>Doesn't work that way, Snit! I know my impressions on this are not the
>slightest dialectical, but they are the product of thirty years of intense
>interest in the field. I reckon a pretty woman is attractive to the vast
>majority of men. A pretty (handsome, whatever) man can hope for no more
>than to appeal to a larger minority of women than his fellows.
Well now. I throw a pithy little comment out there and now I've got to defend it in terms of observation, data, trends, and dialectical analysis. Y'all keep a grrRl on her toes, that's fersure. But see Rob, you miss the point: I was talking about increasing my chances of getting laid and not necessarily about how many buoys and grrRls will tack a poster of me to their bedroom wall. Of course, there might be some sort of quasi-causal connection between the two. But, in the end, it's the results that count. You know, the difference between lusting for Utopia and actually working to bring into existence.
In truth, I said that because I'm prepping to teach a course on the family next semester and I usually have my students analyze the singles ads/personals. Since I just moved to the area and I haven't taught the course in two yrs, I thought I should make sure that what I expected them to find still held in a slightly different time/place.
And lo and behold I found that Brad's Pitt was frequently mentioned in the men seeking men section (e.g., ISO Brad Pitt look-a-like for discreet encounters). Although I don't go into this with my students, I find this fetishization of the body/looks/appearance among gay men fascinating--indicative of *something*--and I'd been doing some casual reading about it over the summer. Apparently, incidences of eating disorders are on the rise among men, particularly gay men, as they try to maintain the kind of physique that seems to be in high demand these days. And, that physique appears to be 'straight looking' slim, young, hard body, six pack type, though there is also the various fetishes for bears and chubbies. So, this might explain the eating disorders and addictions to working out at Gold's Gym among gay men
>Never met a bloke who didn't think Marilyn Monroe cut the mustard (although
>I'm a devoted Emma Peel man meself).
I have. While I know fellows who'd agree that they wouldn't kick MM out of bed for eating crackers, they'd also agree that they wouldn't kick most grrRls out of bed in general. But, in the end, the courtney Cox waif look is ever growing in popularity asfaict and the size 13/14 Monroe would have been considered fat today. Now, take Monica Lewinsky, I'm pretty sure she was a size 14 when she was first dating the First Penis. (She couldn't have been bigger than that b/c the Gap doesn't sell bigger sizes. She got the blue dress at the Gap). But how many jokes did we hear about how terribly fat she was? I honestly thought this was so peculiar. I didn't think she was fat in the least and yet that's all I heard.
> Come to think of it, can't remember a
>dissenting woman either (where-in, I guess, lies some support for your
>aspirations).
Yes, but I don't think lesbian and bi women fetishize women's bodies nearly as much as gay men fetishize men's bodies/appearances. I mean, there is a degree of that, esp concerning age, but not nearly as badly as among gay men
Anyway, I was recently reading about a study where a sociologist placed an few ads in the het section of the personals. One for a beautiful female hairdresser, one for a plain female lawyer who made 100k, one for a gorgeous male home depot clerk, and one for a plain male lawyer. Overwhelmingly, the hairdresser and the male lawyer got all the responses. So I think this is what you're referring to, no?
>Yet, I respectfully submit, no one man's visage has so filled the lonely
>nights of three generations of women.
>Is this
>(a) wrong
>(b) natural
>(c) cultural
>(d) other?
>
>I've always wondered ...
You mean, is it wrong/natural/cultural to lust for MM? Or is it wrong/natural/cultural for three generations to lust for MM?
Well, surely it's cultural. Though there is a massive industry arguing that it is based on biological evolution. Has anyone read this stuff? It was all over the major news mags about two yrs ago. The psychologists argue that body shapes/types and attraction to certain facial features has evolved over time such that men lust for women with shapely--but not too shapely mind you--hips because way back when to do so was to breed with a gal who had a better chance of pumping out healthy progeny than one with larger or narrower hips. There was something about why women supposedly go for broad shoulders and narrow waists, but I can't for the live of mean recall the evolutionary reason
I'd say that Sean Connery will stand the test of time. Isn't he still rated one of the sexiest men alive?
SnitgrrRl