Retro-extremists? What are we called?

[Feraud]

Retro-sexual definitely doesn't apply here considering it's play on the term Metro-sexual. The definition of which is one who takes great care of their appearance but is not homosexual. A term inspired a superficial, male, capitalist, city oriented lifestyle is not one those in question would identify with.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think "retrosexual" actually has some popularity as a term for the rough-and-tough Mickey Spillane type of fellow who shaves with the edge of a roofing shingle, pours bourbon on his cornflakes, and who goes all Everett True on anyone who doesn't offer a lady a seat on the bus. There's times when a guy like that can be quite useful to have around, but it doesn't quite fit our bill.

A "retrosexual" just might, however, be an atavist.

 

[Fletch]

I never knew you to be soft on the Stanley Kowalski type.

Altho I share your respect for Everett True. He should be a b&w cartoon, voiced by R. Lee Ermey and animated in proto-Bluto mode, or perhaps Winsor McCay 2.0.

A "retrosexual" just might, however, be an atavist.

And one might be both retro and sexual without being "retrosexual," altho that might not compute with current gender marketing.

It's all about marketing, really, even if all one is marketing is oneself. Why would we need a name if we didn't need to be positioned?

 

[LizzieMaine]

That was kind of the point made in one of the very first posts in the thread, actually -- it's all about the branding. Just a short hand way of saying how one particular subgroup sees themselves.

As far as the Retrosexual type goes, they can be very handy when one needs a keg of beer lugged up from the cellar.

 

[Fletch]

That was kind of the point made in one of the very first posts in the thread, actually -- it's all about the branding. Just a short hand way of saying how one particular subgroup sees themselves.

As far as the Retrosexual type goes, they can be very handy when one needs a keg of beer lugged up from the cellar.

I'd think any man would do as much at the siren call of suds, even if he hardly had shoulders enough to rest the thing on.

Not to detour too long into guyville, but I like the hidden agenda of the book A Stiff Drink and a Close Shave, which sounds laddie but is really in large part about re-civilizing masculinity. (Probably more hope of doing that in 1995 than today.) Retrosexual is more about a stiff shave and a close drink.

 

[Edward]

I think "retrosexual" actually has some popularity as a term for the rough-and-tough Mickey Spillane type of fellow who shaves with the edge of a roofing shingle, pours bourbon on his cornflakes, and who goes all Everett True on anyone who doesn't offer a lady a seat on the bus. There's times when a guy like that can be quite useful to have around, but it doesn't quite fit our bill.

A "retrosexual" just might, however, be an atavist.

Back in the early nineties, the term 'metrosexual' was adopted by the media to, as has been said, describe a man with certain traits, most particularly taking a pride in his appearance, willingness to use skincare products etc - all things that in the recent past would have been considered "unmanly" - yet without actually being homosexual. In other words, conformnig to certain elements of the stereotype without actually being "one of them gays", as folks then would have had it. Once Cosmo stopped being able to sell issues based on the concept of the man who was "just gay enough" - the metrosexual guy who would do all the great things to look after himself, and be as interested in culture, music, dance as your Gay Best Friend but yet would also be romantically / sexually interested in You! A lady!, they needed a new trend. Hence the media invented the concept of the "Retrosexual". An old school, Sweeney, Gene Hunt, rough and ready type of a man who doesn't use skicare products, has little time for grooming, drinks, swears and does all those tediously over-testosteronised things that we are so often told are the hallmarks of a "real man". Thus women were expected to return to the culture of crying on the shoulders of the nice men about how the men they were attracted to were bastards, and wny couldn't they be like the nice guys (whom, of course, they would discard as being uninteresting, not like the sexy bastards.....). As Leviticus says, 'There is nothing new under the sun'.....

US usage of the term may be different, but here at least conceptual retrosexual man is very much one without the sort of 'namby pamby' manners that would let a lady through the door first, or offer to carry her bags, or stand up for her without first laughing at her plight and very much making her feel like the weak little woman....

