A mother-of-one has revealed why she has given up trying to control the thick facial hair she began sprouting after the birth of her son 28 years ago.
Known only as Mariam, the 49-year-old appeared on ITV's This Morning to discuss her decision and how it has affected her life.
Having throwing in the towel with her facial hair battle in 2008 after her son left home, she explained: "I didn't feel brave...it was more curiosity and what happens with me - will I be more myself if I let it grow? And how will people react? "There was this big fear that if I would show it that everybody would turn away from me and nobody would talk to me any more."
Mariam began a blog in which she talked about her facial hair, how years of tweezing had left her with red, inflamed skin, and shared reactions to her appearance.
She said: "Some people have said that people like me should be 'shot'... but that was just one person on the internet and the internet is a place where people write horrible stuff.
"But on the other hand I have a lot of people that say it's courageous and inspired other women to be more free, so I have both sides."
When asked by host Holly Willoughby whether she felt sexy, Mariam replied: Yes. Now I'm ready to have a relationship. I feel more confident and know myself better then when I was younger... I am happy."
In fact Mariam is feeling so at home in her own skin she also appears as a "bearded lady" in a circus act.
"I like acting, so it was a mixture of my talents," she said.
"I also wanted to give people the opportunity to talk to a bearded lady because they're too scared to approach you in the street."
One way to think about it - I am another 'hater' on the internet, for her, the second one who wants her to be shot - she proudly proclaimed. I am giving her validation. Or, I would if I were serious and not playing on her quote.
Everything is about inflating her'self'. Hate, love,... everything means validation to her. 'Will you look at me? - I need you to look at me and give me something, anything.'
The female musketeer is 'modern' in her thinking. One modern is nothing but in numbers their way of thinking becomes suffocating.
The circus lady seems genuine. A woman trying to make the best out of her fate. Her circus family life probably shaped her character.
The dark skinned woman in the third video is talking a lot of shit - disgusting. The fair skinned one, Hm, the haircut isn't feminine yet she seems to have vulnerabilities. What can be hurt is open for influences from the outside. So she uses her senses...a good thing.
It's a lot of extrapolation - for me at least. Which makes it more likely that I am quite wrong about her.
"There was this big fear that if I would show it that everybody would turn away from me and nobody would talk to me any more."
But she had to do it, it was important, because...
"I didn't feel brave...it was more curiosity and what happens with me - will I be more myself if I let it grow? And how will people react?"
I don't buy that part about being more herself. Growing her hair and toenails is also more of herself?
Does she want to look more masculine? A different style of clothing, haircut, less cleavage would have been a good way to start, but no, it has to be that beard.
She still wears make-up and a dress, the haircut is nothing unusual. She even takes good care of her beard. So a 'Fuck it, I don't care about my appearance that much, there are more important things for me.', kind of attitude isn't the case with her.
She could have shaved the beard. No tweezers, if pain is the issue, or bleached it, or what else there is.
So I guess it's mostly about attention, or let's call it curiosity about how people are going to react.
Nothing wrong with attention, everybody seeks it. Although with varying desire and for different reasons in different ways.
The environment supports her, she writes a blog, gets mostly positive feedback, gets on a, presumably, popular TV show. The whole angle looks like to be a "You go girl, you are so brave and strong,... feminist" routine.
And here I could be off. After seeing the short video interview, I was thinking that she may have been a bit misinterpreted (willfully more or less) by that show to better fit that feminist angle. Maybe, maybe not that much.
Feminism, among many other popular movements, like the young, jealous, bearded sister MRA is consisting of members who are very opinionated.
An Opinionatedness which derives from denied emotions, which are rationalized. A spiral of implanted ideas -> unconscious, denied emotions -> rationalization -> more denied emotions -> more rationalization ->...
At first it's tempting, it makes life easier to put away fear without coming to terms with it.
Like in case of the M R A... "Will anybody tell me what's really going on? I don't feel so good. So you say women aren't angels, sent down to earth to please me(n)? Something has to be done! Yeah, absolutely, I'll join your group.
