Ch-ch-changes

I am trying to discipline myself and work towards a new, better lifestyle.
More water, healthier food choices, more stretches and exercise that can help me towards a better body.

And I'm doing all this because I feel I need to for my health, to combat my headache. Not because I want to be slimmer, or prettier.

But when I think about a healthy diet and exercise, I automatically think of it in the context of caring about your appearance. Being thin, good-looking. I think this is because of all the magazines I used to read, and all the "fat" stories in the press (you know, the ones that say how so&so lost a million stone because they cut out biscuits).
And celebrities, including actresses, are held up as role models because they do this or that type of workout to keep that slim & toned figure, or they restrict their diet to only cabbage and tomato juice. I wonder how many articles there are about an actress' weight in comparison to articles about her acting career, her life, her other interesting traits (e.g charity work)*.

And even if a famous figure moves beyond their role as a body on screen to look at, how much is their appearance actually ignored in favour of what might be more important?

This article about Angelina Jolie at the G8 summit leads with comments about her appearance. How is her GREY hair and pearl jewellery more important than her mission to end SEXUAL VIOLENCE against women and children in war zones? (yes ok, it's the Daily Mail. But my point is that there are articles out there doing this sort of thing all the time - and the Daily Mail is the most read online news site.)

Are we not giving the impression that these actresses, celebrities, are worth very little beyond their looks? Are we not giving this impression to women, teenagers, and little girls?

Are we not giving the impression that no matter what you might achieve in your career, your life, you will only be deemed successful if you manage to be good-looking at the same time? I feel that the value placed on women in society, by men, women and the media, is that women need to be slim and beautiful in order to be looked up to.

Surely we should not be looking at Kim Kardashian because she got fat (OMG SHOCK HORROR WOMEN PUT ON WEIGHT WHEN THEY GET PREGNANT). Surely we should be looking at Kim because of the shrewd business woman she might actually be. (I'm not saying the pregnancy is part of a game plan, I'm talking more the fact that a leaked sex-tape led to a reality TV show and a clothing line amongst other things).

So I have to change my thinking. I am not drinking more water because I think 2 litres of water a day will lead to having beautiful skin and therefore I'll be more attractive. I'm drinking more water to be better hydrated and try and help my head.

This morning I made the first choice towards a healthier life style, green tea over coca-cola as a nice refreshing start to the day. It is small choices like that which will help me change my ways. Wish me luck.

* I am not counting the many countless articles there will be on a woman's love life. How many times a week do we need an exclusive on Jennifer Aniston's love life? Why is it even our business??

It's damn hard just to EXIST

I am having a huge amount of trouble with my self image at the moment. I am not wearing foundation but I am still worrying about my outfits. I took my toenail polish off for the first time in years last night. And I mean years. Well, okay, I have taken it it off before, but only in order to repaint. This time I took it off with no urge to repaint as soon as I had done.  But are things like, cutting and filing your nails, is that anti-feminist?

That is my problem. I feel like if I worry about my self-image, and my looks, then I am being anti-feminist.

I have been reading and learning for the last few weeks on lookism, and beauty and feminism, and I am under the impression that a woman should get where she wants to go without it being because of her looks. But does that mean she can't use her looks to help her get what she wants? If she is promoted simply because she is pretty, then surely she will go nowhere fast? But what if she is intelligent and makes no effort with her appearance? Will she even get promoted in the first place?

The more I research lookism, the more I realise how much rests on your appearance that shouldn't do, and the damage done by judging people. I've had bad self esteem for as long as I can remember. I still judge myself against other people. And I still judge other people. I am such a hypocrite in this respect. But I find myself simply commenting to myself on how someone looks. I saw today a woman standing on her phone at a tube station entrance, and she watched with a scowl as a girl in front of me walked past her. This girl in front of me was putting on a coat and hiking up her skinny jeans. Wasn't being mean, or giving her an evil look first. But this woman clearly didn't like the look of her.  "Don't like the look of". That's being lookist. Yes I suppose it is acceptable when you see a creepy man hanging about a bar, a dodgy mafia person who looks like he might shake you down - these are all stereotypes though and not strictly the truth so maybe it is not acceptable to think this.
"I don't like the look of this" judges a situation on your perception of it. And it is just as acceptable in today's society to judge a person on your perception of them.  So, should I make an effort to look good in the workplace?  Suppose all workplaces have a certain dress code (ours is Smart-Casual unless the bosses are seeing the big man, then it's Smart. Because he would look down on them if they didn't dress up to scratch.) We all judge people on what they wear. Is that lookist? Or is lookism when we judge people on their body type (there's fattist but not thinist) and their facial characteristics. Things they can't help. Or could help if they went to extreme measures (yes, an overweight or obese person could restrict their diet. But some people do just have naturally curvy physiques.) This puts lookism in the same '-ist' category as ageist, sexist or racist. But can you draw parallels with lookism and racism?!  So here is my feminist dilemma (because lookism is a hugely feminist issue, for the obvious reason that women are judged for their looks FAR more than men): should I paint my nails, or is that anti feminist? Should I straighten my hair, or is that anti feminist? Should I wear more war paint aka make up, or is that anti feminist? Am I betraying my sex by wearing foundation/a skirt/high heels/straight hair? Or are these just ways to empower myself? I am reading the book Beauty Bias for work by a woman quoted in this article about make up.  I think it might just come down to personal preference. I don't want to wear foundation at the moment, but I wouldn't be adverse to wearing it again in the future. I hate high heels, even if I "should" wear them because I'm short. Skirts are okay. I prefer to have straight hair, though it's a major hassle to do, but easier to deal with when it's done. And I don't much like my natural hair.
Bloody society, for making it so damn hard just to EXIST.

Things I've seen lately

This article about Kristen Stewart wearing trainers at a premiere. If an older actress had done it, they'd probably be vilified her. 

Also, this article about a girl who lost loads of weight. " "I feel beautiful" she is finally able to say". Hmph. Not sure how I feel about that.

And finally, this article about single women. This is how I imagined my life would be before I met my current boyfriend. This is how my life will be if something were to happen that meant the loss of my current boyfriend. I do love him, but I envy their lives. Although I can't help but notice there's a tinge of mockery in this article. Perhaps because that is the way The Daily Mail writes, or because I expect there to be. I am probably (or probably not) just reading too much into it.

(Sorry for them all being The Daily Mail. For some reason they report on EVERYTHING.)