"Setzen Sie fort, die offenen Fenster zu passieren"

or Keep passing the open windows. That's where my blog title came from. I also may get it as a tattoo... someday. In typewriter print. On my side. It's just perfect. It's the perfect metaphor.

Makeup is NOT Antifeminist

Yes makeup, yes feminist.

*I would like to note that I wrote this geared towards women because of the feminist nature of the post. However, these truths are applied (often in reverse) to men who wear makeup as well. Men should not feel bad about interest in cosmetics, and no assumptions or judgments should be made concerning a man’s sexuality because of his use of makeup. I try to be sensitive to my male readers on this topic, because I acknowledge the flaws of our gender dichotomy. <3 to y’all.

I love makeup. I love makeup because it is art. It is art in the same way tattoos, piercings, and clothes are art for our bodies. It’s a form of artistry I’m not half-bad at. I appreciate cosmetic application as an expression of personality and a creative outlet. I like picking colors that look good together and finding the perfect shade of foundation for my skin. And I love helping other women do the same. I’m a Mary Kay consultant. I’m also a feminist.

And I know that’s hard for some people to grasp, because the way in which people use makeup can be antifeminist, and the way in which people interpret a woman’s use of makeup can be antifeminist. But makeup is never antifeminist. Some women do not wear makeup because they don’t like it. Just fine. Some women don’t wear it because they want to push social boundaries. Just fine. Some men and women are attracted to a certain style of makeup. Just fine. But makeup is often viewed in ways I find problematic. Following are my issues with makeup and my explanations of those.

What makeup is not:

1. A requirement for beauty.
2. A requirement for women.
3. An invitation for sex.

Further explanation:

1. Physical beauty has nothing to do with images on TV or in magazines. Physical beauty is something every single woman has. Some man or woman who is in touch with their sexuality and their wants and needs will find her attractive. Ugliness lies in behavior and isn’t present in physical appearance. I don’t believe in ugly. I do believe in unattractive. Something may be unattractive to me, which to me means that I find it unattractive; and not that it is by nature unattractive. Just because I do not find someone attractive does not mean they are inherently unattractive; someone else still might. Makeup isn’t what makes a woman beautiful. It can highlight the things she is most fond of. Maybe a woman really appreciates and loves the shape of her lips. If she wants to accentuate that, I take no issue with that. All that means to me is that she loves herself enough to have found a part of herself she is willing to show off. And the same goes for a woman without makeup! If she finds herself attractive without makeup on, then she need not wear it. I know I’m beautiful without makeup, but I still enjoy it. I wear makeup a lot, but I sometimes (more often lately) allow my face to go without. I need to remind myself that I’m beautiful without it, and I am confident enough to show it off without fear of how others feel about it. I find myself attractive, and if someone else does not, I’m not bothered by that. I don’t find everyone attractive either! It’s crazy to expect everyone to be attracted to me. A woman’s beauty comes from her attractiveness which is a combination of her personality and her physical appearance; which does not have to match societal standards of beauty to be beautiful. Damn the man.
2. It’s absurd to define a woman’s femininity by her interest in makeup. Perhaps she just feels more comfortable expressing her creativity elsewhere. A woman is a woman by choice, and if she does indeed identify as woman, then she is a woman. Her style of dress, her career, nor her interest in cosmetics can take that identity from her. I’m concerned that a woman can feel less of a woman because of another person’s idea of attractiveness. Often that idea of what is attractive is defined by images on TV (curse television), and I take issue with that because...
   
   
   A) images of women on TV are often achieved by unnatural means and are unattainable by nearly every other woman. It is unfair to expect that of women. Women should not be attempting to fit themselves into our cultural cookie cutter, because not everyone fits! Women should instead accept their appearance, although always aiming for health. But some women are healthy at a size 14 (this girl, for instance). Some women are healthy at a size 0. No body is the same. And the cookie cutter is getting more and more complicated. The cookie cutter has breasts that are not proportionate to the rest of the tiny body. The cookie cutter has skin that is darker than is healthy for the popular blonde hair often associated with it. Blondes tend to have fairer skin and are more prone to skin sensitivity and sunburn. This cookie cutter leaves women feeling hopeless and unfeminine. Women try to lose weight to look like those skinny women, but the weight first comes from their breasts! Women try to tan, but then age more rapidly—another natural process our culture is terrified of, as if looking younger means you aren’t actually approaching death. A woman in her natural state is attractive to someone as she is. There isn’t one way to be beautiful, and it’s ludicrous to think that because a woman doesn’t look like a Barbie—something nearly physically impossible to achieve without cosmetic surgery –she isn’t attractive! And,
   
