The Root of Joy is Discovered in the True Beauty of Women
To really battle transgender ideology, conservatives need a better understanding of beauty
Of the many topics that I have considered writing about, contemplation on the physical beauty of women was not an obvious one for me to consider.
Nor am I in the habit of commenting on the happenings in the world of celebrities, who I consider for all intents and purposes, to be a sort of fictional people group.
However, some recent events have had me thinking about this quite a bit, and specifically the comments and reactions of conservative people with whom I generally agree in many other areas of thought.
Because it’s something that I am not in the habit of doing, with some very specific exemptions, I had to ask myself the question, what would my criteria be for describing a woman as beautiful, or not beautiful?
As C.S. Lewis quotes from an unnamed source, “The beauty of the female is the root of joy to the female as well as to the male, and it is no accident that the goddess of Love is older and stronger than the god.”
It only takes a moment to realize the truth of this. As children first begin to connect words with images and meaning, the word beautiful will almost certainly be understood as a defining
characteristic of their mother. This is true of both sons and daughters, and it’s not the connection that a child makes with their father. Hopefully most people would still agree with the conceptual idea that the love between a mother and a child is a beautiful thing, but for most people in our age, when asked to describe a physically beautiful woman, the overlap between their description, and the description of the average mother of small children will have only a small amount of overlap.
For the most part, a woman will be deemed beautiful if she is sexually attractive to men. There are certain biometric measurements that will indicate to what degree a woman will fit the bill. These are also indicators of health and fertility, such as the ratios between various body parts, the relative symmetry of facial features, and the evidence of good nutrition in the hair and skin.
This sort of reductionism probably makes us a bit uncomfortable. We know that a person is more than a series of shapes, ratios and measurements, and that beauty also has certain ineffable qualities that are not as easily defined. This reality is betrayed by the fact that “beautiful” is not the most common word used to describe women who are upheld as ideal, but rather we use words like “sexy”, “hot”, or “smokin”; terms that indicate a certain level of heat - as if women are mares in estrus.
Naturally speaking, men are attracted to a wider variety of women than simply those that society deems to be beautiful. Attraction has both biological and societal aspects. However, due to the hyper focused algorithmic nature of social media feeds, our perception of the natural distribution of exceptionally beautiful women is the complete inverse of reality. Consequently, men are ashamed to admit that they might find themselves attracted to a woman who is overweight, or who has some other measurable flaw. At the same time, by narrowing the standards of what it means to be beautiful for women, we have unfairly rewarded and punished many women for the hand that they were dealt by genetics. Our current standard of feminine beauty could largely be described as a woman who is so sexually attractive that a typical man would not care how repulsive, cruel or obnoxious her personality might be. What is the result of this dynamic? The top percentages of attractive young women repeatedly engaging in sexual encounters with an even tinier percentage of giga-chads on tinder and other dating apps, yet they are unsuccessful in converting these encounters to committed relationships. The larger majority of women who fall outside the very pinnacle of attractiveness are tricked into hooking up with a bunch of second-rate jackals who are the only men to give them attention. And because women are more selective than men, there is a remainder of bottom feeders, such as the men who try to trick women into dating them by declaring that they are “Lesbian Transwomen” (AKA heterosexual men), and finally, a bunch of rage filled and suicidal incels hopelessly addicted to porn.
A large part of this problem is due to the fact that society in general has forgotten the main purpose for sex; to continue the existence of humanity. But while having children has become an optional life goal, pursuing sexual fulfillment is viewed as primary. This is reflected in what people spend their time, money and attention on.
