Why do you think that most ‘Beauties’ are attracted to the ‘Beasts’ of the world?
This was the question I posted in a social network site. I just wanted to see where it went. Here are the responses I received (of course I removed the names to protect the inquisitive):
“Why do you think that they are? I think there’s dumb pretty girls and dumb ugly girls. We just notice the pretty ones more, but we subconsciously accept ugly girls with mean guys because our moral aesthetic doesn’t object to it.”
“Have you noticed how many of the Beautiful people (male and female) are really Beastly on the inside? Is it because they’ve been able to get their way all through childhood by smiling and batting their eyes? Is it because they are most often ‘chosen’ as friends, teammates, lead actors in plays, prom royalty, employees, etc? Is there a sense of entitlement and superiority that clings to beauty? Perhaps the attraction is that the Beauties have a deep hunger to have a more ‘normal’ life than they have, to try to join those who are out of the spotlight. All of us are often drawn to folks who exhibit character traits we know we lack yet deeply desire also. Perhaps the other Beauties they meet have character flaws similar to their own. We tend to hate our own flaws and detest them in others, no?”
“They’re trying to compensate and bring balance to the Force.”
“I take back my answer. The one above is better.”
“Join me, and together, as Beauties, we will rule the Beasts!”
What I think is that before something is lovely it first my be loved. That is the moral in the truthful fairy-tale of Beauty and the Beast. For example: Mother Teresa loved the untouchables – who were seen as mere beasts. I think we need to make sure that there is no equivocation on the definitions of what is a beauty and what is a beast. Sometimes I wonder if the fairytale was swapped – if ‘Beauty’ did not have physical beauty but just a kind and loving heart and ‘Beast’ was handsome outwardly but a shell of a man inwardly. I think the tale would still follow the ending that happened normally. Love is not a mere emotion but an action – an action of sacrifice. Beauty had to sacrifice what she held dear, and Beast had to sacrifice himself – a martyrship of themselves. Perhaps we don’t just want to tame the ‘Beast’ but also express the ‘Beauty’ in everyone. That is what a Beauty is: a beauty gives a beast a purpose.
But then I got to thinking, what is a beast supposed to be. John Muir said “The core of a man’s heart is undomesticated and that is good.” Perhaps this is the reason – Men need to fight, they need to be Beasts. Women need to be Beauties. It is the incongruity of the two that makes them compatible. Let us look at history… who were the first explorers? The most beastly of men – the mountain men, the vikings, the brave and fool hearty. Who were the first missionaries? The warriors of Faith – Those who proclaimed “To live is Christ to die is gain”. Who can stand up to the forces of the world that make all passive and decadent? The Beasts, the warriors. Who can make a Beauty feel beautiful? A man who fights and defends her like a beast – a brave knight who would give up his life for the beauty. A Beast gives a beauty an adventure.
That is why the ‘Beauties’ are attracted to the ‘Beasts’. It is natural and good. They are the ones who complete the other: the Beast fights for the Beauty, while the Beauty loves the Beast. At the same time they can never be totally the other. John Eldredge writes in ‘Wild at Heart’ “A man needs to be tender at times, and a women will sometimes need to be fierce. But if a man is only tender, we know something is deeply wrong, and if a woman is only fierce, we sense she is not what she was meant to be.” It all comes down to this – Beasts need to be choice makers and to live as true men to attract the true Beauties.