   
   B) people who are attracted to those images are often only attracted to those images because they feel a social obligation to be, as if not finding Kim Kardashian attractive would make them less of a man. (I only say man because women are generally not expected by society to find Kim Kardashian attractive.) So, TV Heads (people who allow television to think for them) can only be attracted to them physically which is only half (although still important) of attraction. That means these people are experiencing a very shallow sense interest in these images, and they are assuming that they will be wholly attracted to a woman that displays that image in the “real world.” However, they are lacking the equally important part of attraction: personality. This leads to misinterpretations and unrealistic expectations. For instance, women with large breasts are often considered sexual—regardless of their personality—because our society encourages young men to find large breasts sexually attractive. Also, I’m bothered because I don’t think TV Heads are really in touch with their sexuality. Every single person attracted to women is not likely attracted to the same kind of woman, and vice versa. A person that lets their TV think for them is often not aware of what they do find attractive. They think that only certain physical bodies are supposed to be found attractive, and someone who finds a 300 pound woman attractive is wrong. But honestly, I believe that person is far more in touch with their sexuality and their physical needs, because they’ve come to that conclusion on their own. Society had nothing to do with that decision. I respect that.
3. I feel ridiculous that I have to say this at all. Guys and gals: just because a woman wears a style of makeup our culture tends to pair with sex doesn’t actually mean she wants to have sex. You may say, “Maddie! People don’t really think that!” But tell me if you’ve heard this: “Her makeup looks so slutty.” You have. And the word ‘slut’ is associated with sex! But be sure to check the etymology on that! When someone calls someone a slut because of the style of a woman’s makeup, they’re insinuating that woman wants to have sex because of that. Culturally, red lipstick and thick, black eyeliner are associated with prostitution and thus women who are initiating sex. But further consideration needs to be made: Perhaps she just likes the aesthetic appearance of that style of makeup. Is it not possible she just finds herself attractive in that style of makeup? Also, we should consider the likely possibility that she may feel pressured to present herself as a sexual being, because she may see herself as such. By calling her a slut, you’re confirming her belief that her purpose is to please men; nothing more. We need to be a lot more careful about our judgment of women—everyone has a story, and you don’t know everything! I get that it’s pretty much written in our DNA to judge people and categorize them, but we’ve come quite a long way since the days of a necessary, biological sense to protect ourselves from warring tribes, in order to carry on our race. In fact, we’re dangerously overpopulated. Seriously. It’s unnecessary. And people. Assuming a woman wants to have sex with you just because you think her makeup screams it, makes you look kind of desperate. And desperation + the flippant use of the word ‘slut,’ makes you a tool. Congratulations. You’re an asshole. Nice guys don’t really finish last.

In short. Makeup is a form of artistic expression. I don’t like for women to feel as though their beauty depends on it. And I don’t like women to feel as though their womanhood is unbreakably bonded to cosmetics. And I don’t like when a woman is labeled a slut because of the way she wears her makeup (or anything she does, really). But I love makeup. I’d appreciate if other feminists stopped harping on it.

But for the sake of you feisty women: I do think women should wear it less. I think they should experiment with their natural, physical beauty and learn to accept themselves as they are. They should look for things they’re proud of instead of focusing on what they’re ashamed of on their bodies. And the confidence to go without makeup is impressive, only because of our culture’s emphasis on it. Try it out for a while every now and then, just to remind yourself of how beautiful you are, and to get in touch with why you’re really putting that face on in the morning.

No makeup, no big deal.

Breasts, Bodies, and Shame oh, my.

Everyone loves breasts. And why not? They are the earliest source of nutrition and they are an early distinguish-er between our society's differentiation between men and women (something I intend to discuss at some point, promise; but if I tried to do that in this post, this post would surely never end). But shame? Women are ashamed when their breasts are "too big," or "too small." They're ashamed of the size and shape of their nipples and the coloring of their areolas. Because this is a factor that differentiates men from women, we tend to associate them closely with sexuality. Since we live in a patriarchal society, women are raised with a deep awareness of their sexual role and the standards of beauty promoted by our culture, as attraction is influenced by those standards.

But women are made differently because evolutionarily, different body types served different purposes. My big butt and strong legs were designed to survive some ice age. Unfortunately, I don't live in an ice age. I live in the United States in the 21st century. But I know my body type served a very important purpose. The genes that make me the size 14 I am now, are the same genes that were important enough to survive generations and generations of big-assed women. I know that my body type doesn't fit into our culture's cookie-cutter standards (nearly impossible to fit into, women), but I know that regardless, there are men and women attracted to the body I have been blessed with.

