|
yes, the ideal female form has changed. however, there shouldn't be an ideal form at all. why is a skinny woman more socialy acceptible than a plump, or zaftig if you will. it is the idea that we have to conform with society's ideals, that we cant be what we are. now this will bake your noodle, do we think the skinny woman is hot because we truthfully think she is, or is it society that says "this is what is beautiful" that forms the bases for our opinion for what is hot? do we control the societal norm or does society control us? are we just bodies pluged into the matrix?
the lord of the flys trys to answer this. it justfies societal conditioning under the grounds that we will become animals without something telling us how to behave. rusoe, however believed that society is the machine that enslaves us, that naturaly we would live in paridise yet we hide our true self to conform with what society wants us to be. the quote "men are born free but walk in chains" is rusoe.
this is not just a feminist issue. everywhare we look we will find this evasive discrimination. we alll have to have the new motorola cell phone we see on 'the O.C." we work our entire lives saving to buy expensive cars, we buy shoes that hurt our feet, why? because we think they look good. we buy 1000$ suits to show off our recently liposucked arses.
is man truly "concieved in sin and born into coruption" or do we become corupt? in the christen theology, we are born with "origional sin". we need to be baptised to release us from it. so if we are born corrupt how can we truly be anything other. in the calvin/luther philosophy "good words will not bring salvation". intresting implementation on politics. should we blame the corupt politician for being corupt, when we infact are corupt ourselfs. or should we forgive his coruption (perhaps the biblical 7 times 70). maybe, we think of politics as corupt because we see the same coruption in ourselfs.
|