Top Secret: THE RETROSEXUAL CODE

[Guest]

But that's current...
cool tune though, have you seen the video?, mm mmmm - the girl is so fine.

True and yes, and hell yeah!

Lou

 

[dirtylover]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Top Secret: THE RETROSEXUAL CODE

See fellas? -The modern man reigns supreme....


*swaggers cockily out of the room, only to trip over the rug...

Hmmm, not sure this rug goes with the color scheme of this hole in the ground..


kiss: - dampy)

edited to add: think we've successfully threadjacked again folks,

alright! - hi5 anyone?

Raphy?

 

[damppanties]

Umm... actually those eyes in your AV remind me of someone and...

Well, to you too.

 

[raphy]

You called?

for Dampy


Honestly, I don't think Retrosexual means slob. Neither does it mean redneck, not even in Jeff Foxworthy's definition of 'redneck'.

There's nothing gay about knowing how to tie a tie - But you shouldn't ever mistake sophistication for a lack of desire to get your fingers dirty when need be.

I can tie a windsor knot, double or single. I know how to pour wine the correct way and how to serve food in a 5-star restaurant. I can also lay flooring and fix your car or your house. I can pick up my guitar and play Stevie Ray Vaughan or Paganini. I can then take those same hands and haul a chainsaw out to the woods and cut down trees for firewood for next winter and stack up the 100 lb logs to dry out before splitting.

I'm not too sure about the word 'retrosexual' itself, but from the list of qualities in Rumple's original list, I'm almost convinced that what the author was trying to say is:

A retrosexual is simply a man who isn't ashamed of being a man.

Because so many men these days seem to be.

 

[NoJo]

The ancient Greeks loved real men. Look at those statues. mmm.


Seriously though, any man who can't admit he's a roaring queen obviously has something to hide.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

This stuff is just so fucking lame. Honestly, haven't we heard this joke a few million times before? About how cool it is to drink beer and scratch your nuts and fart?

Like there's something to be proud of about being a rube.

---dr.M.

 

[dirtylover]

R -Well said, but I think it's somehow flawed to categorise men as retrosexuals or - well, more efeminite men. Raphy, you point out that you have numerous talents taken from across the board. Does this not imply that you are neither retrosexual, or something else, more just you, in fact.

To all the so-called 'retrosexual' men - is it not you who are afraid of being a man, feeling the need to use stereotypical attributes to exemplify your 'manliness'?

A man to me is an individual, whether he be talking about colour schemes or hacking down trees. Personally, I don't see the need for the 'look at me, I've got a big gun - I'm a man' attitude.

A retrosexual is simply a man who isn't ashamed of being a man.

I think a man isn't afraid of being himself.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Het! I was going to say that! Thanks for saving me the typing!

R -Well said, but I think it's somehow flawed to categorise men as retrosexuals or - well, more efeminite men. Raphy, you point out that you have numerous talents taken from across the board. Does this not imply that you are neither retrosexual, or something else, more just you, in fact.

To all the so-called 'retrosexual' men - is it not you who are afraid of being a man, feeling the need to use stereotypical attributes to exemplify your 'manliness'?

A man to me is an individual, whether he be talking about colour schemes or hacking down trees. Personally, I don't see the need for the 'look at me, I've got a big gun - I'm a man' attitude.




I think a man isn't afraid of being himself.

 

[raphy]

I don't think there's a need for the term 'retrosexual' - I use it only because it was in Rumple's original article, and I like to keep everyone on the same page here.

Argh. I've tried to type an explanation about four times now and failed each time.

I will say this though: To reply to your last line

I think a man isn't afraid of being himself.

I know some males who I sure wouldn't call men, regardless of whether or not they're afraid of being themselves.

I think a 'retrosexual' (again, I use the word with hesitation) is a man who knows it's okay to have testosterone at moderate levels. He knows it's okay to be manly. He knows it's 'manly' to like guns, fast cars and pretty women, and he knows it's okay to being stereotypical and admit to liking such things. However, he also knows there's a time and a place for them, and he'd never say that they were his entire world, BUT he sure isn't ashamed of liking them. A 'retrosexual' sits somewhere between the neaderthal 'real man' and the effeminate 'fop', with qualities of both and is not ashamed to have them.

 

[NoJo]

Het! I was going to say that! Thanks for saving me the typing!

Did you mean "Hey!" or "Het!"

