Our day to day lives are surrounded by two distinct exposures to human contact: people we see in “real life,” and people we see on television or in magazines. This presents two very different messages to us. On one hand, we see what we believe are real people around us, they look like a lot like the person we see in the mirror; yet, on the other hand, there’s the people on television and in magazines with flawless skin and slender waist lines. Thanks to digital editing, there is a constant disconnect between what we see in the mirror and what we see on a magazine cover.
Magazines and television are both meant to entertain, and in theory people like to see beautiful things; but at what point does the use of digital editing, such as in magazine images, go too far? At what point does digital editing cross the line between basic “cosmetic” touch ups to the sort of editing witnessed in the following video?
Whether we are aware of it or not, we form an emotional bond with the people that entertain us on television and in magazines; it can become difficult for some people when they realize that more often than not we cannot look exactly like a supermodel. What we consider to be “beautiful” is shaped by this exposure.
For some it may lead to a belief that if “that” is beautiful, and what he or she might see in the mirror doesn’t look like that, then he or she is not beautiful. With low self-esteem being an underlying cause for practically every mental-health disorder from depression to eating disorders, this becomes much more severe than some simple make-up re-touching.
The bottom line is this: we can’t look like the face on the magazine. Furthermore, we shouldn’t have to look that way, even if we could. Humanity is defined by its diversity, no two people (even identical twins) are exactly alike. Why should we all have to look one way, then? I find confidence, both in oneself and in one’s interaction with other people, to be far more beautiful than the dazzling magazines.
No comments:
Post a Comment