Identifying Real Beauty And Why We Should Not Compliment Deceit In Place Of The Real Thing

by Benson Agoha | Opinion

Does a spectacular combination of brain, good looks and confidence, two of them, important attributes of power, symbolize beauty? Is there a correlation between beauty and power?

For example, can we conclude that `beauty is powerful' and conversely, that `power is beautiful?' Perhaps, it's all matter of perspective

But in so far as our varying convictions about beauty go without a doubt, there are those who will argue that they recognize it when they see it. Do you?

Besides, custodians of `beauty' claim that they know it when they have it. One a sage admonishes that beauty is transient and ephemeral - just like power. Perhaps, this is why lovers of beauty seek it, to find it, understand it and know it - in case it disappears.

Some say beauty empowers uniquely. But, as much as it does, it is only internal strength that truly exposes and drives it to the surface. Simply put, power projects beauty. So beauty is a derivative of power.

How then do you recognize, and progressively reinforce latent strengths in others, to stimulate their beauty?

Psychologists believe that beauty is a product of happiness. In other words, if you want to be beautiful, try to be happy, even though you still have to pursue happiness.

Happiness, itself, is a `state' induced by different variables in exchange for its own by-products of varying behaviours that depend on the individual, and his personality characteristics.

Mystics and astrologers believe that beauty is a product of a different `state' that depends on an individual's `self-rising'. Self-rising increases one's sex appeal and radiance. Each of the standpoints have their relevance.

Furthermore, if recognizing what triggers inner strength proves difficult, defining `beauty' appears even more so. Yet many of us crave for beauty more than a superior inner strength.

Without inner strength, beauty exudes a forlorn and despondent morph of an outlook. Without `inner strength' also, `will' is lost, and without `will', there is no `hope'. Without `hope', radiance varnish. Without radiance, there can be no `confidence'.

There are then five variable features of appreciable beauty - all of them, in varying degrees, as shown in the above beauty pyramid:

Inner Strength: this harbinger of beauty is the energy necessary to consciously articulate and aim for a given cause.

Will: the determination to unwaveringly peck away on that cause towards the desired outcome - often seen as positive.

Hope: the belief that there is a future positive result that is derivable from that pursuit. Often, this is more tasking when all else points the vector to a wrong direction. Hope sustains trials and failures and encourages successive repeats.

Radiance: the noticeable result of that conviction that you are doing the right thing towards a desired goal. It is often seen and once manifestly leads to peak performance. It is the point at which `beauty' is observable.

Confidence: The point at which possessors of beauty are seen to exhibit noticeable self-belief as expressed in their postures. In turn, confidence produces an element of calmness and self-worth exemplified by inner peace.

Inferentially, beauty is a product of inner strength, will, hope, radiance and confidence - in that order.

Let me tell you guys a true story. I was once fascinated by a particular face - a Facebook friend. She was this exciting types with seemingly no dull moment. She radiated happiness, seemed on top of her game - each and every time. But with some 6,000 miles between us, physical proof of that personality was not possible.

One day, she uploaded new photos, looking faultless, her smile hiding any wrinkles, her chicks well rounded, two parted lips, beautifully coated with thick veneer of red gloss, exposed a perfectly brushed set glittering in front of the camera. Her eyes were hazel and caught at the right angle by the camera, it simply came out at you. Hair nicely done too.

I was sold to her beauty, and posted up my compliments: "Nice one Tiff...you are adorable, awesomely pretty you couldn't pass without heads turning...bla..bla..bla".

No doubt, as `many us' do to `many of them' on daily basis, I made her life easier. From across the pond, I could only imagine how she would have grinned from ear to ear, feeling like that proverbial Cinderella. Till her brother spoilt the fun for her.

"Bobby......it's all done ooo.." he said, and added "..it's all done - hair done, nail, done, teeth done, eyes done. Y'all got to learn to treat these women, the way they really are...it's all done!"

Of course, most women won't let anyone see them without being "done". It's the reason we are often reminded never to judge a book by its cover.

Plato sought to assuage the feelings of diffidence, and the confusion that beauty quest creates in and for people and, and after exploring what true beauty really is, he concluded that "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!"

Are you beautiful and, importantly, can you recognize beauty when you see it in others?

We may live in a world where courtesy and mischief have teamed up to culturize the art of complimenting deceit in place of beauty, but whenever you recognize the `truly beautiful', don't hold back.

Be generous - after all, generosity is beautiful!

Paris Attacks v Boko Haram Attacks: Why That Argument Is Not Valid

by Benson Agoha | Opinion

Like many others, I changed my Facebook photo in solidarity with France (right).

Surprisingly, questions are being asked why the world easily aligns with the French in such cases, when it has not done so for Nigeria, over Boko Haram.

As often is the case, many have argued that although Britain and America have the ability to wipe out Boko Haram, they have failed to do so because of what is essentially, a regional consideration. In order words Nigeria doesn't matter as much to them.

While it is tempting to ignore these insinuations and maintain a degree of silence, after all, they are arguably, to all intents and purposes, mere conjectures, it does seem in order if one made a different contribution.

In truth, no one may say, with certainty, what the determining factors for high level governmental decisions are - unless they have been privileged to be part of the relevant committee to recommend it. But given what we know, I have had to argue that our disposition to issues that concern us, also affects other people's reaction to our predicament.

Inferentially, a leader's initial reaction to acts of terror against his people, affects his capacity to attract outside help. It is a simple matter of syllogy - if you hate a certain pain so much, you are almost certain to be willing to accept help when offered.

Time and time again, France, and indeed, all civilized nations have shown their disdain for any form of acts of terror - irrespective of whether the individual is a citizen or not. Terror is terror, and as very often seen, it hardly does a victim any good.

Now, in the case of Boko Haram, one must ask - did the Nigerian government show immediate reaction and determination to counter it?

I remember watching a video of a BBC interview in which former President Jonathan Goodluck was almost loosing his temper during an interview, when the journalist wondered why Nigeria had not showed as much seriousness in fighting back until the last months of his administration.

His response included that the country had no weapons to fight, having not fought a major war since the Nigerian civil war ended in 1970. So, weapons had to be ordered, and allowed to arrive before something can be done.

Yet, despite not having fought a major war, Nigeria has had to deal with several home grown rebel movements which tasked its armed forces on law enforcement. Nigerian forces have also been involved in peace keeping missions abroad over the years, including Somalia, Sierra Leone, Liberia.

In Nigeria, the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) is a `secessionist group', the Oodua People's Congress (OPC) is `militant group' while (Boko Haram), took violence to a new level, and made it to the terror list. But violence is violence.

Together with several other groups, these rebels have unleashed many years of abductions, killings, blackmail as well as disruption to affairs of civil society.

President Goodluck told his interviewer that "...no President would be happy to be loosing citizens". Perhaps so. But would these happen in France, Britain or Germany, and not be tackled decisively?

As has been demonstrated time and time again, France, and indeed Britain and America do not tolerate any form of terrorist attack. For a grievance to be entertained, you are encouraged to channel it through the courts - and accept the verdict, by which the government also pledges to abide.

No form of violence is entertained, and whether it is home grown or foreign import, is immaterial. Therein lies the difference.

In 2015 Britain, culprits of the August 2011 riots are still being tracked and whenever any is caught, he or she will still face the law accordingly.

Doesn't one wise saying insist that "as you make your bed, so you will lie on it" Let's `make our bed' rather than argue over those who have made their's.