Can a man appreciate vintage and be metro?

[MissQueenie]

I think there is a gross misunderstanding of the term "Metrosexual" as it is commonly used. In itself, the term has absolutely nothing to do with being effeminate. Metrosexual is a label that is used to describe behaviors associated with modern positive stereotypes about homosexual men (such as careful attention to one's appearance and grooming, sometimes to the point of "beauty treatments" like waxing, coloring one's hair, etc, wearing fashionable and/or expensive clothing, entertaining, etc) that have been adopted by heterosexual men, often living in urban areas (Los Angeles, New York, etc).

I'd like to point out that these qualities, now considered effeminate, were extremely mainstream in the Golden Era. Fred Astaire's Toupee -- a vanity, surely, but it was impeccable and classy and you'd never know unless someone told you. Is this different than a modern man dyeing his hair to cover premature grays? How many "manly" men of today do you know (outside the vintage set -- or within it, for that matter) who carry (and use!) a pocket comb? A pocket comb was essential to ensuring the modern man of the GE was perfectly groomed at all times -- and it was never considered unmanly. My own grandfather -- a war hero, engineer, and hobbyist-carpenter and mechanic -- kept a manicure case in his bathroom drawer and used it often, right up to the day he passed away. No one in their right mind would ever have called him effeminate. And look at all of the revered male style icons discussed at length right here on the lounge -- do you think those men weren't paying very careful attention to their fashion choices? Would you call Bogart, Grant -- yourselves?-- unmanly for putting effort into your appearance? I doubt it.

I think we, as modern men and women, are increasingly conflicted and hung up about these distinctions. The vintage man was, inherently, "metrosexual"; these behaviors have fallen out of cultural fashion in the last 6 decades, and now that they're back among a certain sector of the population, if feels strange, maybe even "unnatural" because we're not used to it anymore. Same jar, new label.

 

[Martinis at 8]

I have to agree with Christopher Plummer's assessment.

How can you compare the actors of the past, with today's wimpy brood.
They had a combination of toughness, sophistication, wit, and presence that is no longer seen on the screens of today's multiplex shoeboxes.

Come on, the Leonardo DiCaprio's and the Tom Cruise's are "just boys" and don't hold a candle to the likes of Bogart, Gable, Cagney, Tracy, Peck, Grant, McQueen, Holden, Fonda, Wayne or even Stewart. These "real men" brought a magnetic presence to the screen and made a powerful and enduring mark on film history.

Plummer's opinion is not "old-hat" thinking, it's reality!!

Well said Rafter.

However, I do agree with jovan concerning the word metrosexual. It's a term I loathe for a variety of reasons.

M8

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I think there is a gross misunderstanding of the term "Metrosexual" as it is commonly used.

I'm reminded of the Italian Renaissance term sprezzatura, which was prominent in Baldasarre Castiglione's The Book of the Courtier (1528).


In its pages, several female characters define sprezzatura for their male listeners: it means good manners, good grooming, gracefulness, thoughtfulness, education, self-possession, and wit ... wielded in a seemingly effortless manner that doesn't call attention to oneself, or denote vanity.


The difference between a metrosexual and a fop is that the former conveys sprezzatura. "T'aint what you do -- it's the way that you do it."


.

 

[ProperRogue]

James Bond was a Metro...

At least one person, and I agree with him, has described James Bond as a Metro.

What Would James Bond Do?

Cheers,

PR

I've never quite understood the notion that "this is what a man should do and be". All the metrosexual-types i know are very into sports and drinking/smoking in bars. Many of them lift weights and are quite strong. Almost everyone i know is courteous and kind. Aren't these attributes of "real men"?

But then i don't believe in a "male identity". Or a female one, for that matter. And i certainly don't think there are, or should be, roles within society or the home which are defined by the possession/absence of a penis.

bk

 

[Martinis at 8]

At least one person, and I agree with him, has described James Bond as a Metro...[/URL]

Cheers,

PR

I disagree. James Bond is NOT a metrosexual in any way shape or manner.

Cheers,

M8

 

[Jovan]

Guess you've never seen....
Bogart in "Sabrina",
Grant in "Penny Serenade",
Wayne in "A Quiet Man",
Tracy in "Captain's Courageous",
Gable in "Teacher's Pet",
McQueen in "Love With The Proper Stranger",
Peck in "Roman Holiday",
Fonda in "Mister Roberts", and
Holden in "Picnic".

You'll note I only said this about Bogart. As I said before, I enjoy the other actors. You're not going to convince me anytime soon that the tough guy acts are a sign of a "real man" either.

