Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
For me, the connection between insulting human dignity and banning anything that might do so is a highly questionable urge.
What is an insult? This is when people don't say what they want to hear about you. And if it's true? To tell a fool that he is a fool is an insult to his human dignity? And if you don't say anything, say compliments, and then don't take a job? Is that a good thing? And if you take on an important position, and then he breaks people's lives?
And why is it an insult to judge people by their innate qualities? Because humans aren't animals? And who?
All these liberalistic games at the wronged, which should therefore be treated with special treatment, are just begging on the porch that offends human dignity.
Well, if participation in these contests was compulsory, then perhaps yes, it would be an insult to human dignity.
Because personally, I personally don't want to be evaluated for external signs as an animal and compared with someone else there and give me grades, etc.�
But thank God contests are voluntary. And someone who wants to compete in their appearance-competes. And let them do it. Why shouldn't people entertain themselves?
Comparing the external data of girls who are strangers to me, who participate in this voluntarily, does not offend my personal dignity in any way.
You might as well ban almost all sports. We all have innate traits, some are better at one thing, some are better at another. But all this requires training. Without them, there will be no special achievements in any field.
Also with beauty. A person can be born with a very beautiful figure and face, but no one will know about it if he does not take care of himself.
So beauty is also a hard-to-reach “skill” that requires constant “training”.
And man is an animal. And by the way, contests of male humans exist, although they are less popular. All sorts of “Mr. Universe” and so on. In principle, any sport is an assessment based on innate characteristics, including. Moreover, the contest of clever people also evaluates the innate. Smart or not.
I share the author's attitude to beauty contests. But I hate being banned from anything other than crime even more.�I am close to the arguments of Yevgenia Nebova and Grigory Sidorov, although I am also an opponent of professional sports, which is steadily degenerating into contests of chemicals and political ambitions.
A number of areas of feminism have a negative attitude towards beauty contests, considering them a form of commercialization of sexuality, similar to such phenomena as prostitution, pornography, striptease and others. Beauty contests in these areas are considered a form of objectification of women, humiliating for women, supporting the evaluation of women only by external data to the detriment of personal and professional qualities, when the only role of women is considered unequal sexual relations, where the interests of women are not taken into account. In addition, the feminist trends that oppose beauty contests believe that such contests impose standards of appearance. The concept of freedom of choice and voluntariness in conditions of social inequality is criticized.
A number of areas of feminism, along with criticism of inequality, show tendencies to restrict equal sexuality, although they are rarely openly hostile to it. They may give reasons against beauty pageants that are actually close to those related to conservative morality. Some areas of feminism, on the contrary, may consider phenomena such as beauty contests to be a manifestation of a woman's confidence in herself, her power over men, and a source of income. Criticism of beauty contests can be considered a manifestation of patriarchal conservatism. Recently, in Western feminism, trends that believe that the beauty of a woman's body can increase the status of women in society have become more widespread.
This point of view is criticized by feminists, who believe that the requirements primarily for women to maintain their appearance and the evaluation of women primarily by external data is a manifestation of gender inequality. Many branches of feminism oppose an alliance with patriarchal conservatives, emphasize that feminist criticism of inequality in matters of sexuality has nothing to do with patriarchal restrictions on sexuality, and reject accusations of conservatism in sexual matters. Not all areas of feminism that criticize beauty contests support their ban. It is possible to support the ban on such events with the participation of minors.
I'll split the question into two parts:
Any competition, and everything in your life, is a competition to one degree or another. Your place at work, on public transport, and the food you eat are all the fruits of competition.�
Beauty is not an innate trait, but something that millions strive for. Proper nutrition, self-care, regular exercise-this is a small list of what remains behind the scenes of beautiful and fit people.�
The evaluation is always relative to something or in comparison with someone. There are parameters by which the judges choose. Standards, as such, do not exist.