Perhaps ironically, for all the obsession some minority groupings within the vintage community can have with the notion of "real manliness", the men truly were back in the thirties and forties, it seems to me, could very often be generalised as leaning much more towards the metrosexual than the ridiculous, bombastic, eighties action hero nonsense of retrosexualism. (Of course, in any era there wiill be both metro and retro types, whatever label gets put on them...).

Whatever, the term is already out there in a way that is broadly at odds with the vintage community in general as evidence on the Lounge, so it seems to me not an option.

 

[vitanola]

That may be a great term for a lot of Loungers. In fact, I think it is perfect in that context. But for the specific (very small?) subgroup of Loungers that a term is being sought for and by, and that has been explained numerous times in this thread, it doesn't really describe the affliction.

And an affliction it is as the sufferers have attempted to point out many times.

For the rest of us it may be that we want a term too. In fact, given the enthusiasm this thread has generated that's probably abundantly obvious, but that's not where this thread started.

Maybe it's time for this thread to either be retired or split into two distinct ones.

AFFLICTION?

POPPYCOCK!

 

[SGT Rocket]

Retro-sexual

Back in the early nineties, the term 'metrosexual' was adopted by the media to, as has been said, describe a man with certain traits, most particularly taking a pride in his appearance, willingness to use skincare products etc - all things that in the recent past would have been considered "unmanly" - yet without actually being homosexual. In other words, conformnig to certain elements of the stereotype without actually being "one of them gays", as folks then would have had it. Once Cosmo stopped being able to sell issues based on the concept of the man who was "just gay enough" - the metrosexual guy who would do all the great things to look after himself, and be as interested in culture, music, dance as your Gay Best Friend but yet would also be romantically / sexually interested in You! A lady!, they needed a new trend. Hence the media invented the concept of the "Retrosexual". An old school, Sweeney, Gene Hunt, rough and ready type of a man who doesn't use skicare products, has little time for grooming, drinks, swears and does all those tediously over-testosteronised things that we are so often told are the hallmarks of a "real man". Thus women were expected to return to the culture of crying on the shoulders of the nice men about how the men they were attracted to were bastards, and wny couldn't they be like the nice guys (whom, of course, they would discard as being uninteresting, not like the sexy bastards.....). As Leviticus says, 'There is nothing new under the sun'.....

US usage of the term may be different, but here at least conceptual retrosexual man is very much one without the sort of 'namby pamby' manners that would let a lady through the door first, or offer to carry her bags, or stand up for her without first laughing at her plight and very much making her feel like the weak little woman....

Perhaps ironically, for all the obsession some minority groupings within the vintage community can have with the notion of "real manliness", the men truly were back in the thirties and forties, it seems to me, could very often be generalised as leaning much more towards the metrosexual than the ridiculous, bombastic, eighties action hero nonsense of retrosexualism. (Of course, in any era there wiill be both metro and retro types, whatever label gets put on them...).

Whatever, the term is already out there in a way that is broadly at odds with the vintage community in general as evidence on the Lounge, so it seems to me not an option.

Wow, I thought I just pulled retro-sexual off the top of my head. I had no idea it was an actual term in the lexicon. I guess I'm not a clever as I thought.

 

[reetpleat]

I never thought of Klu Kluxers as BIKERS.

I am talking about 1 percenters, which is what outlaw bikers call themselves. Granted, bikers have their roots in 40s and 50s post war motorcyclists and post war nihilism, but not exaxtly atavists. On the other hand, they may share some views on guns, god, and country with many loungers.

 

[reetpleat]

That may be a great term for a lot of Loungers. In fact, I think it is perfect in that context. But for the specific (very small?) subgroup of Loungers that a term is being sought for and by, and that has been explained numerous times in this thread, it doesn't really describe the affliction.

And an affliction it is as the sufferers have attempted to point out many times.

For the rest of us it may be that we want a term too. In fact, given the enthusiasm this thread has generated that's probably abundantly obvious, but that's not where this thread started.

