Have young women’s tastes changed, or are they now made to feel they have to share the gay aesthetic?
Published:
June 10, 2014 at 10:13pm
In my day we’d never have been attracted to anything like this. If the girls and I had seen these two coming down the rocks at Ferro Bay we’d have assumed they were cruising for chaps up where the gay men sat in their special spot between Ferro and Fond Ghadir.
It’s an odd look – contradictory. Despite the muscles and the pseudo-macho, it curiously doesn’t give off a masculine vibe at all, but rather the opposite.
I think it has something to do with the shininess, the waxed torso and the preening – men who preen are such a major turn-off to women. But then, men who preen are rarely interested in women, and not necessarily because they’re gay.
24 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/fashion-and-style/10881682/The-metrosexual-is-dead.-Long-live-the-spornosexual.html
Some men who preen and are a major turnoff generally and to women in particular, don’t look like that at all. Malta’s most famous cockfighter has a paunch, not a six-pack.
In the 70s and 80s the gay iconography added fun to novelty, Now it’s plain weird.
Thank God I’m not the only one who thinks so! I was starting to give up after having countless arguments that men aren’t so masculine anymore. The thought that a man is more into creams and waxing than a woman is a very big turn off.
Hear hear!
The last sentence, genius!
because women care more about money and men care more about looks
Just last week, my 15-year old brother declared that he intends to wax his legs for the summer season. He was, of course, immediately shot down by my mother and me.
It has, unfortunately, become the fashion.
Prosit, jien l-istess nahseb. Socjeta mibnija fuq id-dehra.
The answer to your question is both yes and no.
Deep down, nothing has changed, not since the dawn of time.
Men are attracted to women and women are attracted to men. That’s just the way it is. If people suddenly stopped trying to beautify themselves and let nature do its own thing, they would still be attracted to each other because they are biologically programmed to do so.
Adam must have had a pretty big beard. Eve must have been pretty hairy. Neither of them painted their fingernails, went to the gym, dyed their hair, had tattoos or implants or wore sexy clothing but it didn’t stop them from lusting for each other.
That said, social norms certainly have an impact on what many people consider to be attractive. A man with a Tolstoy like beard is often seen as non-presentable or even dirty nowadays. The same goes for a woman with hairy armpits.
Ironically, as time goes on, and for good or bad, the more natural a look is, the more alternative it is considered to be. Pure logic would say exactly the opposite.
Hollywood makes for an interesting study of aesthetics. The James Bond franchise is particularly good because it has run for so long.
Compare Pierce Brosnan to Daniel Craig and Ursula Andress to Eva Green. The general consensus amongst Hollywood observers is that men are becoming more feminine and women are becoming more masculine. The men want to show that they too know how to care about their bodies and the women want to show that they are as tough and brainy as the men, and they’re not only about looks.
It is certainly a gay aesthetic of sorts but people who grow up with it will think it perfectly normal and actually find it attractive (to the dismay and bewilderment of the older generation) because that is what they are used to.
At the end of the day, men and women will always be attracted to each other regardless of the social aesthetic but the social aesthetic and social norm ensures that one look triumphs over another.
One must also point out that Hollywood reality is different to reality on the rest of planet Earth. How many men – real men with jobs, families and things to do – have the time and motivation to maintain the look in the above photograph past the age of 25? Sadly, the fastest growing look nowadays is a spherical one, and that goes for both men and women.
How many young women today would go for the soft and hairy Sean Connery Bond over the chiselled Greek God look of Daniel Craig?
And how many men would go for the chubby and short Marilyn Monroe over a hot bod like Jessica Alba or Angelina Jolie? Things have changed.
[Daphne – They haven’t really. Instinct tells me that even today, if Marilyn Monroe were to walk into a party, all the men would start moving towards her as though drawn by magnets, while Jessica Alba and Angelina Jolie would only be admired from other parts of the room.
And even young women today would be falling over Sean Connery in Dr No. As for Daniel Craig in his current incarnation, he’s an old man to young women – their father’s age, my age. He appeals to women of my generation and not theirs, and there is nothing remotely chiselled or Greek God about him. His appeal lies precisely in the fact that he looks as though he’s spent the last 25 years climbing mountains or trekking through the wilderness in hot sun without sunglasses. In other words, the opposite of those guys shown here on the beach, who look as though they spend their time oiling themselves in front of a mirror while their mother does their laundry.]
Pity they haven’t changed in Malta. Hlief irgiel u tfajliet impahphin ma tarax hawn meta tmur il-bahar. Going to the beach has become an almost horrifying experience.
Daniel Craig is a Greek god in comparison to the average pot-bellied man. Sure, he gets laughed at by gym rats – his physique is average in the bodybuilding world.
