Summary: See the thinking of America’s intelligentsia. Not only does this psychologist explain why women wear cosmetics, but the essay also shows us what we missed by not voting in Hillary Clinton. This is the kind of people who would have been running America, reforming our culture according to the most advanced thinking in academia.
A provocative article at the NYT: “Does Makeup Hurt Self-Esteem?“
In response The Last Psychologist wrote a reply:
“No Self-Respecting Woman Would Go Out Without Make Up.“
This is an excerpt. The Last Psychologist had a large following.
“Let me offer a contrary position, unpalatable but worth considering: the only appropriate time to wear make up is to look attractive to men. Or women, depending on which genitals you want to lick, hopefully it’s both. “Ugh, women are not objects.” Then why are you painting them? I’m not saying you have to look good for men, I’m saying that if wearing makeup not for men makes you feel better about yourself, you don’t have a strong self, and no, yelling won’t change this. Everyone knows you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, now you’re saying the cover of the book influences how the book feels about itself?
“I am not doubting that in fact you do feel better about yourself, I am saying that that fact is both pathological and totally on purpose. Since this cognitive trick does help you feel better about yourself, by all means go ahead, but at what point will you stop pressuring other women to go along with it? When will you stop “requiring” it, like when you say, “oh, she’s so pretty even without makeup” as if the default was makeup?
“The fraud women now believe is that it is wrong to look good for men only, as an end in itself; the progressive delusion is that looking good for men is synonymous with submissiveness, so while you’re allowed to look good tomen, it should always be secondary to looking good for yourself. This is madness. You are enhancing your outward appearance, which is great, but then you pretend it’s for internal reasons? …
“The trick to the makeup debate is that it pretends to want to be free of male pressure, yet the pressure to look a certain way is actually much worse from women. So this result is that a ‘patriarchical’, controlling force, unacceptable if coming directly from men, is maintained by giving the whip to other women. No boss man would survive if he said, ‘ugh, you should put on some makeup, doll yourself up a little bit’ but women say this to other women all the time — especially at work. ‘You look really tired,’ says a woman in MAC Greensmoke to another who isn’t. Just once I wish the reply would be, ‘I am, your husband kept me up all night.’ Not very progressive, but hilarious.
“The evolution from ‘enhances sexual attractiveness’ to ‘doing it for yourself’ is definitely a regressive step, and by regressive I here mean ‘regressing to age two’, but it’s the next step which reveals the presence of a neurosis: recruiting science as a justification for behavior: “Study finds makeup makes you appear more competent.” Can’t wait to read about that study in a Jonah Lehrer book. Ugh. So here’s the evolution of feminist theory, take notes: “I want to look better” to “I want to feel better about myself” to ‘I want people to think I am better.’ Madness.”
————— End excerpt. —————
Science provides a more accurate explanation
The Last Psychologist goes on in the same tone at length. For a clearer and well-told explanation about the science of beauty, see Survival of the Prettiest: The Science of Beauty
“Makeup was an advanced art by the time of the ancient Egyptians. …In the British museum there is a woman’s cosmetics box from Egypt dating to about 1400 BC. …In fact, Egyptians had most of the cosmetics we have today, suggesting that the cosmetics business is hardly a modern invention or response to cultural pressures. …
{Whitening is used in many places, from Greece and Rome to China and Japan.} Over this pale canvas, women apply exclamation points of red to their lips and cheeks. Red. the color of blood, of blushes and flushes, of nipples, lips, and genitals awash in sexual excitement, is visible from afar and emotionally arousing. …Red pigments were applied to the lips in 5000 B.C., placed in cartridges as lipstick in Paris in 1910 …Pots of red oxide of iron have been found inside ancient Sumerian and Egyptians tombs. …
“Fair, blushing skin is the skin of youth, of the female, of the woman who has never borne a child. It is why women of all ages have struggled so to maintain it for life. They are trying to mimic the beauty of the nubile adolescent …Women tend to be paler than men of the same race because women tend to have less hemoglobin in their blood and less melanin in their skin. …skin color differences between men and women are products of sex hormones and directly indicate a woman’s fertility.
“Young girls and boys do not differ markedly in skin tones. The dimorphism emerges only at puberty, when boys darken and girls lighten. Thereafter, women are lighter during ovulation than during the infertile days of their cycle. Their skin darkens when on the pill and when pregnant. …woman’s hair and skin tend to be permanently darkened after the first pregnancy, forever changing the girlish complexion of youth.
“…blushing, and flushing suggest sexual excitement. When coloring gets vivid, the skin is moist, the lips swell, and the skin generally signals “the likelihood that one’s courtship gestures will be reciprocated and consummated.” Red rather than pale lips and pink rather than white cheeks also advertise health. Anemia due to iron poor blood is a common illness in most countries, …
Nancy Etcoff is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Harvard Medical School and a practicing psychologist at Massachusetts General. This is a brief excerpt from a long chapter, part of a heavily documented book. Please do not give rebuttals unless you have read at least the chapter.
The Last Psychologist and the Hillary Administration
Have you wondered who would have staffed the Hillary Clinton administration? Here is an example. Read and decide for yourself if this would have been good for America (that is, of course, a distinct question from the same question about Team Trump. Confident with un-grounded beliefs. A lover of abstractions, theories, and labels. Judgemental. Contemptuous of American society and the American people. A team of such people probably would run the nation off a cliff.
About “The Last Psychologist”
Per the associated Twitter account, the author is a “pirate” and lives in Los Angeles. It might be one person, or a group. See a collection of the theories here. The last post was May, 2014.
Some interesting slightly grounded posts: “What’s Wrong With The Hunger Games Is What No One Noticed“,”The Hunger Games Is A Sexist Fairy Tale. Sorry.” and “Hunger Games Catching Fire: Badass Body Count.” From the last post: 15 people are killed in Catching Fire, “{Katniss} kills one person, but she is responsible for all of their deaths.”
For More Information
If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about Hillary Clinton, about liberalism, about Women and Society, and especially these…
- An anthropologist announces the death of liberalism.
- An anthropologist explains the causes of liberalism’s death.
- An anthropologist announces the fall of the liberal professional class.
- Clinton lost because fear failed, and voters disliked her Social Justice Warriors.