Maybe it's time for this thread to either be retired or split into two distinct ones.

I still think the original post was about full lifestyle immersion. Not necessarily motivation. that came later from some of those who are motivated by the "affliction"

 

[LizzieMaine]

I am talking about 1 percenters, which is what outlaw bikers call themselves. Granted, bikers have their roots in 40s and 50s post war motorcyclists and post war nihilism, but not exaxtly atavists. On the other hand, they may share some views on guns, god, and country with many loungers.

On the other hand, if you had someone today in 2010 immersing themselves in the life of a 1948 biker -- dressing in vintage leather, riding a vintage cycle, displaying the overall worldview of a disaffected vet, he might well be an atavist.

I like the "immersive" adjective, by the way.

The motivation part, to respond to your other post, is, I think is an important part of it -- as was wondered earlier, if two people do exactly the same thing for very different reasons, are they truly doing exactly the same thing? I wouldn't use "affliction" in my own case, though -- it doesn't cause me the least bit of discomfort in my daily life, because I've found a pleasant, reasonable niche in which to live it. Mostly I'm just bewildered by some of the things I see -- the supermarket magazine rack, for example, in the sense of "how can anyone live like that?"

 

[reetpleat]

Back in the early nineties, the term 'metrosexual' was adopted by the media to, as has been said, describe a man with certain traits, most particularly taking a pride in his appearance, willingness to use skincare products etc - all things that in the recent past would have been considered "unmanly" - yet without actually being homosexual. In other words, conformnig to certain elements of the stereotype without actually being "one of them gays", as folks then would have had it. Once Cosmo stopped being able to sell issues based on the concept of the man who was "just gay enough" - the metrosexual guy who would do all the great things to look after himself, and be as interested in culture, music, dance as your Gay Best Friend but yet would also be romantically / sexually interested in You! A lady!, they needed a new trend. Hence the media invented the concept of the "Retrosexual". An old school, Sweeney, Gene Hunt, rough and ready type of a man who doesn't use skicare products, has little time for grooming, drinks, swears and does all those tediously over-testosteronised things that we are so often told are the hallmarks of a "real man". Thus women were expected to return to the culture of crying on the shoulders of the nice men about how the men they were attracted to were bastards, and wny couldn't they be like the nice guys (whom, of course, they would discard as being uninteresting, not like the sexy bastards.....). As Leviticus says, 'There is nothing new under the sun'.....

US usage of the term may be different, but here at least conceptual retrosexual man is very much one without the sort of 'namby pamby' manners that would let a lady through the door first, or offer to carry her bags, or stand up for her without first laughing at her plight and very much making her feel like the weak little woman....

Perhaps ironically, for all the obsession some minority groupings within the vintage community can have with the notion of "real manliness", the men truly were back in the thirties and forties, it seems to me, could very often be generalised as leaning much more towards the metrosexual than the ridiculous, bombastic, eighties action hero nonsense of retrosexualism. (Of course, in any era there wiill be both metro and retro types, whatever label gets put on them...).

Whatever, the term is already out there in a way that is broadly at odds with the vintage community in general as evidence on the Lounge, so it seems to me not an option.

Well put. The term describes, not necessarily a throw back to vintage style man, but to the pre metrosexual man who burps, and doesn't use skin products, but knows how to be a traditional man, whatever that is.

the funny thing is, that while this is so much media hype looking to sell magazines, there is a funny point here.

While women love gay men a lot of the time, and wish straight guys were more like them maybe, once they got it, they realized that they did not have so much interest in a guy who 1. was too much like them, 2. was not interested in sleeping with them.

Women may not always love a too macho, crude guy, but it beats a guy they like, but do not feel any sexual attraction to.

 

[metropd]

Nazism is socialism in the way that the Democratic Republic of the Congo is a shining example of democracy - in name only. Nazism is extremely far right politically. That's not an opinion, it's fact.

+100,000,000 :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

 

[Edward]

Women may not always love a too macho, crude guy, but it beats a guy they like, but do not feel any sexual attraction to.