It is an erroneous myth that the cultural standard of beauty is actually what is attractive to everyone. For instance, I'm not attracted to the fit, masculine, athletic man that fits our cultural cookie cutter. And I made my way through high school thinking that because I didn't fit the cultural cookie cutter shaped for women, that I would not be found attractive. In college, around so many more different men and women from so many different cultures, I've found that my big ass and thick thighs are very attractive to the right person.

What about health? you ask. I'll call myself out: I'm a pretty darn healthy size 14. I am active and I eat a balanced, if not perfect diet. I don't drink soda or eat red meat. I probably consume too much sugar and caffeine, but I try to burn those calories off and to limit my caffeine intake to morning hours. Human bodies weren't created with cars and McDonald's in mind, so we have to find ways to keep ourselves active to make up for these new factors. But "dieting" is scary business. I don't diet. Everyone has a diet. That's just what you eat. But I don't really go on diets. I cut things out of my diet I feel I can stand to lose if I find them unhealthy. However, if I find myself unhappy because I'm turning down food or drink I really want, then I readjust.

Feeling deprived doesn't make for a successful weight-loss plan. You get tired of that really quickly. I've found, though, that if I cut certain foods I (again) can stand to lose, then I'm not interested in them after a while. Once I got over the pop thing, not even Diet Coke sounded appetizing. Once I got past bacon, meat kind of grossed me out. And now I prefer soy milk, I prefer fiber cereals, and I'm happier if I finish two or more water bottles a day. But none of that bothers me. I don't feel like I'm missing out. If I want a piece of cake, I'm going to eat it. If a chai latte sounds super good, then I'm going to get one. Health is only a matter of being healthy. Not thin. Big difference. It's about being strong enough to support your joints, fit enough to walk a flight of stairs without wheezing, and happy with yourself and your decisions. I need to kick my own butt sometimes to get out of bed and do something, but I do it because it makes me happy. Period.

Back to breasts. Your boobs are as big or small as they're supposed to be. If your breasts cause you physical pain, or you don't identify with the feminine nature of your body, then that's something to look into. Your body should never hold you back from activity, and no one should feel trapped in a societal construction of gender. But they're yours. Own them. It is not society's job to tell you how to feel about them. Too big=sex object? Well shoot. How dare you... have the boobs you were born with? Sheesh. Put those away. :P  Too small... for what?

It's your business what you do with your body. I'm not really in the business of telling people what to do. It just bothers me how blindly we allow those cookie cutters to make decisions about beauty for us. You have your own eyes, your own minds, your own bodies to help you make decisions about what is attractive to you. And there's no need to change yourself to make yourself attractive. Because someone who is in touch with their own wants and needs may be looking for someone just like you.

So. Be healthy. Be happy. And damn the man. You can make your own decisions.

Peace .

Get it girl

Blogging

I love the blogging community. I love everything it stands for and the environment it provides. I love that blogs prove to the world that the internet can give the world substance--rather than emptiness. When I first started blogging, when I was 14 (choke-gasp), I wanted a place to express my Self. <--that's on purpose Nazis. When I was little, I'd always wanted a website. Now I know that's way too much work for me, and I'm not actually that technologically proficient. But a blog? I can blog. Aunt Betsy blogs. Kyle blogs. (I'm not putting my other friends because you have neglected it.) And I've even come across people I like by reading. Cypress. The Bloggess. This is reading. It's informational. It's reflective. It's art. It's humor. It's everything social networks aren't giving us. Don't get me wrong. I love Facebook and Twitter (too much). But it serves a specific purpose for me, and does not fulfill my need to observe and create art.

Let your past be the sound of your feet upon the ground.

Here comes some *word vomit:

fun. is back. And everyone else knows who they are. Cool. Not like I knew them years before you all did. Nice of you all to make fun of my music until everyone else started to like it. Just saying. Happens all the time. Jason Mraz, John Mayer, Lily Allen, Sia, Ray Lamontagne, Kate Nash, and I liked RATM WAAAAAY before their comeback with the cool (douche) boys in my high school senior class. My music is "weird" until a song ends up on the radio, then it's "Such a good song!" What does that say about our culture? This is actually kind of interesting to me--annoying, yeah, but still interesting.

I'm pretty sure Emma said, "Don't feel stupid if you don't like what everyone else pretends to love." She's a stinking genius, really, and not just because she's Hermione.

I want to know why it is that people are afraid to like what is a little different. I mean, obviously because people will give them the shit I always got about it. But I always knew my music was good. I always knew that while what I heard on the radio was fun and sometimes even good, what I found through music enthusiasts, good magazines, and interesting people was better. If I can write a paper on a piece of music, then it's worth listening to. If it reflects nothing beyond the lyrics--a shallow message--then I'm just not interested. That's good dancing music, good driving music. That's all. And there's nothing wrong with that. Bubblegum Pop is an art all its own, but I wouldn't call it good music.

