Farewell?

Jennifer Lopez. I have loved her ever since Selena.

But I have to admit, she's not exactly a healthy role model. I mean, she's not someone I would want my daughter to emulate.



She seems very down-to-earth in interviews, but I have to wonder about a mom in her forties who does a photo shoot like this for publicity. I really hope I'm not coming off as judgmental here--I have just realized how important it is for me to examine what or who I follow in order to have integrity as the author and promoter of this blog. I'm using her as an example, but I could just as easily be talking about Madonna. Or Cher. Or etc., etc., etc.

Performers like Jennifer Lopez are in the entertainment business. They do whatever it takes to sell records. As a listener, I fund their message. And most often, their message is that sex sells and women are valued for their sexual potential. Sex appeal is even valued over motherhood:


(http://www.lhrtimes.com/2013/01/18/jennifer-lopez-would-like-to-have-more-children-134793/)

So I am faced with a dilemma: I love to sing and dance to her music. I mean, I really love it. But, her message gets into my head and my soul through the lyrics, the beat, the dance moves, the video--it's all affecting how I see myself and define beauty, whether I want to admit it or not.

So, do I totally ban her from my playlist? Or do I listen to my favorite songs once in awhile but don't endorse the videos? Or...do I chill out and try not to overthink this?

Some days I am convinced that it's fine to listen to popular radio now and then. I tell myself I really like the beat (which I do so much that I can't drive my car straight if I have dance music on) and that the music is not a problem for me. Other days I feel slimy listening to the radio, as if my soul were twerking off in a dark, sweaty club.

The problem with trying to stay true to the message of this blog is that cultural definitions of beauty and its enmeshment with sex are so pervasive that I would have to make some radical lifestyle changes in order to make any real stand. I couldn't listen to the radio, I would have to totally clean up my Spotify playlists and find new music to clean the house to, and I definitely couldn't go to Zumba. Which would suck.

When does "just feeling good" about music and developing some confidence as a living-room-only dancer cross over into the dark territory of complicity in the world's efforts to taint true beauty and keep women in subordinate citizenship through sexual objectification and enslavement?!

Sorry J-Lo, you might have to go.

I know our culture is hostile to any message that preaches radical lifestyle change (unless it's a diet), but I really think the benefits of a strict "no sex object" diet from my entertainment intake are worth examining, at least as this blog's creator.

What do you think? Am I being a little over-the-top, or is this just what the doctor ordered for the upcoming generation?

Beauty Redefined?

A couple months ago I told a friend about my blog. When I told him what it was called, he said "I don't know if you can really redefine beauty". I defended myself by saying that technically you can't, but culturally speaking we need to do away with the connotations attached to the word "beauty".

But it did get me thinking.

If you look up the word "beauty" in the Merriam Webster dictionary, it reads: "the quality or aggregate of qualities in a person or thing that gives pleasure to the senses or pleasurably exalts the mind or spirit".

So no, in that sense you cannot redefine beauty. As the adage goes, it takes a different form in the eye of every beholder.

But then you look down and see this: "a beautiful person or thing; especially : a beautiful woman". So in the dictionary, "beauty" is essentially connected to women.

If you do a Google image search for "beautiful women", which I don't recommend, you will see hundreds of light-skinned women in sexy poses with body parts bursting out of their skimpy clothes. For real. That's how beauty has been defined based on how people in society have refined the search database.

Then you add modifiers, like beautiful black women, or beautiful Asian women, and you see basically the same thing. Mostly light-skinned women in sexy poses and skimpy (or no) clothes.

It's really, really sad. It makes my heart hurt for young girls.

And when you do a search for images of beautiful men, you get lots and lots of muscled nakedness. Really gross.

Why does a search for beauty lead to sex? It's pretty horrifying that the word "beautiful" can only link to one kind of image on a Google search. Boobs on women, muscles on men. Nudity in both cases.

We need to start tagging the words "beauty" and "beautiful" onto other kinds of images so the Google landscape can change. Images like these:


(http://madamenoire.com/)


(http://oldhamproject.blogspot.com)


(http://everydayfeminism.com)


(http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/news/2010/12/12/mujeres-en-liderazgo-latina-women-learn-lead)


(http://www.itsjusthair.com)


(www.hel-looks.com)


(http://sfvault.blogspot.com)

Young, old, man, woman, flat, dirty, dark, round, stringy, kinky...it's all beautiful by definition to someone. It's all God's creation, having been called "good" by God, therefore fitting the definition of beauty.

Start tagging pictures of everyday people living life with the "beauty" label, and let's see if we can redefine beauty for a world obviously searching for it.