Archive for Sunday

There is nothing like an ugly human being.

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on December 12, 2011 by Dante Bello

If I could recall vividly I once had a debate with an acquaintance on Twitter about the tagging and calling of people “ugly”. Apparently that did not went down well like most debate on Twitter – 140 characters of expression sometimes is not enough to get a point across – many of what you are trying to pass across get lost in translation – misinterpretation is often the case which lead to most debate not yielding the desired results.

As I ponder upon it more often considering all the exegesis involved – I am quite convinced that there is nothing like an “ugly human being.” You might be wondering to know why I say this but first let us define the word “ugly”.

I check up the word “ugly” in the dictionary and here is the definition I got: 1. “unpleasant to the ear, eye and mind”, 2. unpleasantly suggestive; discreditable, 3. morally repulsive, and 4. threatening, dangerous.

I must say the aforementioned definitions are correct but in line to my thought when a human being is concerned, I see it differently. I find myself making sense of those definitions more to objects (like a piece of artworks, a car, a house, a boat  – (a person’s action – character ) etc) than directly to how a human being looks like. – Definitely a person’s face or body structure cannot be morally repulsive to society.

“Human beings are not objects…”

By saying a person is ugly is not a fact – it is a relative statement that anyone can dispute in many ways depending on their individual constructs and realities – “What is ugly to you; might not be ugly to me.”

I am of the view that there is nothing like an ugly human being. We are all created perfect according to the creators’ intent.

“Humans are the masters’ piece.”

Our creation does not fall short in whatever way you might want to look at it. Each human being is created for a particular purpose and mission on earth – that is what we are here for – to fulfil it.

Each person is created for a particular person that he or she will be attracted to – the instead of applies.

In the eyes of your parents for example, you are the most beautiful creation God ever made. I am yet to see a mother that will disown their child because the child is an “ugly” child – I am yet to find one. If there is any parent like that then definitely that parent is in  need of some psychological re-examination.

I tweeted on Twitter on Sunday saying: “I’m waiting for the day someone will define an “ugly” person for me outside their construct, preference and perception.”  Well I never any received any reply from my followers or from anyone because in trying to define “ugly” outside of our construct, preference and perception is practically impossible. Or do you want to give it a shot?

I believe most often times when someone say a person is ugly, it has more to do with the aforementioned from that tweet because the girl or guy who is branded ugly to you might be the most beautiful thing that has ever happened to another person – so how do you make sense of this swaying fact conclusively? Hence I find it rhetoric to tag a human being ugly because this “fact” in context to human being not being an object does not hold water in any shape form or kind.

An acquaintance of mine on Twitter @Anto_Prophy, well for now she is that as we just started our Twitter journey and hopeful we’ll get to know each more tweet to @Remzzilla: Reconsider the use of the word ugly, it’s meant for objects. A gentleman never goes there.” #BringItIn. This tweet is in context to a debate we were having in regards to @Remzzilla saying: “a chick that cannot keep herself presentable is ugly”.  What I find compelling to agree with Anto tweet is the fact – “ugly” about how a girl looks like (presentable or not) is flawed because is relative  – re: your construct, preference and perception.

Also in looking at it from the innate design of creation it is void – How a person dress or present themselves is circumstantial and it is our personal choice to use our preference whether we can tolerate them around us or not. That is a choice you will have to make based on your taste.

So, by saying a person is ugly is not a fact because somewhere somehow he or she is not to someone else – do we now flawed that and throw it to the dustbin because it does not fit into your construct?

Do we now say because someone does not align to your understanding and expectation of what beauty is – then he or she is outright ugly?

Do we now also say because a person does not meet your standard of what you have been constructed to believe beauty is – so anything outside of that understanding is ugly?

Rather, it is more correct to say someone is not your “type of girl or guy” i.e. putting preference into consideration – it make more sense and logically correct. I will like to believe each person’s preference and definition of what beauty is differs.

I believe we all are beautiful in our own right – our construct and perception creates this wall of what is ugly and what is not – what is beautiful and what is not – this goes against the innate mandate of our being as humans.

There is nothing like an ugly woman or man – if you dispute this – that is alright but first before you put me in my place – please define what an “ugly” person outside your construct, preference and perception.

There is nothing ugly about who you are. Stay beautiful in your own right…

@dantebello on Twitter