I cannot see how he looks any different than the men in the picture. Just like them, he attained that physique by spending hours in the gym with the rest of the day spent eating boiled children breast and broccoli, and getting his entire body waxed: http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02101/daniel-craig-620_2101438b.jpg
Women hardly care how and why a man looks the way he does. Girls today swoon at the sight of ripped waxed young men like Channing Tatum, and Zac Efron, as well as the much older Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, and Daniel Craig. They might be the age of their fathers, but they look nothing like their fathers, do they.
[Daphne – Plenty of fathers do in fact look like that and some even better, but they’re not famous actors and so are taken for granted. It’s the fame that does it. In reality, Tom Cruise is just another midget and Brad Pitt taken out of context would look like just another goateed pervert on the beach.]
Sure, some women would prefer an out of shape average man with classic good looks like Connery (who funnily enough was a bodybuilder in his early days), but why settle for that when you can have a man with an equally attractive face but with the physique of Michelangelo’s David?
[Daphne – Because women are not attracted to abs and pecs AT ALL. They only claim to be, in public, because there is so much pressure to do so. Women’s sexuality is completely different to men’s. This is a biological fact as old as the human race and fashion only changes it on the surface. The reality is that most women would take Sean Connery at any age and in any condition over those two men at the beach. With women, sex appeal has very little to do with muscle tone. What was it about Connery? His voice, his eyes, his wit and his intelligence – without those, his good looks and figure would have had little or no impact. And that’s just what I’m trying to explain to you here: you look at those two preening guys on the beach and you just know for a fact that they’re poorly educated, unintelligent and that conversation with them is going to be like hauling rocks up a cliff. For women, good looks are just not enough. For many men, they are. That’s why you so often get really clever men with vacuous but pretty wives, but never a really clever woman with a good-looking stupid dolt for a husband.]
What turned Daphne’s beloved Daniel Craig into the hot property that he is now is precisely the look she seems to be complaining about:
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2011-08/02/gq-sport-james-bond-daniel-craig-workout-fitness-file
I notice Daphne did not post the following comment (methinks she does not like it when someone blows a hole through her hang-up driven arguments, as much as she does not like the fact that gay men lead where straight men follow):
What turned Daphne’s beloved Daniel Craig into the hot property that he is now is precisely the look she seems to be complaining about:
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2011-08/02/gq-sport-james-bond-daniel-craig-workout-fitness-file
[Daphne – Funny how some people claim to be unable to stand me and then hang around for hours anxiously waiting for their comment to be uploaded and imagining there are nefarious reasons why it hasn’t been. I’ve been out all day on photoshoots. If for some reason I don’t wish to upload a comment, you will get a delete message. If it says ‘awaiting moderation’, then believe it.
No, you are completely wrong. There is nothing in this photograph of Daniel Craig which is even remotely similar to the one I’ve uploaded of those two oiled men on the beach. The differences are not subtle. They are major. If girls/women saw this walking into the water, they would follow. If they were to see those two walking along the beach, they would assume they’re a couple. To be more specific: Daniel Craig looks like he got that way because of his work, i.e. a rig worker, while those other two look like they have made looking that way an end in itself. He looks properly masculine, and they look anything but. I really don’t know why these things have to be explained.]
I never claimed to be unable to stand you. In fact, I find you very entertaining and enjoy baiting you from time to time when you need to be corrected.
[Daphne – ‘When you need to be corrected’. I hope no woman is stupid enough to marry you.]
Funny that older comments got posted before mine – you must have been trying to find a way out of this one.
[Daphne – Yes, and how. The problem had me on tenterhooks all afternoon. Obviously older comments were uploaded before yours. They came in before yours did; that’s why they’re older.]
The fact is, as Drew said, and as mentioned in the link I posted, Daniel Craig achieved his look by spending hours at the gym and waxing, not by working on an oil rig.
[Daphne – This is about the look itself, and not about how it was achieved. That is the point. Two young women spend hours at the hairdresser and with the make-up woman. One emerges looking made-up and blow-dried; the other with a make-up ‘free’, natural and tousled look. They have both spent the same amount of time and trouble on their hair and make-up. Their looks are completely different. One look appeals to other women; the other looks appeals to men.]
The scene in the picture is a take on Ursula Andress’s bikini exit from the sea (Dr No) – can’t get any gayer than that.
[Daphne – It isn’t a take on Ursula Andress at all. Emerging from the waves is a mythological reference and is as old as time. The Dr No scene is itself a reference to Aphrodite rising from the sea: http://www.reading.ac.uk/ure/leaflets/Ure_Aphrodite_Cyrene.pdf . You need a better education. You can’t understand contemporary culture unless you are able to reference its roots.]