The fact that metrosexual is defined in a dictionary is really unsettling to me.

 

[Senator Jack]

Funny, no one called me a metrosexual till some idiot coined the word metrosexual.

Sorry, but the author of the James Bond article is trying to take a current phenomenon and apply it to a character created in an era when men just happened to care about how they presented themselves to the world. It's pointless and stupid and, therefore, typical of the times we live in.

Further proving the author's fatuity is that the article was written in 2006 and while I don't know about the rest of the country, here in NY, metrosexual was passe three years ago. Have I expressed how much I hate this word? Not enough. Chalk it up to a few cocktails. Let me come back to it in a less crapulent state and I'll really have my thoughts together.

Regards,

Senator Jack: A Quinn/Martin Production

 

[Bebop]

If you appreciate vintage, you shouldn't know what metro means. Otherwise, you just recognize vintage.lol lol

 

[ferryengr]

Well, quite a few ideas have been expressed here since I first intiated this thread! I'm interested to read all of them.

Just for the record, rightly or wrongly, my definition of "metrosexual" was more along the lines of a man that blurs the gender distinction. A man accepting of a feminine side to his personality. I was not thinking of a man with a high level of concern about his appearance or with a high sense of style.

I brought up the question to see what kind of views I might solicit. I tend to believe that over the last 100,000 years of mankind's existence nature and nurture have resulted in certain genetic wiring and socialization in men. I think modern society tends to dismiss and minimize the effects of 100,000 years cultural development and even natural selection has had on our species. This idea is promulgated with great humor in Rob Becker's Defending the Caveman www.defendingthecaveman.com. One of my attractions to the vintage era is the cultural aspect. That it was a time when ideas about men and women were quite different and maybe more accepting of the affects I just describe. I find it kind of liberating to think in a vintage era way - where men and women can be more like they are "naturally".

For example, if you follow Rob Becker's premise, men developed their communications style by virtue of what was essential to what they did and what was required for their existence. For thousands of years, a successful hunt, or even success on the battlefield, required that men not communicate verbally. If you talked too much, you scared away the game or let your enemy know where you were. If you talked out loud, you died! So is it surprising men are often accused of being less verbal? Does that mean men don't communicate? Hardly. Success in the hunt or on the battlefield required good communication - just not necessarily verbally. I'd even suggest men typically have highly developed non-verbal skills. I've often found that many women know this if you ask them.

That was just meant as an illustrative example and the real point is whether the vintage era offers an alternate to modern views about male and female roles that can be of interest.

Now let's see what people say with that clarification . . . .

 

[Son_of_Atropos]

Looks like the problem is that no one no longer knows what manliness is.

Personally, I think people should be judged by their actions more so then what they say. Now a days, I think people merely talk themselves up and when they meet any adversity they fold.

That probably doesn't answer the question whatsoever but I think that the two terms aren't related at all. Everyone should put their own style in how they dress and not be constrained by classifications.


In other news, Ottawa v Detroit for the cup.

 

[Slicksuit]

One of my attractions to the vintage era is the cultural aspect. That it was a time when ideas about men and women were quite different and maybe more accepting of the affects I just describe. I find it kind of liberating to think in a vintage era way - where men and women can be more like they are "naturally".

Hmm...I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. To say the above is to imply that the current state of affaris is 'unnatural'. I think that society has a way of evolving that suits the needs of the time at hand. Maybe more sensitive men is something to be expected in an era where men are increasingly more responsible for childcare, with dual-income working parents (or even the possibility of the wife being the primary wage-earner).

Possibly, it is a feature of natural selection and evolution for gender roles to evolve in the manner they have today. One could argue that in an increasingly knowledge-based and service economy, that the appearance and emotional astuteness of a man is more of a necessity, a desirable trait. Vintage mores about gender roles may have served their particular time period well, but may in fact be disfunctional in the current climate.

This is not to downplay the role of certain values idealized when thinking "vintage", such as respect, courtesy, and civility. Such values have been an asset for centuries, and will continue long into the future.

The mention of spretazzura reminds me of the book "The Compleat Gentleman", an excellent read!

 

[Joie DeVive]

This one has had me thinking all day long.

I'm largely of a mind that you should do whatever you like with your looks. It makes no difference to me. I have a female friend who likes to shave off her hair in the summertime (like Q-ball bald), and I have had male friends with long hair and fingernails painted black. Whatever makes them happy.