And here's the rub: I have really cool friends, who aren't shallow (and I don't always use that negatively--only to mean a lack of depth). They have a lot to them. But they are still trapped in this endless, blinded view of what's "cool." I've never really cared. When it came to music, anyway. I guess I fall short of individuality in other areas. But music is one thing I hold dear to me. I'm a musician. I'm a singer. And I'm not going to sing some shit (sorry!) that doesn't make me work, that uses no range, that does nothing interesting with meter or key or rhythm. Jeez. Those people are famous because they're pretty and can carry a tune. Again. An art all its own. But not good music.

And rapping. Smh. There are good rappers. They're poets. They can communicate feelings, ideas, and beliefs through their words. Every word contributes to the message. There will be metaphors (duh, it's poetry) but they're carefully considered. They're not just kind of witty to reel the oblivious audience back in. *Cough, cough Eminem. Holla if you hear me, poets*
Rapping is a really, really cool form of expression that's made its way to kids who have no other way to express themselves. But the little white girls from rural Illinois and Indiana nodding their heads to gangster rap should perhaps take a look at why.

Why is something only cool when everyone else thinks it's cool? Who decides this? Why isn't something cool by its own right? But I guess I do the same thing. I just like the music that people I think are cool like. And if you're the kind of person that finds people that listen to that music cool, then that's what you'll listen to. Whatever. But seriously, from a cultural perspective, I want to know why we have this phenomenon. Why is it that Sperry's which have been around forever are just now catching on? Or why big glasses, which have been a big joke for years, are cool now? Why do we have to wait for other people to think things are cool to think it ourselves????????

I've always been kind of a weirdo. I know that. But in a different group of people, I'm not all that weird at all. In people from more diverse areas, with more liberal values, with an interest in philosophy, and a respect for theology, and who like poetry and canon literature. Those people don't think I'm weird at all. But people who read romance novels, watch reality TV, have more conservative values, and those who are uncomfortable learning about different theologies or interacting with different cultures... those people have always found me a little weird. "Quirky," in Drew's words. That was a nicer way to put it. I have a respect for those people. That is their culture. But I was kind of living in a counter-culture to that in which I was raised. Marshall's culture was contrary to mine, which is kind of an interesting concept.

Culture isn't geographical.

Not anymore. Not with worldwide communication and with long-distance travel. Cars. Planes. So I managed to live in one culture: Marshall, but I represented a different culture: 1111 ____ Street. It's kind of cool from a theoretical standpoint, but in practice it was really hard on me. I was sometimes mean about that culture just because I was fighting so hard to preserve mine. Now I know there's nothing wrong with their way of life. It's just different than mine. It took some space for me to come to that conclusion, though. I needed to leave a while. But now I appreciate it for what it is. I don't want to live here again. But I don't hate it; I just don't fit in.

Okay. I'm going to try to end Word Vomit posts with a little bit of a wrap-up so you or I can make sense of this mess:

Wrap-Up in 3:

1) I'm a music snob because I'm a musician, and my tastes don't usually reflect popular music, although I like it for shallow entertainment. (Again, I don't use shallow like ya'll do. I use it to mean simply lack of depth.) Sometimes I get bitter when people make fun of my music. I know in time other people will start to like it, and then I'll get bitter all over again. I'm a pretty bitter person.

2) I am fascinated by herd mentality. I want to know what popular tastes show us about our society. How does something catch on? Should artists stay true to their style of music? Or should they meet popular demand? It's interesting stuff--fear of straying from the norm.

3) Culture is not geographical. I was my own culture within a culture to which I didn't belong. No culture is wrong or right. They're socially constructed; not innate, which people assume, which makes accepting different ways of life so hard for some.

*Word Vomit: train of thought writing, restricted to line-editing, and sometimes hard to follow. Sorry bout that. But not that much. Because I still post it.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.

If a picture can speak a thousand words, then what is to be said for a thousand words? I speak and I speak and I speak... and nothing is said to those who don't understand me. And of a picture--much is to be said--said--for the value of of its communicative value. It communicates to those who understand it. Music, dance, theatre...

all for the sake of communication. To share an idea, a concern, a feeling that cannot otherwise be expressed. Words do for me what a picture does for some. A picture does for me what words can do for some. Anything can reach anyone if they choose to seek meaning. Art is Meaning. And Meaning is Message.

NOTE: Hypocrite literally means behind the mask. Two masked figures representing hypocrisy, and the knives in reference to Caesar. "Back-stabber" for real, friends. I liked it. I don't know whose it is. If you find out, let me know, please.