let it all collapse, the icon for the www.punkerslut.com website
Home Articles Critiques Books Video
About Graphics CopyLeft Links Music

Beauty as a Sexual Object

By Punkerslut

Image by Havok
Image: "Alien Love" by Havok

Start Date: February 11, 2004
Finish Date: February 20, 2004

     To fall in love -- considered by some as the ultimate quest in life, and prepared by others with a constant and unending flow of fantasies, dreams, and enchanting ideas. And what we find sometimes to be so uniquely freakish of a fetish of our own, so personally vaulted and denied at every conscious inquiry -- we find, in fact, that it is a secrecy of our own sexuality and our own fantasies, that disallows us from discovering that, what we find to be deviant is actually commonplace in the minds of all individuals. There is no person whose sexual ideas are unique, no fantasy of anyone that is not based on the same roots of the fantasies of others. This is sexuality, a social and emotional facet of every human. So, it must be granted as truth, that it is the repression of sexuality in our society, that convinces us that our own sexuality is a freak, a deviancy, an intolerably disgusting and improper attitude. Despite the fact that sexuality has been an intrinsic part of the lives of the hundreds and hundreds of millions of people, or the hundreds of billions of animals, there are still some puritanical ideas of people to oppose it. And, even if sexuality weren't commonplace, one would think that the argument of "so long as none are harmed, let it be," would be enough to justify it. I think that it was not a matter of argument, but one of shame and repression, that granted the puritan-minded people to believe and preach as they do.

     If, in fact, those of the puritanical ideas had no conception of sexuality, I do not believe they could have the will to rally against sex. If it were just a fact of life, nothing that personally affected them, then it would not be something they could muster so much unforgiving hate for. Alas, I do not think these puritanical ideas have done much of anything to uplift the personality of goodness or the character of charity. The idea that sex is an evil is not a friend of the ideals of kindness, intelligence, or truth. These puritanical soldiers have done nothing but bog down the structure of civilization, waging a war against our own animal nature. By seeing their own feelings of sexuality, experiencing the desires and urges, the thoughts and inhibitions, puritans find themselves vilified with their own character, ashamed and mortified. I think that people manage to put anger, passion, and strong, powerful emotions into vengeance, when it is their own personal nature that they are attacking. The Puritans have allowed themselves to be cruel, brutal, and absolutely cold-blooded in their war against sex. As the blood running through civilization warmed, the extent to which they were allowed to fight has been limited and limited. Tortures and murders were an intrinsic part of the original Puritan culture, when it came to their attitude about punishing sex.

     It is a rather popular statement, that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Yet everyone seems to interpret this statement differently. The fact that someone or something is beautiful is only true because there is a critic to call it that. No artwork exemplified beauty without an onlooker, no song brought forward melody without a listener, no poem created peacefulness or rage without a reader. There can be no argument to this. We find, also, that just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so is ugliness in the eye of the beholder. The same artwork that was called beautiful by one may be called ugly, disgusting, or otherwise unappealing by another. It is here that the true meaning of the phrase may be captured. The only reason why something is appealing or unappealing, attractive or unattractive, is because there is a mind in the sensory organs there to judge. The ideas of what is or is not gorgeous, enchanting, homely, or wretched are all dependent upon the viewer. Then we apply these ideas to a person. One's voice is seen as glorious in tone or rancid in quality. The face and body become a considerable work of art or a defaced panting, or something in between or to a more extreme. Judging a body and a face, though, as beautiful or ugly, is a much different action than judging a painting as either beautiful or ugly.

     A person, unlike a painting or a poem, is conscious, capable of emotion and happiness. All of a sudden, their physical attributes become subject to criticism and judgment. What is the purpose, though, of finding someone attractive or unattractive? The simple and obvious answer is for the purpose of mating and procreation. Now that the reason for appeal or unappeal, in a person's beauty anyway, has been uncovered, another question remains open. If a person's outer shell can be judged as ugly or beautiful, by one person or another, and since this judgment does not help us to determine their character, should we disregard beauty and ugliness as a deterrent to a person's true self?

     Of those individuals who call themselves Freethinkers, artists, independent minds, lovers of intelligence and friends of liberty, it is the typical attitude that a person's emotions and way of thinking is in fact a part of their intrinsic self. There can be no greater proof of this than experience: beautiful people may be cruel and heartless, as the ugly people can be intelligent and meaningful, and vice versa. A person's beauty does not determine the way they think. It does not make them more kind or charitable, nor does it instill in them attributes of vice or cruelty. This fact, I imagine will meet with no argument from those whom have experienced the world. The Freethinkers, though, have further advanced this position, by incorporating this philosophy into their personal lives. They do not judge people on their image, and accept friendship and affection from someone regardless of their looks, and they are not less scornful of a brutal person no matter their beauty. They have taken a rational position and they must be commended for that. In another way, some of them have incorporated their philosophy into their sexuality, either consciously or unconsciously. For example, they find someone attractive based on their ideas, their character, their way of thinking and personality. One's physical body becomes sexually arousing once they are identified with ideas of justice and goodness. They have not warded off human sexuality, so they have much more mindfulness and personal awareness than the puritans. In some cases, a Freethinker who fell in love with someone for their ideas, after the breakup, they see resembling their initial love, even if socially considered unattractive, are considered attractive by the Freethinker.

