Posted:
Originally posted by: krystal_watz
You made the statements, "Butch females are not conventionally/classically beautiful", and "Usually they look like... who are not conventionally good-looking".
These (regarding how 'butch females look') were your opinions, not the media's.
Okay let me again restate the obvious, for one last time. I started off my first post by clearly stating I was explaining someone else's opinion. So I am not sure why confusion still remains. I am sure Terenaina said what she said in her initial post because these are general opinions found on any online forum about these women which by the way the media is ultimately responsible for. I in turn gave a few examples of female celebrities of this category that aren't considered beautiful in the classical sense, subjective opinion, yes but that is what majority thinks, a simple google search would show that this subjective opinion is held by many. Of course, that still doesn't make it the universal truth but it isn't an opinion held by just one person. Again, I am relaying what I have time and time again read on any online forum or social media platform. The media only shows one type of butch lesbian which ultimately brainwashes the public into thinking that's all they are. If the media started showing different types of lesbians, general public opinion about lesbians would change as well and they wouldn't start overhyping the first conventionally pretty one (a.k.a Ruby Rose) that comes along.
This type of brainwashing done by media also explains why people express shock at Deepika or Aishwarya being Indian in the west. It's because only one type of Indian women are shown on the media by the West (but that is changing now). That's why you see comments like "oh she is pretty for an Indian" as were seen on that recent DP article. Are these offensive and ignorant? Yes, of course they are. But do such opinions exist? Yes.
15