Being Gay

[Emiliano]

The concept of women being the "beautiful" (or "weak") gender has been coined by straight guys throughout many many centuries.
While obviously with animals, it's mostly the male (duck, lion for example) who is what we as humans consider beautiful.
I am convinced that this "woman = beautiful" concept is coming from the same "sociohistoric" source as the concept "gays = feminine, weak".

Excuse me female fellows, but I don't find the female body beautiful. I think that men are the "beautiful gender" and in our society the only reason why it isn't widely considered like that is because
1. women unfortunately didn't have a lot to say in past centuries, and
2. gays neither

Like I said, I wanted to come back to this because you said a few things I wanted to think about. Its a rough couple of days but my brain is at last almost kind of working today.

It interested me how you wrote: "The concept of women being the "beautiful" (or "weak") gender..." because it was almost like beautiful and weak were being used interchangeably. And when I think about what has long been the western, European standard of female beauty it is related to weakness.

When I think about female fashions up until pretty recently (and to an extent current ones as well), its all very physically restrictive - corsets, high heels, tight skirts, just to name a few examples that cause pain and limit movement. But also elaborate hairstyles and makeup - fashions that require a lot of upkeep, that discourage a lot of movement or physical exertion. Its only been since like the 1960s that it has been considered attractive for white women to have tanned skin, where as before women would literally poison themselves to remain pale - to be dark would be to mean you had exposure to the sun, you worked rather than being pampered indoors.

I know very little about non western standards of beauty because I was raised in the USA, but I can think of similar things in other traditions too - the Padaung women who stretch their necks with rings, or the history of foot binding in China. Im sure there are many others.

It is often a delicate, fragile, dependent, somewhat childlike - both physically and intellectually - standard of beauty that is placed on women. It seems like a more recent thing (maybe ancient too in some ways) that we have begun to celebrate the beauty of strong, powerful, athletic women.

I feel like this relates to what [MENTION=14705]Pix[/MENTION] was saying about how so much female representation is just about looking good and getting the guy, and the lack of representation in our culture of powerful, strong, independent women. Beauty doesn't really seem to be a way to find female empowerment, it seems like it is more often a tool to dis-empower a woman. In a society where worth is based on sexual desirability though, I can see how some women could use beauty in such a way to gain power, or wealth, or status.

And all of that is in contrast to what male beauty is. Male beauty is all about strength and power. What beauty signifies in a man vs a woman are nearly opposite things.

To think about the animal comparison - to what purpose is the female typically the dull one of the species and the male the more brightly colored or adorned? And then to look at humans with that context... what does that tell us?

You said that this idea that women are the more beautiful sex has been placed on then by straight men is something I agree with, but if beauty in a woman means to be weak and dependent, its not a title that women should necessarily take as a compliment.

Those are my thoughts on that, I dont know if that relates to what you were saying about how homosexuality comes in to be related with the feminine and the weak, but I was curious about the connections you were making there. Can you expand more on that? Is it about a way of controlling male homosexuality, to make it less threatening in some ways? Or how did you mean it?

And to touch on the last part of what you wrote, I agree that the male form isn't viewed as the more beautiful because gay men and straight women have never had the social power to objectify men in the same way straight men have held that power over women. Now that is changing, but is it because of social power and influence or financial influence?

I also think its interesting to note that at least since the 20th century, gay men have been taste makers in women's fashion and standards of beauty. And more or less it seems we have been happy to perpetuate the same weakness = beauty and sell women on the idea that their sexuality is their only option in how they empower themselves.