In previous generations, any community would contain a some finite number of young women, and most if not all would seek to participate in the same roles that women have been engaged in since the dawn of human civilization; namely, raising children in the confines of a monogamous heterosexual relationship, commonly referred to as marriage. In any community, it is inevitable that some sort of natural hierarchy will emerge, and physical beauty would be an important component of that hierarchy. But like most distributions, it would probably be somewhat bell shaped, in a group of 100 young women, a handful would be noticeably more attractive than the rest, their good looks would ensure some level of success in finding a husband, no matter what else they have going on, and a handful would probably be unusually unattractive, who may have a difficult time finding a spouse despite having many other wonderful qualities, but the vast majority of women would find themselves somewhere in the middle, and it would not be unreasonable for them to assume that they would be able to attract a man, or that some arrangement could be made. Because keeping a man faithfully committed is very important to women, and because people are all far more pragmatic than we like to admit, in a wise society these young women would also spend time developing skills and qualities that would make her a valuable contributor to life outside of the bedroom. This could range from the ideals in Proverbs 31, to the sort of aristocratic finishing school skills of the Victorian era, to the home economic skills of the 20th century. As technology and culture change, the importance of particular skills will wax and wane, but for a relationship to be successful, both parties must bring value to the table.
Hierarchies are affected by the standards of both men and women. Men may judge women more primarily on their physical attributes, while women judge other women on their fashion and other aesthetic adornments. Ideally a lack in one area could be compensated for with a boost in the other, and in a small community, these things would sort themselves out where most people can achieve some level of satisfaction in their place in society.
In the age of social media however, the hierarchies are not locally based. They are global. So while a young girl in the middle of the distribution of genetically inherited beauty may have honestly assessed her situation and said, “half of the girls in this town are more beautiful than I am, but I am still more beautiful than the other half”, now all the girls will compare themselves to women who represents a genetic good fortune somewhere in the range of 1 in a million. Perhaps the top handful of local beauties will be able to recognize that they do have many qualities that will ensure relational success, but a large portion of those girls in the middle will not see themselves as able to compete at all. They will compare themselves to a standard of feminine beauty that is just beyond their grasp, and devote massive effort to trying to attain it.
Judging by what trends on social media, you could easily conclude that the main pursuits of almost all female creative energy in our day boil down to only two things - Fitness and beauty. How many people’s entire personality could be summed up in the category of “fit/beautiful person” “person teaching fitness and beauty” and “formerly unfit person who only talks about their fitness/health journey”.
Statistically speaking, teenagers are having less sex than in previous decades. While christians may want to cheer about this, it’s not because they are embracing biblical morality. It’s instead because they are abandoning the inbuilt desire to obey God’s first command, to be fruitful and multiply, and replacing it with a twisted version of that desire, one that seeks to preserve the momentary pleasure of sex, and reproduce the pleasure, without the natural pattern of consequences that follow. A hierarchy that should represent a woman’s capability to be a lifelong companion, and a mother, as well as sexual partner, has been replaced with one that only ranks women on their perceived ability to please men sexually. Tragically, many young girls are attempting to assess their position on a hierarchy that they cannot fully see or understand, and they are deciding that it would be easier to compete in a different hierarchy altogether. This is where the transgender movement comes in, as well as the less surgically permanent ideological movements adjacent to it. Our society's narrow definition of beauty has created a backlash of alternative lifestyles, because we have failed to embrace the beauty in true diversity, not only in the physical characteristics of women, but in all their values.
The fact that wokeness and trans ideology are so politically tied to the left, has also caused those on the right to simply oppose anything and everything that the left put forth. Those on the right did not have a sufficient understanding of beauty (not only physical beauty, but artistic beauty as well) prior to this particular set of debates, and they are still deficient in their understanding. Sadly, the women who are embracing these alternative lifestyles abandon all attempts to pursue beauty. They become ugly not only on the outside, by marring their bodies, but also on the inside, as they embrace the idea that all men are predators and abusers. Demi Lovato is a sad example of a woman who, although she was quite beautiful, did not feel sufficient in her place, and so she has rejected any attempts to appear “attractive” in the way that women and men have understood that word for centuries. She has abandoned the hierarchy of feminine beauty for one that rewards destruction.
