But it’s still galling to see. You know it would’ve tasted amazing anyway. But of course image is everything and that’s ruled our lives for centuries. It got me considering – how do we make our value judgements? Who defines what’s imperfect or beautiful? So when those judgements effect on our waste levels and impact on the planet, is that ok still?
Trends certainly change over time. If I’d have you been offered charred broccoli as a kid I’d have refused to eat it. And who pay good money a dessert that’s been dropped (Oops I Dropped the Lemon Tart)? But both are now championed by top quality chefs and generating Michelin star rankings.
Opinions change with fashion. Acceptance changes with experience. There’s body form Then. Desirability has changed repeatedly as time passes: voluptuous to flat chested to curvaceous to skinny heroin chick. Every body type has been en vogue at some point Virtually. And yet we remain obsessed about who’s too fat or too thin. Fashion changes constantly Even, with styles considered too way out in a single period slowly assimilated into our daily norms there.
So with all these continuous fluctuations why do we still established parameters about beauty and acceptability? Why do people reside in fear of being judged still, of needing to fit in. I follow a lot of zero waste materials and plastic material free organizations on social press and one thing people often discuss is topics associated with beauty and approval. It’s human character to want to fit with the audience – a survival technique. Marketers and Advertisers know that. They wouldn’t keep telling us ‘we’re worth it’ while a skinny lady throws her long hair around if it didn’t increase sales. But if the norm changes frequently, shouldn’t we start redefining ‘suitable’ to be a little wider?
- Leave to act for about 15 or 20 minutes until the potato juice has completely dried out
- Hold a kitten, Name a kitten, pay attention to a kittens purr
- Violet tint fights brassiness and yellow undertones
- Whip up an Olive Oil Cleanser to Soothe Dry Skin
Gillian McKeith got a fresh deal a few years ago after her life choices and appearance were compared, unfavourably, with Nigella’s. I obviously don’t know either or them to learn what they’re like inside (an improved definition of beauty?). Nonetheless it begs the relevant question – how much usage, waste and excess consumerism goes into attaining Nigella’s look, and is that appropriate and favourable?
Yes my very own locks may be unruly. It’s curly and I’m in my 40s – shit happens. Is that really justification enough to consume and spend to comply with a ethnic norm that could change in the blink of an attention? Could just expanding our parameters for this be a simple path to reducing our usage all round? We say beauty is within the optical eye of the beholder. So now we now need those beholders to begin looking at things a bit more carefully. And motivating others to do the same.
Historically, learning problems of consistency has resulted in many stunning breakthroughs. The “UV catastrophe” when a thermal source emits an infinite amount of light at small wavelength is such a problem. Clearly that’s not constant with a meaningful physical theory where observable quantities should be finite. Note, though, that is a issue with an assumption.