Philosophy – “Why Representation is a Lie” – 4/14/2021

“Those prideful of being ‘represented’, for appearance’s sake, in a workforce of utility can only be described as the ones who believe ugliness can be a form of beauty.”

– Modern Romanticism

It is the ugliness of toil, to the creation of something beautiful, that separates both.

Poverty is not beautiful, as it should never be called such. It will only ever make poverty remain stagnant. People work, they toil, to make something of themselves. It is the toil that is the ugliness. It is the creation that becomes beautiful. To make something of oneself involves transfiguration, to become something better than the current person one is. That is beauty.

Beauty is a betterment of a former kind, not an acceptance of other supposed types. If it is ever the latter, then beauty becomes ugliness by way of what hideous stands for. Hideous is only ever the shattering or the destruction of creation. It is the death of a life, that represents this hideousness. If we, as people, ever believe ugliness can be beautiful, then we have thrown out the standard of preservation. However, only in the manner of excessive comfort, without the discipline that pain brings, can we be this way.

Rising above a current state, a meager stature where one has remained stagnant, is to become beautiful, is to create, is to make something of oneself. Love has no place, if we expect it to be handed to us, before us. We comprehend who we are. We should remember our identity.

An identity is not a discovery. It is a reminder of our universal selves. It is deceit that dominates a person’s mind, when they believe that “who they are” has “yet to be understood”. It is a deception, because what can be understood, to any person, is that what is made of oneself is a betterment of who they are, not directly of their identity.

Representation is the pride, inhabited in the mind, of one who cannot differ beauty from ugliness simply by understanding the notion that to make something of the self has nothing to do with appearances. It is to comprehend that appearances are stagnant, do not move, though are there to move others. If one is proud of simply being represented, then they are like the artwork hung upon the wall for viewing eyes. Inspiration for others, yet stagnancy for the self.

One is finished in “representation”, just as the artwork. A completed picture, and unable to progress the self any further.

Philosophy – “Why Representation can go to Hell” – 3/24/2021

“Whether decided to be qualified enough for a position, is not for the display of yourself upon the pedestal. Even choosing between the apple or the orange is considered for either’s health properties, not for how it appears.”

– Modern Romanticism

You are useful. You should not wish for distrusted sorts to tell you that you appear beautiful. You are not meant to be accepted by your appearances. Instead, you are meant to be accepted by what you can do. You have only one mother. And, you have only one father.

If weak-enough people deem all as meant to be their mothers, then they are insecure. They are addicted to comfort. As a mother will always tell her child that he or she is simply “good enough”, it has also become the common rhetoric of the 21st century. Being perfect enough or good enough is not ever for the ground of function. One can always become better, in terms of function. Though, to better oneself on appearances will only enhance insecurity. It is because one is always insecure when considering their appearances, never for anything else.

One is not insecure for anything other than appearances. This is due to the state of being secure, simply means one is being guarded. Guarded, that is, for beauty. If beauty is taken into consideration by the protector, then it means that they believe the beautiful one to be weak. Though, among people, even of women who display this same rhetoric of wanting to protect themselves, fail to comprehend that capability is there to protect others, not the self. One is never capable for the self, though possesses their skills for the necessity of preserving life. Protection, that is, meaning that the role behind function is of the ugliness to the toiled human form being able to either construct or reconstruct beauty.

If to be secure means to have protection near, so that one’s appearances could be “accepted”, then representation merely displays a person as guarded enough because they are weak. As in, they are meant for their minds to be kept wholly in unwavering dependence on their protector. That is, if the workforce has gained a wish to “represent” the so-called “unrepresented diversities” of the world, it merely means there are certain people who can be deemed as needing to drop their strengths and skills. Such means, their security will come by way of complete and unshakable dependence.

It is now to be said that when a person relies entirely on the protector to guard their own appearance, the “motherhood” aspect of this becomes realized. That is, through the addiction of comfort, we can believe ourselves either perfect or good enough, though never strive for betterment in terms of our skills. As another’s protection will simply delude ourselves into thinking that we are good enough to the protector, then it is our capabilities that remain stagnant to never be improved. It is that the desire for one’s representation is a weakness that stunts individualism.

Again, appearances are what are secured, not one’s skills nor their function. If one’s body is the sight of either what is beautiful or functional, then it is to the latter that shall protect the former. It is always what is functional of this world that protects the beautiful.

It is out of our dependence upon what we comprehend to never betray nor abandon ourselves, being of what we can fully trust, is how we are protected or secured. It is the ugliness to the human form, toiled, battered and vulnerable by a day’s worth of protection, symbolizes how it serves to protect what should be preserved.

Nothing of our functions, when the workforce has garnered a wish to “represent” certain sorts out of their appearances, could be accepted when such a realm has its focus on security. All the more security for those who are insecure enough in their appearances, merely extends the view that these certain sorts should indeed remain weak and increasingly dependent. No person, so dependent on their appearances to be guarded, in their display of being represented in the sense of being diverse, can rely at all upon their own functions or skills. In being weak, a person has no need to guard. Though, were such “represented” people to be strong, they’d find more of a need to protect others.