What has made this topic salient to me lately, is the response of many conservative and right wing people to the selection of Yumi Nu on the cover of the sports illustrated swimsuit issue. As I said at the beginning of this article, these are people that I agree with on most topics. They would agree that it is not good that young women, as well as young men, are being drawn into celebrating and embracing radical new sexual identities. They would lament that younger and younger children are being exposed to pornography, and being taught about sexuality in schools, without respect for their parents. They would affirm that abortion is a terrible thing, and that the destruction of a human life at the altar of selfishness is a tragedy. And yet, when a young woman who falls outside the narrowly defined definition of female beauty graces a magazine cover, their responses are absolutely repugnant.
Jordan Peterson was rightly criticized for saying that she was not beautiful, and that “no amount of authoritarian tolerance is going to change that”. Michael Knowles sheepishly asked if he was “The only conservative who thinks that Yumi Nu does in fact have a certain physical beauty”, and based on many of the other responses, it’s understandable why he would think that. Hopefully she doesn’t end up seeing all the barf faces, comparisons to marine mammals, and comments about her inability to control her eating.
There seems to be a real disconnect between the conservative ideal to protect family values in regards to things like woke ideology and transgenderism, and the embrace of a market-driven philosophy towards fulfilling the male appetite for a constant stream of sexy female images. This dissonance was also made apparent in the crass use of semi-clothed models in the Daily Wire’s “Jeremy’s Razors” commercial. And while we are at it, this is probably a good time to bring up the fact that we shouldn’t even be defending the SI Swimsuit Edition, which was essentially created as an annual incentive to sell subscriptions to a magazine about sports, mostly aimed at married men with the promise of thinly veiled smut. Husbands everywhere were eager to save their wives the trouble of collecting the mail from the mailbox, lest this precious cargo find its way into the wastebasket by mistake.
When I was a foolish and naive youth, Shane Claiborne’s book “Jesus for President” did what it was intended to do, and I became convinced that the “loving” Christian should vote for Obama (not that the alternatives were that great.) However, as I became aware of how people are manipulated on both sides of the political divide, it was much easier to vote for Donald Trump, because he clearly was the lesser of two evils in both his campaigns. Despite this, I was never tempted to buy a MAGA hat or support him in any outspoken way, because he is still an immoral person, and his attitude towards women is repugnant. It’s not hard to say that someone can be right about some things, and wrong about others. How can I arrive at such a position? By following the standard of the Bible. If Roe V. Wade is repealed, as seems likely after the SCOTUS leak, perhaps we as Christians can finally begin to hold conservative politicians to a coherent standard of morality. While I believe in capitalism, I also believe in the fallen nature of man. Nothing can withstand the corrupting influence of sin, including the free market. The only way to combat this influence is to actively fight against it. Not through brute force or central planning, but through the creation of genuinely superior products and ideas. A big part of this means a recapturing of a biblical concept of beauty.
Normally, I do not seek out images of women in swimsuits. However, when I saw the picture in Dr. Peterson’s Twitter post, my initial thought was “that’s a woman”. In this regard, Ms. Nu is an embodied answer to the question that Matt Walsh has been asking all over the world. Does she carry more weight than some doctors would prefer? Sure. But honestly, how much are we going to trust doctors in 2022? Are they motivated by anything other than avoiding litigation? One person on “Truth social” posted the image with the fact that according to her biometric data, the CDC refers to Yumi as “obese”. Hasn’t the MAGA camp spent the last two years lambasting the CDC as some sort of authoritarian evil? Yet the fact that “it’s not healthy to be overweight” seemed to be a consistent criticism for many of the people commenting on her selection as a cover model. From the convservative voting base, it’s surprising that this would be such a concern. Having lived in Texas for close to four years, I can confidently say that health is not a major concern for most conservatives.