Can be the case..... then it also has a lot to do with the fact that many women tend to view a man as raw material, to be turned into what she wants rather than for what he is.... I've known all too many over the years who see the 'bad boy' as a challenge, and aren't interested in anything 'easier'.

 

[Maguire]

+100,000,000 :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

For the absolute risk of being out on a limb ( and i HOPE this post isn't political, but rather just informative), this should be clarified- nazism isn't "far right" in the traditional sense. nazism has two branches- the hitlerite branch and the strasser branch. Neither would qualify as "right wing" Both would probably be "extreme centerism" if you will in that both will entertain socialistic notion of "equality" between economic groups. The various movements associated with the "far right" today, ie falangism, iron guardism, nazism, were in their time, revolutionary and the antithesis of the "right wing" which would be associated more with monarchism, legitimatism, divine right, etc. All the nationalistic organizations would have been anathematic to genuinely aristocratic, "far right" ideologies. Really by the 1930s the whole "far right" as far as monarchistic ideology ceased to exist. Our "far "right " today would have been essentially centrist by the european standards of the 1930s. What made it controversial wasn't its "centrism" but its vocal militaristic aims.

I recommend looking at mussolini's definitions of fascism, etc to really get a well balanced view of the idea. The idea of "far left" and "far right" are really outdated ideas and inaccurate to describe either marxism or any form of fascism.

 

[carebear]

Both of the above are more properly identified simply as authoritarianism. The antithesis of authoritarianism is liberalism, in the classic sense, which nowadays reflects libertarianism to a great degree.

I read the first page then jumped back here. On the original question from Jack:

Chronophobes?

Anti-modernes?

 

[Fletch]

And to think *I* posted, "not to detour into guyville..."

While women love gay men a lot of the time, and wish straight guys were more like them maybe, once they got it, they realized that they did not have so much interest in a guy who 1. was too much like them, 2. was not interested in sleeping with them.

Women may not always love a too macho, crude guy, but it beats a guy they like, but do not feel any sexual attraction to.

You're opening up a real can of worms here.

1. Right off the bat you posit gays as the one-and-only alternative to present-day media-conventional str8 d00dz.

2. You then go on to assume (follow me closely here) that women's sexual attraction to men is intrinsically and fundamentally about their being, somehow or another, somewhere down the line, "macho, crude."

Call me crazy, but I feel you're limiting the debate here. Maybe you don't intend to, but you know, maybe that's an intrinsically masculine thing to do: a) simplify; b) seek control.
I dunno, really. I myself was never much of a manly-man, except for the whole attraction-to-women thing, which has, perhaps predictably, not panned out too well. Yet I persist, somehow, driven by forces I do not fully understand.

 

[Fletch]

Can be the case..... then it also has a lot to do with the fact that many women tend to view a man as raw material, to be turned into what she wants rather than for what he is.... I've known all too many over the years who see the 'bad boy' as a challenge, and aren't interested in anything 'easier'.

And cultural cues are scrupulously, if subconsciously, respected as to what constitutes "bad." Just being a careless crumbum ain't enough, fellas. Your in-demand alpha sleazebag actually has to meet standards. [huh]

 

[Bourbon Guy]

I think "retrosexual" actually has some popularity as a term for the rough-and-tough Mickey Spillane type of fellow who shaves with the edge of a roofing shingle, pours bourbon on his cornflakes, and who goes all Everett True on anyone who doesn't offer a lady a seat on the bus. There's times when a guy like that can be quite useful to have around, but it doesn't quite fit our bill.

A "retrosexual" just might, however, be an atavist.

Cornflakes? Hmm ..... cornflakes.

Sounds a bit light. Maybe in the summer. When it's cold, I like my McCann's steelcut oatmeal with molasses. And now you have added a whole new dimension to that as well. You are a bad influence, Ms. Maine. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Fletch]

'Scuse me, Guy, but are you by any chance talking smack at Lizzie? :whistling Not a swift move...