NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/alt/supermod/1788

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-14 | 6.0 KB

Xref: sparky alt.supermodels:1788 soc.women:19521 alt.feminism:4366 soc.men:19241
Path: sparky!uunet!ulowell!news.bbn.com!noc.near.net!bigboote.WPI.EDU!bigwpi.WPI.EDU!cor
From: [e-mail] (Cory Shimer)
Newsgroups: alt.supermodels,soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: Supermodels contribute to spiraling low self esteem?
Date: 13 Nov 1992 20:16:36 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Lines: 139
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigwpi.wpi.edu

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Peter Chrzanowski) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Cory Shimer) writes:
>> If someone makes you feel relatively unattractive by what they say
>> or do, and then you happen to see some poster of some supermodel...
>
>> The problem with low self esteem is that it self propagates.
>
>No, the problem is with the notion that someone can "make" you feel
>one way or the other.  In the absence of violence or other overt
>coercion, you are responsible for your own mental state.

I totally disagree. You are responsible for your mental state
no matter the situation. However, I also disagree that what other
people say and do should not affect your mental state.

No one can "make" you feel a particular way, but someone can
affect your judgement about yourself, and in turn you may change
the way you feel about yourself or others.



>
>The problem is with the notion that self esteem depends on how you
>perceive others rate your attractiveness.   Self esteem might just
>as well depend on personal characteristics like integrity and learned
>capabilities as on appearance -- things YOU can control.   Since you're
>the one doing the "esteeming", why not set the criteria to suit yourself?

Well, obviosuly self esteem inculdes more than self perceived attractiveness,
but lets stick to attractiveness and how all this realtes to supermodels.

Sure, you not just can, but always DO control your self esteem.
Others do not control your self esteem. however, just about everybody
has this included as part of their criteria to control their self esteem:
perceived attractiveness. This perceived attractivness is
calculated by how/what others do and say to you.

This is where the problem comes in that being an asshole can negatively
affect someone else's life, whether is is the asshole's fault or
responsiblity, it's doesn't matter... it's a fact.

>
>> The less attractive you feel, the less attractive you probably become
>> (from a personality standpoint, and perhaps from a physical standpoint
>> if it causes you to neglect your appearance), which makes it more likely
>> that people will do or say things that make you feel less attractive.
>
>There you go again, saying that other people can "make" you feel more
>or less attractive.  It's said that the ability to achieve depends on
>self-esteem but some of us think this is backwards(poor Henry James!)

that statement is way too general. You can have low self esteem
from a social standpoint, but have decent self esteem from an
intelectual standpoint, or from some other standpoint. So
your ability to "achieve" depends on what is involved with trying
to achieve it.

>
>Perhaps if you quit worrying about the self-esteem and concentrate on
>what you want to achieve then the self-esteem will follow ?

Perhaps, but achievement is not the only criteria for selfesteem.
I;m trying to focus on the perceived attractivenes part of
selfesteem.

>The problem with the self-esteem game is that it has trouble
>bootstrap-loading itself.  But it sure sells self-help books!
>
>> The problem is that society contributes to this.
>
>Yes, it's certainly society's fault if I feel crummy about myself.
>

uh, I didn't say it was societies fault, but I did say that
society can contribute to it.

>
>> Even if you are feeling good about yourself, some asshole
>> can come along and start the downward spiral of self esteem.
>
>Perhaps the solution to this is to take responsibility for yourself
>and how you feel?

Uh, you don't have to take responsiblity because you can't avoid
taking responsiblity for how you feel about yourself. If you
think your not responsible, you are merely fooling yourself.

>
>
>> Think twice before being an asshole, you might just be affecting
>> someones life.
>
>I thought the whole point of social interaction was to affect other
>people's lives, and let them affect yours ... but really, you're

Now you are playing into my hands as far as this debate goes.
I agree with your "whole point" of social interaction.

It is to let people affect your life (and vice versa).

If you are going to go around affecting people's lives you
should take responsiblity for how want to affect their life.

Of course, if you don't care, you aren't going to worry about it.

You have to realize that while the other person is responsible
for their self esteem, you are responsibly for affecting their
life in a way which might lead to that person lowering their
self esteem.

>absolutely correct. Why, if I tell someone about that egg on the chin
>that just might start that nasty downward spiral and, who knows, in
>a few years they might just ... kill themselves !!!!

Well, it could happen. You were responsible for
affecting their life, but not for their downward spiral.

However, whether you like it or not, you contributed to his
downward spiral.

>
>It must be really tough, taking responsibility for so many other people.
>

If you don't take responsiblity for your the way you want to affect
someones life, you are a part of societies problems.

If everybody goes around not caring, and just
being an asshole, and is hateful and
unconstructive in their interactions, it'll be a
sad world.


That's why I disagree that you shouldn't care about whether you might
be hurting someone else. You can still be constructively truthful
about you feelings, but theirs no need to be an asshole.