Why would a few extra pounds bother so many people on a model, when it doesn’t concern them that there is an epidemic of obesity in America? Perhaps it’s because conservative politicians have no interest in investigating the root cause, which is almost certainly tied to the government subsidization of food production. Farmers are middle of America red voters - let’s not rock that boat! The insertion of high-fructose corn syrup and other byproducts into nearly every food is not the consequence of free market economics. Government interference in economic production always leads to unhealthy excess, such as the gin craze of the 18th century in England, which resulted in children as young as 10 and 12 regularly poisoning themselves on cheap, abundant government subsidized alcohol.
If we are going to have a real chance of reversing the trends toward transgenderism, gender dysmorphia, and the hypersexualiztion of everything, we cannot simply point out the evil. We must embrace something better, and that requires that we reevaluate our conception of what is beautiful. When I said my first thought on seeing Ms. Nu’s cover photo was “that’s a woman” I meant it in regards to the fact that it was quite obviously not a man. The equating of beauty with peak physical fitness blurs the distinctions between men and women. When the ideal is a very low body fat, men can in fact become better looking “women” than many real women. In that regard, we should celebrate the fact that at least this year, only biological females grace the cover of this magazine.
In seeing that image, I could easily discern that Yumi Nu is a real woman because she carries a little more weight. Women and men carry their weight differently, and the distinctions become more clear between the sexes when a few more pounds are present.
Much of the criticism of Ms. Nu came from young men, who aren’t used to seeing anything but the carefully curated version of female beauty brought to their eyes through the algorithms of the internet, but there was also criticism from other women.
One writer on substack under the name “the mad mommy” concluded her blog post about fat models with this little gem:
“You see, Boys and Girls, in the real world, those who constantly strive for excellence are the ones who will survive and thrive in a free society. Don't let a fat model on the runway make you think otherwise” Now, apparently she worked hard to lose weight, so she’s now in the expert category of “person who was formerly less fit/beautiful”, and she sees Ms. Nu’s current physical appearance as a failure to strive for excellence. Yumi Nu is 5’11’, putting her in the 99.8th percentile for height, which is almost certainly taller than Ms. Mommy blogger, and no amount of hard work and bootstrap tugging would allow her to look the current swimsuit model directly in her eyes, unless that effort was used to grab a stepladder.
As far as excellence, almost no one who has commented on her physical appearance seems aware of the fact that Ms. Nu is not merely a model, but also a singer songwriter. I listened to some of her music on Spotify, and while it may not be in my personal taste, it is apparent that she is someone who possesses talent, and strives for excellence. Some of the songs were quite clever. Paul wrote to Timothy that “physical training is of some value, but training for godliness is much better, promising benefits in this life and in the life to come.” I would place training in music and the arts somewhere between those two categories. Listening to her music was certainly more enjoyable than reading a disgruntled mommy blogger complain about fat models.
The male critiques are based almost solely on Ms. Nu’s perceived sexual attractiveness, and are almost certainly lopsided in regards to where those men fall in the distribution of attractiveness. (in other words, they are criticizing a woman that they would have no chance with, both physically and socioeconomically) After all, most women prefer a man that is at least a few inches taller than them, so Ms. Nu’s height alone puts her out of the league of most men, and the fact that women desire a man who has more earning potential eliminates even more.
Here’s where the rubber meets the road; most men (speaking in regards to averages and distributions) are not going to find themselves in a relationship with a woman who has more traits of physical beauty and attractiveness than Ms. Nu, and they certainly won’t find themselves suddenly involved with the type of woman they are critically comparing her to. But if they are able to secure a relationship with a woman, will they refuse to call them beautiful? Will they hold their own spouse to the same standard that they are judging this young woman? Or consider an even more likely scenario: Perhaps a good percentage of these men will be able to marry a woman who has a lower percentage of body fat than Ms. Nu on their wedding day. People change over time. The woman you marry does not remain the same. Will they kick their wives to the curb when they cross an imaginary line between acceptable, and gross? Will they tell their wives that they look like “a beached whale” the first time she puts on a swimsuit after giving birth? Weight gain is inevitable when women bear children. The algorithms will push those women who are able to quickly shed those pounds to the top of the feed, (because making it look easy is the hallmark of great content) - but what if your wife isn’t able to lose that weight so quickly?