And your equally beloved Sean Connery was Mr Universe contestant in the 1950s, which is what attracted the Bond producer’s wife to recommend him for the role:
http://www.pinterest.com/SevenSpotGR/sean-connery/
The fact is that Daphne sees what she wants to see. She probably decided that the demigods in the top picture went to Natius Ola, whereas Daniel Craig’s torso is naturally smooth (or waxed by fellow oil workers).
[Daphne – I strongly suggest you spend time in the archaeology section of a good museum, looking at statues of demi-gods and working out their defining characteristics, and how very different they are to your two chaps on the beach. The fact is that most women (and probably most straight men, too) instantly recognise that there is something not quite masculine about those two. And notice that I said ‘masculine’ and not ‘straight’.]
In Malta it’s become common practice for young men to pluck and style their eyebrows. 15 years ago the ladies of my generation would have considered this to be incredibly off-putting.
This is a planet where F1 drivers appear in anti-dandruff shampoo ads and use pit radio to whine about tyres, brakes and just about everything electronically controlled.
Imagine these asked to do the same.
http://37.media.tumblr.com/3e433e7ea3f34691b1a55d5e8c95a203/tumblr_mk7rdsb7CK1rod8iso1_1280.jpg
Jim Clark, the smoothest and coolest of them all.
http://content-mcdn.feed.gr/filesystem/images/20130615/low/newego_LARGE_t_77761_240770.JPG
James Hunt, playboy, fast, dangerous.
http://f1-history.deviantart.com/art/Gilles-Villeneuve-Netherlands-1981-333944635
Gilles Villeneuve, Enzo Ferrari’s psychological nightmare following the latter’s loss of a son to leukemia.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Ayrton_Senna_with_a_Dog.jpg
Ayrton Senna, tortured by his privileged upbringing in Brazil.
Icons reflecting their fans’ latent homosexuality. Whatever they did was perfect, objects of unquestioning love.
All gone and consecrated to legend. I doubt the two in the picture would even know who they are.
I think we can blame David Beckham
See for yourself: http://www.reddit.com/r/LadyBoners/top/
[Daphne – Benedict Cumberbatch would have been attractive even in the 1970s. In fact, his particular charms are typical of what was popular in that era. Robert Plant, Marc Bolan – very ‘girly’, but at the same time, absolutely no gay aesthetic. In fact, men wanted to be them, whereas the reaction you would get from a normal man to a muscle-bound, oiled poser preening around would be scorn (privately). ]
I agree with you on Benedict Cumberbatch.
Although he’s old enough to be my father (he’s 37, I’m 24), I’d definitely choose him over the young, muscular men who normally vie for my attention at the gym.
I think it’s just the sexualisation of men. The exact same thing happened to women in the modern age, although more severely of course.
People are more comfortable with the idea of a man being the object of desire, so much more than they were in the 80s and earlier.
[Daphne – Men have been treated as objects of desire since the 1960s at least. What’s different now is that women have been programmed into the gay aesthetic and led to think it’s normal. But from what I see, when it comes to choosing a mate, they choose what has always been the straight male aesthetic.]
But certainly not in the same way they are now. Women’s bodies were always more prominent and sexualised. The male gaze and all that. That’s beginning to happen now with men.
For example in the past there wasn’t such an emphasis on having ‘abs’ or anything of the sort, and in fact most male actors didn’t have them. Even Sean Connery.
It was about them being heartthrobs, being charming, and not about their perfect bodies. It’s an increase in vanity, which yeah, I agree looks a little odd on most men.
It’s worse than that. The role of males has been denatured in Western societies since 1945.
Before that, you could expect to go off to war at some point in your life, or at least to carry out manual labour. Now you’re locked up in an office so you are unable to fulfil your natural male instinct of violence and physical effort (yes, violence).
So what do you do? You channel the physical effort into an effort to climb the career ladder and the violence into preening.
It’s not natural, and it’s no wonder so many of us are psychologically imbalanced.
“The role of males has been denatured in Western societies since 1945.”
The fact that both men and women are moving away from their traditional gender roles is a positive, not a negative. Not to mention the fact the men were very much conditioned to act a certain way in the 1940s, which was just as unnatural.
The problem here is that we’ve become so obsessive about our looks. If you want to ‘fulfil your natural male instinct of violence and physical effort’, play a sport. An instinct for violence does not turn into preening.
Can we just agree that different people have different tastes and statements like BOOM ‘WOMEN DON’T LIKE THIS’ and BOOM ‘WOMEN FIND THIS OFF PUTTING’ are a bit too sweeping?
[Daphne – People have different tastes, but it is a fact that men and women are wired differently, and on that basis it is possible to say what men tend to like and what women tend to like, and also what they tend not to like.]
Also, about this ‘gay aesthetic’ of which you speak… ever heard of bears? Otters?
[Daphne – We’re not talking about bears and otters, though, are we. We’re talking about those two men in the picture.]