We men have to come together, sign some petitions for equality and demand equal rights, for equal people. Feminism isn't about equality, they have that rationalization hamster thing running - we men are rational beings, ho ho ho, no effort required. Feels good, eh, I mean absolutely flawless semantically pure argumentation by definition, those are the facts! Yeah so we are about equality, TRUE equality not that feminist kind one!
Yeah, what he said, Shut up! Everybody told you not talk politics here! You and your right-wing agenda! Nobody likes you here! Take a hint, nobody likes you! That should tell you something. Get lost!
So to bring this to an end.
Feminism, something I associate her with, her attitude, feeds on everything it can. Everything is rationalized to validate one's position. He hates me? Well, he's obviously ignorant. It's the internet - full of those trolls. I am so glad to be on the team which doesn't operate on that level. Love makes right. I'm sexy and I know it. (TM).
Does she share that attitude? To quite some extent, I do believe so.
Feminism, like the MRA, and Marxism, and Christianity, is anti-nature. Therefore, it rejects natural indication of fitness.
modernism is an escape from the determinism of nature, into the slavery of productivity. If you remain loyal and productive, your genetic inferiorities are to be excused...or should be ignored.
Modernity offers a materialistic, and cosmetic, pride. If you cannot e born with it, then you may purchase it, if you work hard enough and pay your dues.
This is how it takes on this attitude where reality must bend to your essence, rather than you bending to it. Of course, this requires an artificial environment, within which the illusion of escaping nature and natural selection, can be enacted by all those who most fear or are the most affected by the indifference of the world.
In place of "world", as in cosmos, they place the world, as in the world of man: the artifices, and human interventions. They dare others to judge them using natural markers, for in Modernity, the only markers accepts are monetary, and social, and cultural.
Beauty is redefined as something superficial or subjective, and not as an outcome of genetic strength, exhibiting, fitness and fertility. A woman can avid hearing to some natural standard of attraction, based on procreation. She is to be judged as a "person", a sexless, race-less, clean slate...with no inheritance, no history, no past. She - even suing the designation is troubling - is to be judged on her merits, in relation to socioeconomic and cultural standards. These socioeconomic, cultural standards are Modern, and no other.
Not Muslim, not pagan, not tribal, not traditional...no, Judeo-Christian, Nihilistic and current.
The above mentioned, represents the very power of modernity; the seductive appeal of forgetfulness.
Think...a world of uncontrolled reproduction, sheltered by a system of institution, benefiting from disciplined, consistent, engaged, masses.
In such a world, would not the cruelty of nature, seem, almost, unbearable? Who can cope with the cold decree of a past that cannot be intervened upon? But the outcome can be "corrected".
All it takes for the corrective intervention to have an impact is for the past to be forgotten or dismissed or denounced. How many of these victims of natural selection, allowed to become conscious of their predicament, due to sheltering, would resist the temptation of a "clean slate"?
Suddenly, you are no longer the representation of an entire lineage, carrying with you its failings and victories, but a "new beginning", now to be evaluated in accordance with the immediate. No matter how weak you are, you can purchase respect, if you pay the piper. They will bow before you if you rise in the insitutinoal order, by paying, to the ones above, the required deferecne.As you rise, you gain in liberty, because evry phase tests your loyalty, resolve, and totally commitment to the bullshit involved.
This is what is "intimidating" about this so called " strong woman". A female, rising to the position of institutional representative. Not her, but what she represents is what intimidates; it intimidates because it has the force of numbers.
No matter how dumb you are, you can purchase the semblance of intelligence...now called education; education, being the purchasing of other people's intelligence. It does not matter if your analytical, real-time, abilities are below average - this being what intelligence is - just as long as you repeat, quote, defer...in that academic style of pretentiousness.
You can see how the majority would find this appealing. You can also see why they could not, and would not, ever let go of its compensating force. Now, you may understand, why debating, conversing, trying to convince these, dullards, is a useless attempt. They are not interested in reality because reality is what they want to forget and escape.
How can you appeal to a reason completely dedicated to meeting an emotional, instinctive, need?
It took the intervention of a bull-dyke, calling herself heterosexual (Blurry), to completely derail a thread, on ILP, about male/female differences. The insinuations were typical, and the cowering, by the effete, men-children, was expected.
