I certainly shouldn’t feel defeated if I can’t stop an impossible thing. I shouldn’t feel like the whole world’s burden is on me or feel like I am somewhat responsible for cleaning up the mess. This seems to happen when God is taken out of the “moral” picture, which is a dangerous thing, because that can never work. That also doesn’t mean, however, that I shouldn’t try to change the things that can be changed—myself for instance, or a few people who might be open to change. I guess that’s why this blog has stuck around.

“A utopia is a dystopia forced upon you by a madman. ”
– Sam J. Lundwall, from Utopia – Dystopia: Nedslag i framtidens politiska historia

Blut ist nicht dicker als Wasser (Blood is not thicker than water)

July 17th, 2011

There are few things that people tend to say about their families. Some of us say we have families and are more than comfortable with them; some of us really believe that we have none (but we all know that’s unlikely because distant relatives are family too), and some of us just willfully don’t want to have anything to do with our own families. The latter seems harsh, but once you get to know the reasons behind some of our cold and distant attitudes toward familial ties, the more you realize that the meaning behind the saying “blood is thicker than water” doesn’t always ring true in every relationship. It sure is the best scenario to have your relationship with your family be the strongest. There’s always that instant biological bond—that familiarity since birth that no one else will have with you besides your own blood. However, how many times have you heard of legitimately abusive fathers, apathetic mothers, and… evil twins? Unfortunately for some of us, families are not always our strongest ally.

This realization however does not make friends, colleagues, and coworkers immediately more akin to you, unless you testify as such. There lies the danger in generalization. That is why up until a certain point in my life, I’ve come to take the ever popular maxim blut ist dicker als Wasser (the origin is German) as something very relative and only true to some. Whenever I talk about my own relatives, it somehow shames me to freely express my hurts and disappointments with them. I think that is because somehow, somewhere, some smarty pants thought of writing about how broken families produce unstable people, and enough people bought into that lie. So whenever a poor soul expresses their being hurt for years by their family, the listening party despises the victim for not being right with their family and pities them. I must say, though, that in any kind of relationship, we all must work very hard and patiently to get it right. The loving effort must be there, and one must always be willing to forgive and reconcile with a repentant relative. However, some things are beyond our control, and acts of reconciliation aren’t perceived.

I’ve got way too many hurts from my own family to even know how to begin sharing them. I just know that I’ve done my part to love them. I’ve stopped pursuing them not because I’m emotionally exhausted but because I’ve done what I could, and it’s up to them to change their ways. What I’m saying probably sounds very common, but I think what is uncommon for a lot of people is the ability to partake in peaceful confrontation. Hiding from people to avoid confrontation or refusing to even hear what they have to say does not solve anything and only makes things worse. We’ve all got some sense of pride, and withholding someone from trying to be on good terms with you by avoiding them is feeding power to that monstrous pride. This action has little or nothing to do with the gravity of that person’s fault and more to do with one’s own greed. I have to admit that when I refuse to talk to someone because of what that person did to me, I feel somewhat powerful by punishing that person through shutting them out and remaining silent. Nobody who is willing and actively pursuing the ability to make amends deserves that kind of punishment. Once you refuse to talk to the person confronting you to talk things out, you immediately become at fault for prolonging the problem and making it worse. Sadly, very seldom do people really understand this. I tend to brush this valuable piece of conflict resolution off at times myself, because it is easier to just not do anything.

If you placed me right next to my family for examination, you’d also be able to tell that I’m an apple that fell far from the tree—another expression turned around. Probably the only thing that really stands out as a similarity is the way we all look. I fortunately don’t act, speak, or think like they. It’s really odd.

I thought it was kind of interesting that I took these photos in my family’s old house as I was visiting about a month ago (as you can see, it is empty and ready to be moved into by the next owner). Some of their stuff is still there, like that lamp and the vintage collage of my grandparents and their kids you can see in every reflection.

