In the eye of the beheld

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Well, it used to be thus anyway, but now beauty has moved from the eye of the beholder and is now set firmly in the eye of the beheld.

What kind of warped excuse for evolution of the human species is this?! In shrink mumbo-jumbo psycho-type talk, I believe this new development is referred to as the gaining of self-esteem. The more bourgeois among us — mostly females who probably secretly harbour hairy armpits — will call it amour propre.

By its very definition, self-esteem belongs to the self; in this case, the woman who is looking at her mirror in deep reflection and denial of the facts that confront her. This means that the esteem is the sole responsibility of the human being who is observing and internalising it.

If such a person should reach consensus with themselves that she is beautiful, we as the rest of society are expected — no, forced — to accept this as the gospel truth and play conspirator to the aesthetic farce under which the particular individual has placed herself.

This is ludicrous, in my view, but the way the world is going, we are heading ugly-face-first towards an evolutionary catastrophe fuelled by the cosmetic and fashion industries and Oprah. I mean, where will it end?

I am going to be very superficial in my assessment of this new phenomenon of moving beauty from the eye of the beholder straight into the eye of the misguided beheld, and perpetuating the beauty-or-ugliness stereotype. I find that it is paramount that the Sumo, being the impartial observer that he is, tackles this issue face-on and offers both sides of the argument to leave you, my dear reader and obliging master, to decide for yourself whether the current trend in what is regarded as desirable in the fairer sex is heading in the right direction.

I will start by delving into what is considered to be society’s acceptable standard of beauty. We need to reach consensus on this matter before we forge any further on this path of discovery. Let’s set the parameters here and assert that beauty mainly means someone is attractive.

I will present to you what it is that I find attractive. Let’s see: the woman has to be shorter than I am — not midgety but short, though I know that some may find acutely vertically challenged people attractive. My woman also has to be on the low side in the concentration of her melanin (if she is of the African kind).

She has to be curvaceous, but never too big; I draw the line on weight very early — around 50kg to 60kg, almost 100kg less than the mammoth Sumo (at a stretch and depending how desperate I may be and how much golden nectar I have consumed, I may extend the weight limit to about 72kg kilogram, but that is where I stop; the bus is full, lady, and I shall not take on any more joy-riders!).

One of biggest gripes I have with potential mates is the general unwashedness that is manifesting itself among young women these days. What is up with that?! Take a bath or two, scrub yourself down before you go out; trust me, it is not you who is worth it — it is me. I can’t have you looking like the day before yesterday. Damn, that is nasty!

I firmly believe that whoever it is that made it popular to be generally unkept should be hunted down, sjambokked and burnt at the stake. A generally unwashed-looking woman is the most vile of aesthetic crimes that can be perpetuated against the Sumo’s demure eyes.

Along with the above, the woman has to be in possession of a behind that can bring men to financial and emotional bankruptcy as well as a well-developed set of mammary glands — the likes of which can make male drivers run into unsuspecting old ladies who were minding their own business outside the Spar.

This is what I find attractive in a potential mate and it is mostly, give or take a few kilograms and centimetres, what society regards as beautiful. Just look at fashion models around the globe; they are all tall, bulimic and anorexic with pretty faces.

But there is also the other faction of society that believes that beauty should — by virtue of it emanating from another human being — be the sole property of the said human being and that the rest of society may only if invited to do so observe from a distance and never pass judgement on the state of the individual. I think this is bollocks, but I’ll carry on anyway.

You see, self-esteem, like the devil, has been blamed for all manner of general gruesomeness that people have inflicted upon themselves in the hope that they may gain favour or attention from their families or spouses. I believe that bleeding yourself because you think you are “the un-pretty” is not cool at all, especially if you are a woman. I mean, the world is your oyster and it’s just waiting for you to take it for all it is worth.

And this side of the argument, the hairy-armpit side, says that it is the pressures that society places upon us to be attractive through media and advertising that causes some of us who consider our facial features to resemble those of a bovine creature to take action because we do not feel accepted or loved, or because we stand out and are different from the rest.

I remember I felt like that once. I had just been dumped by the girl of my dreams, so I did what any person in that position would do. No, I didn’t reach for a pack of Minora Blades; I reached into my bar fridge and grabbed a nice, cold beer. After three of those brown bottles of joy, I was starting to forget her name; after about six, her image was starting to get blurred; and after a case, she became only known to me as the “Evil Xhosa Woman”.

And don’t jump to call me a tribalist because I used her tribe name in her descriptor. There were already “Evil Pedi Woman”, “Evil Venda Woman” and others in my little powder-blue book of revenge.

Therefore, by the logic above, we should not put so much emphasis on physical beauty. We are encouraged rather to concentrate on the inner beauty of another human being. We are told that personality is all that a person needs and the physical stuff is for the base and the superficial.

