One of the first lessons you learn within the Philosophy Of Architecture class is the most jarring, and that is that beauty IS NOT within the eye of the beholder. As an architecture student at Mississippi State University from '90-'95, Philosophy Of Architecture was a required course as a sophomore. Therefore, all of us second year students endured this enlightening experience there during our fall semester.
So obviously, this begs the question: Who then does decide what's beautiful and what is not? The critics do. And these individuals have earned the right to do so. For a great critic is far more experienced in doing so than non-critics. They're experienced and educated. And no, this doesn't always make them right, but it does up the ante relative to their adjudication batting average.
Therefore, if you're ever wondering why a certain fashion trend is hot, paint color, or kitchen motif, you have only to look to the critics to thank (or loathe) for this.
To sum this up, I'll work to make a present day statement that should resonate with many of you. Chip and Joanna Gaines built their fortune / influence on their roles as critics. Though it may seem that their popularity is anchored in their million-watt smiles, it is not. Instead, both of them are incredibly gifted critics, and this means that their ability to adjudicate beauty - within single-family homes, home furnishings / decor - is off the charts. And to be as equally weighted as they are, in this regard, as a couple, is rare indeed.
The Gaines have harnessed this talent by packaging it within a super approachable Texan folksiness that's made them a fortune. Thanks be to God that their show wasn't dubbed Fix-a-fucker, otherwise, there'd be that many more westerners (& otherwise) - then there already are - saddled with chronic porn consumption issues.
-------------------------
99% of architecture students (back when I was a student) weren't athletic and very few were involved in Greek life. But, there was one student who was a couple of years behind me that did serve as a male cheerleader, and as such, donned the mascot ("Bully") costume for a handful of seasons.
As such, this young man was most definitely athletically built, and this made him stand out like a sore thumb amongst the rest of us. But, it didn't help matters that this physically anomalous student was completely at peace with "exposing" his body. Therefore, during the spring semester, as the temps were beginning to climb, it wouldn't be unusual to see him out sunning himself within the architecture building amphitheater. I can remember specifically feeling torn between what he obviously saw as naturally pleasurable versus my own powerful - almost instinctual - urge to idolize his flesh.
Fitness magazines, published for men, which were readily available on magazine stands during the mid-'80s, offered me the opportunity as a middle schooler to idolize those images therein. And, of course, the publisher didn't care who purchased the periodical or whether someone was idolizing their photos. All they were interested in was sales.
I can vividly recall the shame I felt in having to explain to my mother (she couldn't help but notice the grape purple bag) that I'd purchased an "Exercise For Men Only" mag from our local K&B drugstore.
-------------------------
Paul Freeman is an Australian photographer whose repertoire is nude or semi-nude men. And more often than not, the men he photographs aren't within a studio space but within much more naturalistic environments. If you look at his work, it's apparent that he's a superb critic of the male body, yet the images that he publishes aren't - at least to me - titillating in the least.
So what separates his work from what I was exposed to as a young boy within the aforementioned fitness mags?
-------------------------
Pornography's sole purpose is to illicit a titillating response. Early exposure to porn versus non-pornographic imagery that respectfully celebrates the human body can short circuit a boy's embracing / understanding / appreciation for the beauty that lies within both his own and others' flesh, particularly if he's unsure of his own "fleshly worth".
More often than not, this exposure occurs during adolescence, and as I alluded to earlier, this can be a decidedly unbecoming development within the life of a teenager. For he knows he's being taken advantage of, yet his hormones (& perhaps his home life, etc.) are seemingly working in favor of this private curse. It's a bad, bad scenario that's especially prone to screw up a kid's head if it happens to be within a vacuum.
-------------------------
As a side note, all forms of body augmentation from anabolic steroid use to breast implants to tattoos, I would argue, stem from man's idolization of the body versus appreciation. And this is because, these augmentations are "permanently" enhancing the body to be more in line with someone else's ideal (either real or photographed).
For example, an athletically built man who sees an anabolic steroid using athlete is likely going to immediately notice the size differences between his own drug-free body and that of the juiced dude. Similarly, a woman with regular sized breasts, encountering her artificially endowed sister, can't help but notice her silicone implanted chest. And finally, an ink-free individual, rubbing shoulders with someone he admires - who happens to be expertly tattooed - may very well soon obtain his own first tattoo.
-------------------------
So what's the recipe for success in recircuiting our brains to see pornography for what it is (cheap, intrusive, disrespectful, debilitating, harmful, poisonous, toxic, explosive, robbing)?
I would argue the first step is recognizing where you were (& how exactly) initially hoodwinked by Satan to elevate / idolize the human body as you did. And from there, invest a boatload of time in unpacking that deceit (perhaps alongside a trained professional) prior to working hard to forgive yourself for so much shame and guilt that you really weren't solely responsible for experiencing.
In closing, remember that God created man in his own image (including his sex organs). We are image-bearers. God too, created sexuality, from the reproductive process itself to arousal and everything in between. We are not meant to be ashamed of our sexual desires, nor are we meant to not see each other through a sexual lens.
No comments:
Post a Comment