Well, there you have it. This post really cannot have a proper ending without the help of my family doing their part to fix the problem. I’m just going to leave this like an open-ended European movie, with the underlying theme of proper confrontation and communication as its main message. I’m just waiting for a deux ex machina…

What I Wore: Nine West pumps, a vintage red dress (label was torn) that I wore as a blouse, Talbots skirt

Salt & Light: Apply to Clothing

May 20th, 2011

This post was originally for a guest post on Jesus Couture’s Web site, but it seems like they’re probably going to take an ungodly amount of time to fix their blog, so I decided to put this up here. It was still nice of them to ask me to write for them, though. I really appreciate the thought. Here goes…

I thought I’d talk about clothing within the church today. Since I assume that a good number of you are Christians reading this, I feel the need to address this very issue—sadly, it has been an issue. I’m sure that you recall that we are called to be the “salt and light” of the earth, which means we are to be set apart from sin and from the world. From what I have been seeing, it seems like a lot of us do not look at all different from the rest of the world.

What I really mean by this is that we dress like everyone else does, we see the same kinds of movies and TV shows without filter, talk the same gossipy talk, walk the same catwalk, etc. I don’t really see any harm in indulging in a lot of secular things—don’t get me wrong! I love my rock music, art films, and French coutouriers as long, as they don’t incite lustful thoughts for my husband or me. However, we should know our boundaries. We can still be part of this world but not of it, according to John 17 and Romans 12:2.

They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. -John 17:16

Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing, and perfect will. -Romans 12:2

I think the problem with a lot of churches now is that we tend to want to adapt to our surroundings to be more inviting to others—this to a fault. To an extent, this is okay. We do need to be inviting. When a church becomes too gimmicky and hip while watering down the message, presumably to “dumb it down” for people they assume would not get the Bible, it is an example of giving in to the world. God’s Word should be straightforward enough for people to understand. This is something that we need to trust Him to take care of.

As far as clothing goes in church, I believe that we women should not be wearing the blouse with the plunging neckline, the mini skirt, or the tight jeans that most every other woman we come across is wearing. Christian men, including pastors and husbands, have confessed about lusting after women, both single and married, in their church. It is true that lust can be triggered by anything regardless of clothing, but there are some types of clothing that invoke this much stronger than others and as a direct cause right then and there. We can assume that men are trying their best to not lust after us, but we have the other half of the equation to think about, which is to try to help them (and ourselves, really) to not think of us (ourselves) as objects of lust. Lust isn’t admiration. It’s far more dangerous than that. It ruins lives and marriages, and it can start for a man from just seeing an inappropriately dressed woman in church and perhaps lead up to his seeking out and viewing pornography. Again, it’s a 2-way street. The man can call upon God and the power of Christ to renew his mind after seeing something that entices him, but the initial thought was presented by a care-free (careless?) christian woman.

If lust were admiration, then lust would care about or respect the person it is admiring. Lust, however, isn’t like that at all. It selfishly partakes of whatever is available then moves on to another (usually more desirable or intense) object of lust. What kind of relationship would it be if lust were the basis of attraction? Temporary and fake.

Most of the things that I write about here are related to personal experience. I was not always a believer in modesty’s importance to the Christian faith. In fact, I walked the catwalk and even talked the gossipy talk just like every other woman in the world, and the main difference was that I believed in Jesus Christ. I was off to a good start. Jesus is the central message behind Christianity. However, I didn’t realize how much my clothing was a stumbling block to people who wanted to believe in Jesus or who already believed in Him. I came to realize that my clothes and some of the other girls’ clothes were distracting men from being pure in thought and serving God with a clean mind and spirit. The other girls in church and I were not helping these men with purity and doing our part of concealing our cleavage and thighs. I had to put God first and go against my natural inclination to dress to attract without any real boundaries.

I know it’s not fun to talk about reality sometimes, but not one good thing ever really happens when we wear clothing that doesn’t conceal sexually enticing areas. Clothing like that makes us feel good, but so does sin. However, modest clothing doesn’t have to be boring and awkward. I really hated and still hate unflattering clothing, but modest clothing can be attractive (though not necessarily designed to attract/distract) without being sexual. Some of the stuff I have on my blog includes photos of what some other girls and I look up to wear that might hopefully give you some inspiration.

If our God is the God of all beauty and creation, then why do you think you have to be frumpy to be modest?