“In Defense of Eye Candy” is an article about computer interface design, but the more I read it, the more I realized that it applies to gender identity and presentation just as strongly. One of the features of kyriarchy (and I love that word, and am so glad to know it) is the idea that things expressed in rationalistic categories, preferably with numbers, are fundamentally more real than ones expressed in terms of emotion. So it pleases me very much to read things like:
…emotion is not a luxury: it is an expression of basic mechanisms of life regulation developed in evolution, and is indispensable for survival. It plays a critical role in virtually all aspects of learning, reasoning, and creativity. Somewhat surprisingly, it may play a role in the construction of consciousness.
and:
affect, which is inexplicably linked to attitudes, expectations and motivations, plays a significant role in the cognition of product interaction…the perception that affect and cognition are independent, separate information processing systems is flawed.
This speaks truth to me. It suggests that beauty, in the sense of achieving the presentation we desire, is likely to genuinely improve our own cognition, and in letting us deal with the world as people who feel truthful about ourselves improve the ways we interact with others.
The more we learn about people, and how our brains process information, the more we learn the truth of that phrase: form and function aren’t separate items. If we believe that style somehow exists independent of functionality, that we can treat aesthetics and function as two separate pieces, then we ignore the evidence that beauty is much more than decoration. Our brains can’t help but agree.