Let me speak from personal experience. My own wife was quite thin for most of her youth and young adulthood. We didn’t meet until we were about 24 years old, and to be honest, I don’t remember what her physical shape was the first time we met. I do remember her smile -(she doesn’t even remember that meeting.) We did not begin dating until much later on, but we were coworkers and became friends. During that period, she gained a significant amount of weight. Was it because she was lazy? No. My wife is one of the hardest working people I know, and has remained physically active as a dance teacher throughout our relationship. After some tests, she discovered that her weight gain was actually due to a type of tumor in her brain. Surgery would be dangerous and could threaten a loss of vision, but fortunately, there was a good chance that medication could cause the tumor to shrink. When we began dating, she was still going through this process. She was working hard to eat healthy and exercise, and she was (rightfully so) quite proud of the results. I am an awkward person, and I don't feel naturally at ease giving compliments. But I knew that I needed to praise Mandie for the beauty that she possessed, and not let her compare herself to others. Women are all unique. They all possess qualities that are unreplicated in another person anywhere on earth. Some of those qualities are available for anyone to see, but some are hidden, and God desires that they will become known only to the man who will love her, cherish her, and seek to uncover her beauty. This goes beyond the exclusivity of intimacy. What the purity culture did not understand is that even if another man has slept with a woman, only a husband can truly “know” his wife. God brought the beauty that I needed to discover in the form of a woman, and that act of discovery continues to this day.
In all honesty, I had to work through some of my own issues regarding beauty and attractiveness when our relationship began. My conception of beauty was absolutely shaped by what was fed to me through media, movies, advertising, and a very early exposure to (pre-internet) pornography. The purity culture in my homeschool and church environment was a bit warped towards a “purity prosperity gospel” - in my mind, the sign of God’s favor would be revealed in the relative discrepancy between my own attractiveness, and that of my future wife. Eventually, God revealed the idolatrous nature of my desire for a spouse, and I stopped actively pursuing relationships indefinitely, until the Lord directed me to do otherwise. It was after the sudden and tragic death of my wife's mother that I realized how much she had come to mean to me as a friend, and through a series of very obviously divine circumstances, our relationship began. By our second date (the only second date I ever secured), we both knew that our marriage was only a question of when.
In the early stages of that relationship, when it became clear that this was the woman I would marry, I made a conscious decision. Mandie would become my standard of beauty. In every particular moment, her present appearance would be the way that I would define what a beautiful woman looks like. I never refer to my wife as being pretty. Pretty is a word that many women may like to hear, but the definition of pretty is “attractive in a delicate way without being truly beautiful”. How could I describe the woman who embodies my definition of beauty, as not truly beautiful? My wife looked gorgeous on our wedding day, but that memory, or the photograph, is not my definition of beautiful. My definition of physical beauty is embodied in the appearance of my wife today, and tomorrow it will be the way she looks tomorrow. The memory of yesterday adds to the entirety of that definition, it makes it richer and fuller, and it’s always expanding. Some things about her appearance won’t change very much; the amazing smile that was the first thing I ever noticed about her, her unique eyes that are not quite blue and not quite green, with subtle hints of amber. Other things may change. Her figure has changed since having children, and it continues to change as she works hard to be healthy, not because I am demanding it of her, but because she is very aware of how devastating it is to lose a mother prematurely due to poor health. For a long time, my wife was the only woman I referred to as beautiful, until we had our first daughter. Our two girls are absolutely beautiful, and very likely as they mature, they will continue to meet many of the physical standards of beauty, certainly in the upper half, rather than the lower half of the distribution of attractiveness. When I call them beautiful, everyone agrees. But if they were not blessed with physical traits that society perceives as beautiful, would I be wrong as a father to tell them that they are beautiful? Would it be better if I said, “most young men will rank you as a 4 or a 5. They will consider dating you a step down, so you might have to let them get physical if you want to keep them interested.” For a father to say such a thing would be despicable, even if it was true.