But I have to admit that I have found the "metrosexual" thing somewhat amusing. While fastidious grooming and dressing are a definite part of it, it isn't the whole thing. Cary Grant had those characteristics in most films and I don't think most here would say he fell into the catagory of metrosexual.
I can't put my finger on what exactly the difference is.

It's kind of like indecency, as they say, I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.

For example my brother-in-law who uses a face cream more expensive than most of my shoes. When he was getting married, we joked that he wanted to be the bride. It was to the point that he came to the ladies lingere shower to receive some goodies of his own. I have nothing against fine pajamas and unmentionables for the gent, but somehow this was disconcerting to me.

I wish I could put my finger on what the difference between the dapperness of yesteryear and "metrosexuality" is, but I can't. I have the feeling that is has something to do with adulthood, but that's as far as I can define it.

And as to my opinion as to if "metrosexuals" can appreciate vintage, I say why not? There are old grandmothers that like Jimmy Hendrix and horror movies, and goths who like old movies and Victorian festivals. Labels can be so binding! Like what you like. Let everyone else do the same.

One last question that may be fftopic: but since chest waxing is often considered synonymous with the topic of this thread I gotta ask...
Am I the only gal out there who likes male chest hair???? lol

 

[Jovan]

Sorry to disappoint, but I have maybe three chest hairs total.

I don't mind it, but Robin Williams level of chest hair can get a bit... scary.

 

[herringbonekid]

A man accepting of a feminine side to his personality. I was not thinking of a man with a high level of concern about his appearance or with a high sense of style.

For thousands of years, a successful hunt, or even success on the battlefield, required that men not communicate verbally. If you talked too much, you scared away the game or let your enemy know where you were.

i don't see why traits such as sensitivity, gentleness etc. should be labelled 'feminine' and all the 'strong' traits be labelled 'masculine'. i think these distinctions will dissappear in time.

most men no longer hunt animals, or fight on a battlefield. communication skills are much more useful in a workplace where increasingly males and females can both do the same job.

(Slicksuit pretty much said it all above)

 

[Rooster]

most men no longer hunt animals, or fight on a battlefield.

That's interesting. I, and all of my friends hunt and their kids of appropriate age are in Iraq on the battlefield.
Interesting to find out my life style makes me a modern day caveman.lol

 

[Martinis at 8]

That's interesting. I, and all of my friends hunt and their kids of appropriate age are in Iraq on the battlefield.
Interesting to find out my life style makes me a modern day caveman.lol

C'mon now, that doesn't make you a caveman. But you know Rooster is sadly correct. Don't you?

Cheers,

M8

 

[Kimberly]

Carey Grant and many other men in the Golden Era took care of themselves and were always impeccably groomed, but they made it look effortless and not done on purpose (if that makes sense). They also had a sense of distinction and charisma that oozed out of them and were very masculine but in a gentlemanly way.

When I think of the word metro sexual and style and grooming I think of a man who is impeccably groomed and takes good care of himself, but it is obvious they do it (i.e. manicured hands, baby soft skin, etc). (if that makes sense again lol ).

 

[Martinis at 8]

Carey Grant and many other men in the Golden Era took care of themselves and were always impeccably groomed, but they made it look effortless and not done on purpose (if that makes sense). They also had a sense of distinction and charisma that oozed out of them and were very masculine but in a gentlemanly way.

When I think of the word metro sexual and style and grooming I think of a man who is impeccably groomed and takes good care of himself, but it is obvious they do it (i.e. manicured hands, baby soft skin, etc). (if that makes sense again lol ).

This actually makes quite a bit of sense to me. Nice capture of my thoughts.

M8

 

[Senator Jack]

When I think of the word metro sexual and style and grooming I think of a man who is impeccably groomed and takes good care of himself, but it is obvious they do it

Recast that sentence with the phrase 'in sexual denial' somehow fit into it and I think we have a right proper definition.

 

[ferryengr]

Good points Slicksuit. I do think society and culture is changing and one thing that has distinguished mankind is our ability to adapt to change. That being said, I'd still assert that where we come from has a lot to do with who we are. (Not that I mean to imply there is any one "right" way to be.) Rather than argue that men were men in the old days and need to be still like that and cannot change, I am more interested in the notion that we can not ignore where we came from. I'd also assert that in the vintage era there was more acceptance of where men came from histroically than there is today. Less denial, if you will.

I guess I am in the middle on the chest hair issue. Not Robin Williams by any means and not Boy George either. But to answer the question, the women I've know have not been into enormous amounts of body hair.