Who reacted? Kriswest. A cat-fight breaks out, the boys, just pull back and watch. Then, the Magji, brown-cow, enters the scene to return the forum to its mundane babbling. Remember Mags, the cow moderator over at the barn? The one who came here, all in a huff, ready to teach us something we had never considers...then slithering away into the dung-pool she moderates?
No male dared to say a word. If they did, it would be in that boyish, gosh-darn, insert comical comment, manner of the brain-dead, high on drugs...including the computer and television kind. Feminization in action.
I first became interested in male lactation in 1978 after reading Dana Raphael’s book, The Tender Gift: Breastfeeding. Although Raphael only dealt with the subject briefly, she did say that men can and have produced milk after stimulating their nipples.
While my husband David had no interest in nursing our son, we both were intrigued with the idea. We had just had our first unassisted homebirth and were excited about applying our positive thinking techniques to other aspects of our lives. Although Raphael had written about milk production through nipple stimulation, perhaps, we thought, David could do it simply through suggestion. He began telling himself that he would lactate, and within a week, one of his breasts swelled up and milk began dripping out. When we excitedly showed my father (a physician) David’s breast he said, “Obviously there’s something physiologically wrong with David.” The fact that David had willed himself to do this, did not impress him. We knew, however, that this was yet another example of the power of the mind.
Still, we were not ready for David to actually breastfeed our baby. First of all, there was no need for it. I was doing just fine on my own. But more importantly, he simply had no desire to do it. After he discovered that his body had indeed been responsive to his thoughts, he suggested to himself that the lactation would stop, and within a week his breast returned to normal. The experiment had been a success.
We didn’t give it much thought after that until years later when I came across a short article called “Male Lactation” by Professor Patty Stuart Macadam of the Department of Anthropology at the University of Toronto (Compleat Mother, Fall, 1996, Volume 43).
It is possible, and has been observed in animals and humans. In 1992, 18 Dayak fruit bats were captured from a rainforest in the Krau Game Reserve, Pahang, Malaysia. Of the 10 mature males captured, each had functional mammary glands from which small amounts of milk were expressed. A breast is a breast. Male lactation is physiologically possible and, according to Dr. Robert Greenblatt, production in males can be stimulated by letting a baby suckle for several weeks. Indeed some human males secrete milk at birth and at puberty.Historically, male lactation was noted by the German explorer Alexander Freiherr von Humboldt prior to 1859, who wrote of a 32-year-old man who breastfed his child for five months. It was also observed in a 55-year-old Baltimore man who had been the wetnurse of the children of his mistress.
She is to be judged as a "person", a sexless, race-less, clean slate...with no inheritance, no history, no past.
Other 'clean-slates' can do that. You have to be one, or try to be one, to be not judgemental, to accept and love all your fellow (wo)men. First, words which divide, seperate and discriminate get a pure negative connotation, next will be their removal.
She - even suing the designation is troubling - is to be judged on her merits, in relation to socioeconomic and cultural standards.
Either to not be judged at all or by an absolute moral standard for everybody - love(ly).
They will bow before you if you rise in the insitutinoal order, by paying, to the ones above, the required deferecne.As you rise, you gain in liberty, because evry phase tests your loyalty, resolve, and totally commitment to the bullshit involved.
Yes, there is a price to be paid and the real price, I suspect, is not in the years in which one is slaving away to further one's career, to rise in power and potentially more freedom, but that after attaining that position, there are some parts gone inside, which had to make room for that bullshit. Some creativity is required to try and survive, while retaining something one considers worthy of surviving.
A case in point.
I am a sexist and a racist, a speciesist, an indivdualist?,.... I feel that evil in me, haha. Those damn senses and that discriminating* mind. There is a permanent solution to it - death. Zombification.
* - discriminating, a bad thing in itself , so I felt no need to add another curse word, hah.
Either those guys there are zombies or they are desperately needy to fit in, anywhere, no matter what, or they cleverly use that platform, more or less believing their own bullshit.
Remember Mags, the cow moderator over at the barn?
Haha, nice image. Not in particular, I may gonna dig a bit into it in hopes of unearthing some comedy - silly or tragic.