     So it happens, that the phrase comes to us, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder," and we find that beautiful and ugly are relative terms, subjective in that they exist only in the mind. Our natural response to this is that a person cannot wholly be judged by their physical, since they are conscious. they are capable of thoughts, ideas, emotions. Thus we find every Freethinker and independent individual falling in love with a personality of a person, regardless of physical appeal.

     There is one fact that must be treated, though. An individual cannot have sex with a personality. As much as the idea is desired, physical affection cannot be given to a thought, an idea, or a character. It is necessary that a body is there. Admiration of an individual and their thoughts is never so pure or heart-warming as when there is a face for that individual, by which emotions and even ideas can be expressed; the look of ease, of a person laying down at the end of a long day, or a look of interest and intrigue, fascinated by the current occurrences, or a look of boldness and strength, defending what we believe in and what we fight for. The analytical expression, unsatisfied with what we know, delving through thoughts, facts, memories, to develop a more just theory -- the expression of deep thought, it allows us a greater admiration of the deep thought itself. Nothing can greater express sadness than a story one wished to relive by retelling, accompanied by tears.

     This is just the face alone: eyes complimented with brows, a mouth given a tongue, and a nose, the rest covered with skin enveloping ten thousand muscle strands, all of which can combine to tell us thoughts and emotions. Anger and aggression, sadness and solemnness, pleasure and euphoria, exhaustion and rest -- all feelings by which we can purely communicate to another by the contraction or relaxation of our face muscles. The blessing of the voice adds to whatever feeling we are communicating, even if we are not speaking actual words. In fact, the emotion or facial expression delivers is dramatically heightened and empathically understood those vocal sounds which transcend all human language, particularly when we express a sudden pain, joy, or understanding.

     Then, we are to consider the rest of the body. There are few words so reassuring, as a gentle, affectionate, and understanding touch. The idea of love can be written in a million poems and a thousand essays, which help us understand it in a reflective manner, but few things are so realistically understood as love when through the physical act of it; it is so logical to believe that experience is necessary to knowledge in this situation, just as it is impossible to know the true nature of terror without going through war, or other experiences. Lips, eyelashes, and other facial features, gently caressing, touching, or nuzzling the intimate or even common parts of the body: lovemaking, never so real or pure as can be demonstrated through experience. Those gentle parts, the neck, the stomach, the inner arms, find themselves also to be the most intimately felt. Perhaps it is the nature of evolution: ourselves becoming most protective of our most vulnerable parts, that they can also be the most intimate parts, because we feel that we want our lovers to feel those parts which we are most aware of. The other parts, the spinal column, the inner fore arms, the hands, though we are not only protective of them, we regard them during sex as gentle and intimate.

     Understand, though, that up to this point, of the necessity of a body for physical expression and physical love, I have said nothing of beauty, spoken no words on one's complexion as it is concerned to sex. I have only demonstrated the purity of expression when physical, when either in body or through the face. Yet there may be something rather unsettling, or otherwise seemingly contradictory about these thoughts. Those who have based their opinion on Freethought and independence, have argued that the physical complexion, of beautiful or ugly, is not accurately indicative of a person's inner character. But, on the other hand, the body allows us the most pure and affectionate method of expressing our desires.

     I suppose that it must be admitted that one's body and face is an important part of love and sexuality. Whether we find one's body to be beautiful or not, the existence of such a body is important. But, beauty can even play a positive role in this. A body may in fact be considered indifferent, perhaps somewhat ugly or homely. But, once that body has a personality, an opinion, an ideal, a character, these things alone may be enough for us to find them attractive physically. The same can be said of a body we initially find attractive, but then we hear a rather unintelligent, thoughtless mind speak, a rather cocky personality, and an otherwise unattractive character, and we find them ugly physically. It is not always the case, but it happens to be true often. Thus, beauty, no matter what it comes from, a physical complexion, is necessary to a meaningful relationship.

     Before ending this dissertation, there are still some thoughts on beauty that will not rest in my heart until I have fully explained them. As I stated before, there are many people who would find it immature or thoughtless to love or deeply care about someone just by their physical complexion. But, it is almost a thing of serenity, when a young boy's passions are enveloped around just the image of a girl. Granted, he may not be thoughtful in his quest, but he is listening to his desires. The thoughts and ideas that are spurning in his mind may be misguided, but they are gorgeous, wonderful, and even comforting. Fantasies may be played out where just a kindly personality is placed in the boy's fictionally apparition of her. He will feel joy when he imagines her impressed with every aspect of him, and very loving and caring of him. The same can be said of a girl and her affection for any handsome man.

     With this, I end. I can only hope that I have enlightened some minds.

"You can infer nothing, however, from all this discourse, but that the poor man is in love; and that the general appetite between the sexes, which nature has infused into all animals, is in him determined to a particular object by some qualities, which give him pleasure."
          --David Hume, 1758
          "Essays, Moral, Literary, Politic," Section: "The Sceptic"


join the punkerslut.com
mailing list!

copyleft notice and
responsibility disclaimer