This may be so, but I often wonder: if there were an opportunity for one of these happily ill-favoured people to gain beauty by means made accessible by modern advances in medical science, would they abandon the rest of the unsightly and join the bandwagon of popular culture, denouncing the very plain principles of hairy armpits and mother-earthliness that they once so staunchly upheld? My guess is they’d jump ship, but that’s just a fat, base me.

Both sides have compelling arguments. On the one hand, no one, in their honest senses and all other things being equal — would choose an unattractive partner over a particularly beautiful one. Not even you, reading this and judging me, could look me in the eye and tell me otherwise.

On the other hand, you cannot form a meaningful and lasting relationship with a person with whom you are not compatible on a personal and spiritual level; the day-to-day running of a relationship, if you will.

This presents all of us, as members of our modern society and the animal kingdom, with a nasty conundrum. On the one hand there is what you are physically attracted to; on the other there is what you emotionally and spiritually need in your life for you to be fulfilled — a catch-22 indeed, my good friend.

So, what may we then say of the modern woman in the context of a modern lifestyle and, closer to home, in the context of a post-apartheid South Africa where the woman has all the opportunity in the world to succeed and is encouraged to do so? What of this? Well, let me break it down for you.

We are slowly moving into the era where the scales of power in the male-female dynamic are starting to tilt very heavily in favour of the woman. What we are observing in front of our very eyes is evolution warped, where the laws of nature when it comes to gender (in)equality are being revised and skewed irreversibly.

Before the Gender Commission comes after my slow, fat ass, I’d like to state for the record that I have no qualms about gender equality; in fact, I promote the emancipation of the woman, but what I am addressing here goes far beyond good governance principles, human rights and all those good things, and touches the rules set by that eternal hottie — Mother Nature herself.

Here is where I’m coming from: I wonder if you have ever noticed that, in general, people from the more opulent neighbourhoods are generally more aesthetically pleasing (attractive) than people from poor neighbourhoods. This is not because the people in the uppity neighbourhoods dress better or drive fancy cars that may add to their appeal, but rather because of genealogy.

Traditionally, wealthy men marry beautiful wives — not because the women are money-grabbing skanks. No, it is because the relationships formed are mutually beneficial. The beauty of a woman is directly proportional to her desirability and her ability to be in a position to choose from a selection of superior mates.

So, the wealthy man gets a nice trophy to show off to his friends; the beautiful woman gets a nice house to raise her children with private education that will ensure their prosperity; and the children share the parents’ genes and come out even more attractive, depending on whether the man came from old or new wealth (which will determine the pre-existing state of his genes).

It is nature. The strongest cave-dude always got the hottest cave-mama because she knew that he could hunt and provide for the family — that is, if the cave-hottie wasn’t clobbered over the head with a blunt object and unceremoniously dragged back to the cave to consummate the marriage upon her gaining consciousness. It’s been like this since before Jesus was a figment of his Holiness the Almighty’s imagination.

So now, fast forward a few thousand years, and the scales are tilting the other way. The woman now has the financial power, the power to provide for her own family. All of a sudden she doesn’t “need” a man; she can provide for herself. Now the standard of what is to be found attractive is being reversed. The hottest woman in the neighbourhood is not the best catch any more. It is the most educated woman, with her house, car, business or executive position, that is the catch. Men know it and have latched on to this new dispensation — the leeching bastards.

It is this woman with whom I have a problem. Financial success does not mean automatic attractiveness to everyone. To some, yes, but others are not that desperate yet, so stop acting as if you are a prized cash for all because, well, you may not be — which I’m sure will be to your surprise. Some of us still believe in love and the union of pure hearts and true minds.

May I be honest here and state that beautiful people get preferential treatment? We all know it’s true; women who are attractive are always thought of first, and I do not believe that there is anything wrong with that. It is the way we are wired as human beings. The best genes prosper and we can’t escape that.

These days, though, you had better be careful of what you do or say as a man. The ugly bus has just docked, my dear friend, and the un-pretty are out in full force. May I be allowed to say that we celebrate your success, my dear sisters, but our wiring is hell-bent on keeping you out of our minds, hearts and beds — well, until it’s time to settle down and start a family anyway, then we may consider you for the financial benefits that you bring to the union — just as you women have done for ages.

For now you may describe as cowards and backward chauvinist us men who do not approach you with your power suits, fancy cars and property on golf estates. It is OK; we know this and are ashamed of it, and maybe one day we will change. The standard of beauty and, by extension, desirability of the potential mate still remains firmly in the hands of the beholder, but it is slowly slipping out of our hands and into the hands of the beheld.

I rest
The Sumo