But why is it that we affirm that a father should call his daughters beautiful, even if they are not? How can we uphold such a standard without being liars? And how can we be opposed to other things that people want to affirm? If we don’t want our daughters to claim to be boys, shouldn’t we be brutally honest about how attractive or unattractive they actually are?
The answer that many people would give, and that thankfully, many people did give in response to the criticisms of Yumi Nu, is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think that this statement is true. But I think that we are probably wrong about what that statement means. We think that we are the ones who see beauty. But we can only see parts of a person. We can focus on certain aspects, some of them measurable, others harder to describe. But we are all seen to our innermost being by the eyes of God. God is the one who truly sees. He sees us not only when we are at our best, but at our worst. He sees our past, and our future. God is intimately aware of every flaw, yet he considers our being to be good. When we catch a glimpse of beauty, it is a revelation of the true nature of God’s creation - a creation that was not ultimately complete until the arrival of the woman - the capstone of the physical world. The first human verse was a spontaneous response to the presence of a flesh and blood woman, standing in a garden. Eve was the mother of all the living. All her children would call her beautiful, and she would say that each and every one of her children was beautiful as well. As the next part of the Lewis quote goes, “To desire the desiring of beauty is the vanity of Lilith, but to desire the enjoying of her own beauty is the obedience of Eve,” If we cannot perceive the beauty in a person, it is because we don’t have eyes to see, not because it isn’t there.
When I looked at the image from the magazine cover, my first thought was “that’s a woman.” My second thought was, “That’s a beautiful woman”, and my third thought was, “She reminds me of my wife.” (My next thoughts were, “Jordan is being an idiot.”, and then “I probably shouldn’t be looking at swimsuit pictures”) When I was 20, I might have been tempted to criticize her appearance. And I understand those who are upset because they feel that they are being “forced” into accepting and affirming a false notion of beauty. A demand for acceptance and appreciation with no desire to improve or grow is not beautiful. But inside everyone there is a seed of beauty. It was created by God’s speech, and it grows through the same creative process. The words of God caused light to come into our world, and by that light we can see that what He made is good. We were made in the image and likeness of God, with the power to speak, and the vocabulary to express truth, goodness, and beauty. When we use our words wisely, we cause that beauty to grow and flourish. We cultivate beauty with the truth. When we dispel lies that a woman believes about herself, her beauty becomes more visible. This is the work that Christ does in us. We read the word of God to remind us of our true identity, and even when it may not seem to reflect our current reality, we choose to act in the belief that these words are true.
It’s apparent that this young woman decided to become a model because she believed that she was beautiful. It’s impressive that her own belief defies the voices of her critics. Delusion can shield someone from listening to criticism, but so can the truth. I don’t think that she is deluded, nor was it a notion she came up with on her own. It started with her parents. Good parents see the beauty in their children, and foster it to grow. They protect them from harm while their identities are made secure, and a child who knows who they are is far less susceptible to lies of this world. For those who embrace many of the values of the world, to have their daughter become a model is a celebration of her beauty. I do not want my daughters to aspire to be swimsuit models, I don’t think that is the best way to celebrate beauty. But I do want them to feel beautiful. I don’t want them to desire being desired, but I want them to desire the enjoyment of their beauty. Some parts of their beauty should be enjoyed by everyone, other parts should be enjoyed by their children, and certain parts only for their husbands. But regardless of how someone appears, there is beauty inside of them, and that beauty can be evident in their bodies, even if they do not fit the shape of what the world accepts as beautiful. As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” It may start at our feet, but the gospel can transform every part of us into something beautiful.