A song I came across while listening to an online radio. Felt a mixture of being humored and saddened. Men becoming feminized and the nihilistic Christian ethos - what's the issue with having a girlfriend? It's a better option to keep yourself chaste while you wait for your ideal alpha State man to take you away.
Her comments on Hitchens are particularly interesting. I think Hitchens focused on the secular-humanist, world-view and neglected to explore spirituality outside Judeo-Christian nihilism of the post-modern era.
Paglia represents a pagan female, all the way down to her bisexuality. A very masculine-thinking female, which is rare. An example of a female who can be heard by a male, when there are so many feminine thinkers, of biological males and females both, who should just shit the fuck up and stop pretending they have something intellectual to say worth listening to. Repeating the popular social and cultural myths, does not make you worth listening to.
At least Hitchens, with his eloquent verbosity, represents the Jew metamorphosis, from the Cult of the Chosen to the Cult of the all-inclusive Zionists, who tear down so as to disappear and integrate.
The article he's talking about is written by Anna North. A simple Google of this woman brings up a picture of her heavily powdered in make-up. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Seeing a feminist in make-up is one of the funniest things. So outspoken about men and their sexist misogyny by being attracted to women - she indulges them, despite being a powerful centerpiece for the whole feminist "movement," and not actually being required to do so.
Of course, the typical response by a feminist is to say she does it to please herself (not even society, because that's evil and misogynist) - they like to look nice. Nice for what? Because there's a Christian, nihilistic, ideal of beauty in every one of us - beauty without purpose, ripped from all things natural (sexual) so as to keep her image as one who is chaste and detached from all the "brutes" who are only interested in sex.
And females always talk about how males try to compensate for their defects. Modern day feminines are the ones, really, compensating for their short comings; e.g., they splash on make up as their natural faces aren't sufficiently erotic and then the whole push up bra thing. Almost everything about them is fake; their personalities, their finger nails, their boobs, etc, and they demand that men " man up " - that we be " real men "; what a joke.
And females always talk about how males try to compensate for their defects
“If you were offered the chance to live your own life again, would you seize the opportunity? The only real philosophical answer is automatically self-contradictory: 'Only if I did not know that I was doing so.' To go through the entire experience once more would be banal and Sisyphean—even if it did build muscle—whereas to wish to be young again and to have the benefit of one's learned and acquired existence is not at all to wish for a repeat performance, or a Groundhog Day. And the mind ought to, but cannot, set some limits to wish-thinking. All right, same me but with more money, an even sturdier penis, slightly different parents, a briefer latency period… the thing is absurd. I seriously would like to know what it was to be a woman, but like blind Tiresias would also want the option of re-metamorphosing if I wished. How terrible it is that we have so many more desires than opportunities.”
Atheism does open the gates to nature and to objective analysis of everything we take for granted. The connection between Judaism, Christianity, Marxism and Secular Humanism, resulting in feminism has to be redefined when the foundations are crumbling and we still insist on preserving the pie-in-da-sky.
Secular Humanists feel threatened by this slow detachment from its own inheritance. Communists felt the same kind of pressure when they launched their warfare against the Christian Church.
Maintaining the label of "victim" while assaulting the original, the source, the mother of all victim dogmas, is a difficult balancing act.
Just listen to the definition of what violence is, as it is applied to opinions. We see the same rules applied on internet forums such as PN and ILP where if someone is offended in any way by any position then a red flag is raised, and the long road towards the shameful banishment - exclusion from the 'in' crowed, as it were - begins.
MRA, the male version of this feminism, and its Cult of Victimhood. Feminism+ = MRA The + indicating the "masculine".
Atheism must add itself to that list of conformist ideas. Not just rejecting the ridiculousness of a God, but "plus" a reaffirmation of all the cultural bullshit theism, the nihilistic kind, has brought about.
This stuff is getting ridiculous. Beyond Orwellian. Although only natural i suppose; considering Sweden hasn't participated in a war for over 200 years and the media has been subsidized for over 50 years. Yet there's no MRA, and i suspect it's due to all the victimhood sentiments being drawn towards to issue of immigration.