Women of the world raise your right hand. We use this hand to pledge allegiance, to shake hands, to high five, and now to assert our independence (thank you DeBeers). We are terrified to attach ourselves to political labels and yet we are surrounded and consumed by mass media and marketing labels. Women today carry and wear; Coach, Louis Vuitton, Vera Bradley, Baby Phat, Chanel. These labels define; class, age, social standing, and wealth. How many, what color, do they match the outfit and season are all distinguishing characteristics to allow strangers to evaluate each other. How frequently do we procure new clothes, designers, and labels that not only litter our closets but define who and what we are to the rest of the world? These flat representations of self are no longer the accessory; they have become the main attraction.
There is less and less introspection regarding personal beliefs and values. Americans are taking the easy route. Rather than question and define themselves, women are saved the trouble by their peers, billboards, television, and internet advertising. Do you want to be professional? The answer is to dress like this character from your favorite film. Would you like to be considered attractive to the opposite sex? Watch this video and you’ll see how it’s done. Personal relationships shallow as individuals seek out someone to fit a mold, perform the perfunctory relationship perks, and disappear when they are no longer needed. True appreciation of a person, brand, or idea is destroyed.
It has become all too easy to look at only the face value (it’s a pun) and disregard the substance. The question, “Do I really want that purse, is it well made?” is not asked because women do not buy the purse based on its quality. They buy the purse to fit in, to look like their friends, or to stand out as someone who can afford such an item. Labels are more important than the item they represent. The same is transferred into personal relationships. Women rarely ask, “Do I really care for this person, are we compatible?” They are taking the time to establish; how do other women react when we walk by, does he look good on paper, are his qualifications impressive to parents, employers, and peers. Mainly they are considering, if this were a competition (which many attempt to make relationships seem as if they are) would he be a trophy or a conciliation prize. All of these standards are created to advertise a brand but discourages the woman from distinguishing her own identifying brand. She is a person who carries this bag and dates this sort of guy. The value of her partner is entirely based on appearances. Last season was blonde and muscular, this fall sandy brown hair and tortoiseshell frames. The relationship is based on limited interaction. This is done intentionally to avoid getting to really know the partner.
Expressions like “friends with benefits” stem from this type of relationship. The union is based on the idea that two people can share physical intimacy without becoming emotionally intimate. A bond that exists until one partner locates a more suitable companion worthy to advertise publicly. As relationships of this variety become the norm, the expectations of partners in a relationship decline sharply. The patterns traditional relationships follow towards greater intimacy are gone. Immediate gratification has a significantly higher value than long term investment. The commitment implied in relationships and dating is taken lightly as more and more individuals enter shallow relationships to maintain a hassle free lifestyle.
In order to transition to the newest model once it comes out, women are not allowing themselves to experience fulfilling relationships with value. A bond of this quality demands a level of give and take that they are not prepared to accept. They distance themselves from partners in order to sustain an image of independence. Truthfully, it’s simple pride. They ultimately refuse to admit a desire to know a partner more intimately as this may be interpreted as a sign of weakness. They play emotional games that inevitably cause more harm to themselves than those they imagine they are manipulating. Decision making driven by the mass media and popular culture, creates an environment wherein women are not satisfying their personal needs, many are unaware of what their individual needs are as no one can tell them. Women consistently pursue a stereotype of who they should or specifically should not be with in relationships. Demanding that others recognize and appreciate their partner as they would a new bag or pair of Manolos, as a show piece rather than as a person.
Increasing numbers of long distance long term relationships show that people are comfortable with the crutch. Being in a relationship that demands no real commitment, with a person they do not share time and daily life, individuals can claim that they are not emotionally immature. However, the very existence of such unions further exemplifies the refusal of modern women to honestly commit. How close can a couple be when either partner is incapable or unwilling to actually know the other? The long distance long term relationship is also a powerful show piece as peers recognize the length of time individuals claim to be ‘together’ and reward that by suggesting they are knowledgeable or well versed in relating to other human beings. Truthfully the relationship is most typically a compilation of images and imagined relational beliefs in their compatibility with someone they don’t really know. Much like the attraction to purses that women don’t know the quality or background of the brand or fashion house.
Knowing the body of an artist’s work enables dealers to appreciate and understand the meaning behind the creation. When women select bags and accessories based on trends, it shows how little they are willing to look deeper and also how shallow their appreciation for the designer’s work has truly become. Women judge one another using standards based in ignorance of the true creative talent required to construct a fashionable item or to understand the depth and personal quirks of their partner. Women have initiated a standard that to wear the same uniform and date the same partner is to be included. Rather than customizing their look or their preference in partners, women have become too lazy to do the work and are henceforth doomed to spend their lives looking like idiots dating the bland guys that only checked that their jacket said North Face and not if they held the same values that made them stand out.
This means that the majority of the population will go unappreciated. While the rest of the actually interesting people are milling about wondering why they can’t seem to find a partner of substance that accepts and challenges them. It’s a form of art appreciation to study the fashions we wear, bags we carry, and people with whom we surround ourselves. Tying ourselves to brands we do not understand and therefore cannot fully appreciate, only wastes valuable time and energy as it only further emphasizes our lack of creativity. It does leave the good stuff for those of us who are paying attention…which is a pretty nice benefit, if I do say so myself.
International Social Justice September 27, 2008
Tags: arrogance, first world, International affairs, third world
When I honestly think about the presence of torture and preemptive military strikes in the world, I see the face of this child in my mind’s eye and wonder if a utopian world is possible. Then when I think of military strategy and economic progress, I see a child that looks like a little me. I wonder if biological warfare and ethnic cleansing really matter because they’re happening in some one else’s country far away from every harming this little girl. But then my mind’s eye shifts and I see both little girls standing side by side and realize that they look a lot alike. I think in a world where one wears designer jeans and the other works 19 hours a day to make clothing for others, who is more wealthy? And why should one go to sleep to dream of hunger and injustice while the other sees visions of security that enable her the luxury and arrogance to think she has the right to place value on another person’s life?