Can a man appreciate vintage and be metro?

[Feng_Li]

Soaps tend to be more economical. You can go as cheap as $2 for something like Williams, or get a high-end soap for $7-12 a puck. Either one should give you at least 100 shaves, and will have the two important things canned products generally lack: lubrication and water.

 

[Jovan]

Thanks. I'm gonna take this conversation to another thread so it doesn't go very off topic here.

 

[Feng_Li]

Hmm... is there any double edged safety razor you'd recommend for someone just starting out? If the danger's eliminated, I think I can sleep at night.

I'm told the Merkur HD is good, as are vintage Gilettes...I'd ask the folks here, as they're pretty much considered experts.

 

[Feng_Li]

Thanks. I'm gonna take this conversation to another thread so it doesn't go very off topic here.

Righto!

 

[Jovan]

Here ya go.

 

[Kimberly]

Speaking of shaving, I bought my son the new Gillette razor called Fusion and he loves it. He says it gives the best shave he has ever had w/ a lot less damage than the gets w/ other razors. The only downfall on the Fusion is the fact that the cartridges are super expensive and are often all sold out (I guess other men love them too).

 

[Hammelby]

Veery interesting topic.
I think masculinity went down the drain long ago, and what is left of rolemodels today is sad and confusing. I read an article the other day in a danish paper, that claimed that the "man" has been reduced to being a superlover. If he has a hard time satisfying, he is not a man woth having... [huh]

Baron, I liked your view on gender roles. They were right on the money!
Last year I lived in Stockholm (sweden) wich is a place for a lots of
progressive genus and gender tehory and feminism but also for some
non progressive ideologies. And for sure rolemodels today sucks.

I had time to reflect on gender and masuclinity and if i actually needed one But then i discovered the vintage thing, and with it came the (metrosexual??) habit of looking sharp at all times. I had found something there that I loved and had given alot of thought about. I was amazed how far good appearence and manners can get you, but.. some of my old feminist are still sceptical.

My two cents are. Consious choice.
If you have reflected and then chosen to live by certain values, that is to me a qualitymark and not a way of conforming to stereotypical values.
In that way i guess you have more control of picking the good stuff and discarding the bad sideeffects?

 

[LizzieMaine]

This has been a very interesting topic to read -- and it's gotten me thinking about the other end of the scale, the notion that to be really manly, a man must not care about his appearance at all, or at least give the impression of not caring. Where did that come from, anyway?

It certainly wasn't part of pop culture for much of the twentieth century -- for anyone over the age of ten, anyway. It's children -- little boys -- who had the stereotype of "do'wanna take a baff, ma!" and of reveling in their own slovenliness -- until the point where they moved into long pants, learned to slick their hair, and looked forward to becoming serious-looking, hat-wearing men. Even if they were destined to grow up as blue-collar workingmen, the first thing they'd do on getting home at night is *clean up* - they'd no more sit down at the supper table in greasy overalls or a smelly undershirt than come to the table naked. One might get legitimately dirtied up on the job, but part of being an adult meant knowing there was a time and a place for everything. And when the time and place called for it, the roughest toughest workingman could slick up as well as anyone, and willingly did so because that's what he was supposed to do.

So where'd that go? At what point did the apotheosis of manliness shift to that ten-year-old-boy ideal of being as scruffy and sloppy as possible? And why?

 

[herringbonekid]

So where'd that go? At what point did the apotheosis of manliness shift to that ten-year-old-boy ideal of being as scruffy and sloppy as possible? And why?

it started with certain youth movements, namely hippy, punk, grunge and skate-wear. all of these fashion movements had an anti-smart (read 'anti-corporate') element that showed itself in the form of rips, untucked clothing, and messy hair etc. these filtered into mainstream fashion during the 90s to become the more cuddly 'slacker' look that has since become ubiquitous.

it was originally a reaction by ye olde disaffected/angry/alienated youth against the straight white corporate patriarchal figures of society. the irony that you can now buy a pair of Ralph Lauren khakis with rips and/or paint splashes on them seems to be lost on most.

 

[Rooster]

This has been a very interesting topic to read -- and it's gotten me thinking about the other end of the scale, the notion that to be really manly, a man must not care about his appearance at all, or at least give the impression of not caring. Where did that come from, anyway?

It certainly wasn't part of pop culture for much of the twentieth century -- for anyone over the age of ten, anyway. It's children -- little boys -- who had the stereotype of "do'wanna take a baff, ma!" and of reveling in their own slovenliness -- until the point where they moved into long pants, learned to slick their hair, and looked forward to becoming serious-looking, hat-wearing men. Even if they were destined to grow up as blue-collar workingmen, the first thing they'd do on getting home at night is *clean up* - they'd no more sit down at the supper table in greasy overalls or a smelly undershirt than come to the table naked. One might get legitimately dirtied up on the job, but part of being an adult meant knowing there was a time and a place for everything. And when the time and place called for it, the roughest toughest workingman could slick up as well as anyone, and willingly did so because that's what he was supposed to do.

So where'd that go? At what point did the apotheosis of manliness shift to that ten-year-old-boy ideal of being as scruffy and sloppy as possible? And why?

