- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have an admission that I want kept secret amongst us girls. (Some old school feminists regard “girls” as some blacks regard the “n” word. For females old enough to bear children, the correct word is “women.”)
I have armadillo scales on both arms; and no matter how much shea butter and coconut oil I slake on them. I can still see those scales, protruding off my skin as high as ever. I have lost weight and lift weights
no matter, the scales are so thick and durable that an anti-tank shell would bounce off of me.I went to my wife for solace—-good luck with that—and she noted offhandedly that my mother also had armadillo scales. My genetic destiny (I would have preferred to have inherited her small pug nose, but no I got her leathery skin instead). I resorted to scrubbing my arms with a puff to mechanically exfoliate the scales, but when I next had to shower, they had returned, newly minted.
So my rhetorical question is: are not chemical peels and chemical exfoliators such an extremely TEMPORARY fix to amount to an outright fraud? Why would anyone spend her or his hard-earned cash to remove dead skin cells when his or her body, backed by eons of adaption by natural selection, is struggling mightily and SUCCESSFULLY to quickly restore that which has been lopped off?
(In truth, I could care less about my leathery arms—-I wear short sleeve shirts in winter if possible—-because no one is looking. No one notices and if someone did I would apply for a restraining order against him or her on the grounds of stalking.)
Not just old school feminists there are still radical feminists, the older ones and a new generation rejecting mainstream feminism. Chemical peels are not a fraud! If done my a dermatologist they are the most effective way to deal with your problem. My sister has scaly elbows and she gets prescription sal acid. You should go to your doctor and ask for an acid based cream to treat it. There is that Lac-Hydrin with lactic acid you can buy over the counter. As for your logic of natural selection=good thing-its flawed. Evolution does not create perfection and does not change quickly. People get rid of dead skin because it feels uncomfortable and is cosmetically displeasing. Same as treating acne.
Marlo Thomas, “That Girl” wrote:
Here’s a riddle:
A trucker is sitting in a bar next to a feminist. They’ve both had a lot to drink and they’re arguing. The feminist says women have been oppressed for centuries — the trucker says they haven’t. The feminist says women deserve equal pay — the trucker says they don’t. The feminist says a woman should be president — the trucker just laughs. They simply don’t see eye to eye.
What’s the one thing the trucker and the feminist have in common?
They’re both men.
In fact each evolutionary adaptation an organism makes is a “good thing” to use your words if “good thing” means that the adaptation increases the likelihood that the organism will pass on its genes to future generations of the organism. (Hence the concept of the “selfish gene”.)
What I was attempting to convey was that my leathery skin is not pathological or a “problem” to use your word, but rather an adaptation of my aging. Paradoxically aging makes me less attractive to women, which in turn reduces my chances of passing along my genes. But aging including my own benefits the species on the whole because it increases the likelihood that younger and therefore healthier homo sapiens will pass along their genes.So I embrace aging because I am making room for younger to procreate by getting out of their way.But even if I had developed my armadillo scales when I was 18, I still would not have cared one whit. BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT MY ARMS; INSTEAD THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPRISONED IN THEIR OWN HEADS CONSUMED WITH WORRIES ABOUT THEIR OWN APPEARANCE.Sorry Rozy, no one is looking at you; they just aren’t.
- The forum ‘Ask the Beauty Brains’ is closed to new topics and replies.