I guess I could use both of my Grandfathers as examples. This thread has had me thinking of them alot in the past few days. They were born in 1902 and 1905. One was superintendant of parks and the other was a truck driver. I never saw either man outside with out a hat. I never saw either one with blue jeans on or tennis shoes. I have a news paper article of gramps mowing grass at the park wearing a fedora, carrdigan and cuffed pants. I wouldn't consider either one a metro sexual because they dressed nice no matter what they were doing.
I consider the term metro sexual to involve the blurring of gender roles and associate it with effiminant men, or men that have become feminized by today's society.
Real men do still exist out in rural fly over country. They aren't brutish louts either, but more the type of men that my grandfathers were.
I personally would be offended if I were to be refered to as a "metro sexual".

 

[LizzieMaine]

Well, sure, that makes sense if you're a kid. There were plenty of sloppy fashion rebels in the 30s and 40s -- think of the collegiate kids slouching around in beer jackets covered with grafitti and filthy saddle shoes, or the wartime bobby soxer in rolled up dungarees and her father's discarded white shirts, hanging out at the tails. But the difference is -- those kids grew up. Today, we've got men my age, in their mid-forties, who go out of their way to look like high school kids -- and that's what strikes me as such a break from past cultural precedent. I can't think of another time when adults have gone so far out of their way to avoid looking like "The Man," even when they *are* The Man. It's just very very puzzling to me.

 

[herringbonekid]

...but there was never another time in history when adults were so desperate to appear younger, and dress like youth (and prolong their teen obsessions..... there was another trendy term that described over thirty-year-olds who dress and behave like teenagers, but it escapes me. anyway i think we're fftopic

 

[Fletch]

Color me an America-hating secular-humanist p!ssant if you like, but I honestly think that our overseas brothers (the Baron and hbk for two) have a saner grasp of masculinity than American men do. Being a black-and-white, this-or-that culture and being preoccupied with trends and political meanings, we've swallowed a lot of bad medicine over the years.

Metrosexuality is not the worst of this - it's a comparatively innocuous and consumer-driven trend. I'm more worried about the "essentialist" view that has gained so much sway with people who aspire to think and care about the culture.

Essentialists say, in broad terms, that men and women are not only different in biology and socialization (to which I reply: duh), but that we ought to preserve, foster, and even enforce, all such differences, because to do anything else is misguided PC social-engineering and another step towards an androgynous culture. It's a push toward simplisticness and conformity, and away from the individual and his freedom (and may I add, hers).

Saying, as ferryengr does, that men tend to be better at nonverbal communication because the hunt and the battlefield require it makes some sense. But it implies an awful lot, not all of which we should casually accept. It plays with the whole idea of an evolving society, and plays to the anger and fear in us.

 

[Rafter]

I had a sample of some pretty luxurious shaving cream at one time, and it gave me the best shave ever with the Mach3. Unfortunately when I asked how much a full can was, I was quoted $7. Ouch.

I've used many high end shave creams- Truefitt & Hill, Taylor of Old Bond Street, Cyril R Salter, Musgo. All are quite adequate and give close shaves.

My all-time fav is Trader Joe's Honey Mango.
Have you ever tried TJ's Honey Mango shave cream? It's only three bucks and gives the best shave yet...and the smell intoxifies the females!!

 

[ValleyBoy]

I consider the term metro sexual to involve the blurring of gender roles and associate it with effiminant men, or men that have become feminized by today's society.
Real men do still exist out in rural fly over country. They aren't brutish louts either, but more the type of men that my grandfathers were.

Very well said. This is exactly how I have come to percieve the term from cousins of mine who live in bigger urban centers (San Francisco, Seattle) and who they themsleves proffess to this idealogy. As I said before, the grooming aspects are in complete agreemant with my thoughts on fashion, but the efffimination of some from this group is to me ridiculous. On a side note, I have met very few woman who proffess a strong desire to settle with a pretty boy. They don't mind dating them, but most woman I've met want to marry a "man's man" sans the negative conotations society has placed on that term.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Not to be confrontational . . .

What is considered to be an effeminate trait for a man?

bk

 

[herringbonekid]

On a side note, I have met very few woman who proffess a strong desire to settle with a pretty boy.

in that case, the gangs of effeminate pretty boys are of no threat to you at all and 'men's men' can live side by side with 'pretty boys' in perfect harmony. no ?

 

[Baron Kurtz]

i've never understood the term "man's man" or "men's men". Those two phrases would indicate to me the exact opposite of their intended meaning. That is, they would imply "a man for other men".

bk

 

[herringbonekid]

yeah. it should be "i'm a woman's man"... as the Bee Gees so succinctly put it.

 

[Rafter]

What's so wrong with being the stoic, self-denying, male that doesn't shop enough. Advertisers created the "metrosexual" for their profit, this kind of man, less certain of his identity and much more interested in his image.

Whenever there's a trend, such as the "metrosexual", there's going to be a reaction against that, almost immediately after that, where you see a stronger man, kind of the "machosexual".

Advertising looks like it's starting to catch up. A Miller Lite ad shows a round table of guys debating "man laws." Actor Jim Belushi published an advice book titled "Real Men Don't Apologize," and Vince Vaughn's brute in "The Break Up" rocked the box office.

The new macho is the old macho. It is about being competent and feeling traditional, filling traditional male roles. I think guys are still in touch with their feminine side but not wearing it on their sleeves.