 

[raphy]

This stuff is just so fucking lame. Honestly, haven't we heard this joke a few million times before? About how cool it is to drink beer and scratch your nuts and fart?

Like there's something to be proud of about being a rube.

---dr.M.

If you think it's about that, then I think you've missed the point, Dr M.

 

[damppanties]

What do you mean not ashamed? Why should he be ashamed of liking guns or pretty women? Are men getting SO concerned about what they're SUPPOSED or not supposed to do?

raph, it's okay to be anything. And not apologise for it.

edit: this was supposed to come before the last two posts.

 

[cloudy]

Raphy - HEAR, HEAR!

(you can throw me over your shoulder and carry me off anytime)

Cloudy

 

[raphy]

What do you mean not ashamed? Why should he be ashamed of liking guns or pretty women? Are men getting SO concerned about what they're SUPPOSED or not supposed to do?

raph, it's okay to be anything. And not apologise for it.

Hey, you don't have to tell me. I'm proud of who I am. I'm proud of being a man, both the sophisticated cultured side and the unsophisticated 'rube' side (as coined by Dr M). I find a use for both.

But I do know that there are men out there who *are* ashamed of their testosterone, because they've had it beaten into them by women that being a 'manly' man is a bad thing. They become labelled as an uncivilized neaderthal at the slighest hint that they can work with their muscles or have a sex drive.


p.s. I should add this: There's also men out there who are ashamed of their cultured side also, because they've had it beaten into them by other men that having 'sophistication' is a bad thing. They become labelled as 'fags' or 'queers' at the slightest hint that they're intellectual or artistic.

 

[damppanties]

Hey, you don't have to tell me. I'm proud of who I am. I'm proud of being a man, both the sophisticated cultured side and the unsophisticated 'rube' side (as coined by Dr M). I find a use for both.

But I do know that there are men out there who *are* ashamed of their testosterone, because they've had it beaten into them by women that being a 'manly' man is a bad thing. They become labelled as an uncivilized neaderthal at the slighest hint that they can work with their muscles or have a sex drive.

And no one wants to be labelled that.

Yep, I think I know enough 'you' to know that you wouldn't be ashamed of anything about yourself. The above response was about men in general.

I started out by saying - are men getting seriously intimidated by what women think of them? It's kind of a new thing to see men defending their right to being men.

 

[NoJo]

Gays were put down (sometimes literally, like dogs). Blacks were unfairly treated in much of the western world for a long time. Those people are completely justified in turning the oppression around and declaring their pride in what they are.

But "I'm a (retrosexual) normal man and proud" is just a stupid thing to say. Straight males who feel threatened by the relatively small amount of queer media around these days are really majorly overreacting, and showing a kind of callousness in assuming that there is some sort "balance" to be restored: They're just scared of any change in the status quo.

 

[raphy]

Gays were put down (sometimes literally, like dogs). Blacks were unfairly treated in much of the western world for a long time. Those people are completely justified in turning the oppression around and declaring their pride in what they are.

But "I'm a (retrosexual) normal man and proud" is just a stupid thing to say. Straight males who feel threatened by the relatively small amount of queer media around these days are really majorly overreacting, and showing a kind of callousness in assuming that there is some sort "balance" to be restored: They're just scared of any change in the status quo.

It's not about the "queer media" and it's not about being threatened, SJ .. It's not even about being gay or straight. My post above is probably the best I can do at trying to describe it - If you don't 'get it' from that, then I'm afraid I can't help you any more.

I'm simply running out of words.

*shrugs* ..

 

[raphy]

Yep, I think I know enough 'you' to know that you wouldn't be ashamed of anything about yourself. The above response was about men in general.

I started out by saying - are men getting seriously intimidated by what women think of them? It's kind of a new thing to see men defending their right to being men.

Men have always allowed other people's opinions to influence them, whether they be male opinion or female opinion (in my post above where I cite thte two examples I blame this on both men and women - Certain types of both, anyway) - it's human nature to do that.

It's more pervasive now, I think. Started with the 80s 'new man', but like all cultural fashions it has attracted its share of extremists on both sides.

 

[Liar]

Gays were put down (sometimes literally, like dogs). Blacks were unfairly treated in much of the western world for a long time. Those people are completely justified in turning the oppression around and declaring their pride in what they are.

But "I'm a (retrosexual) normal man and proud" is just a stupid thing to say. Straight males who feel threatened by the relatively small amount of queer media around these days are really majorly overreacting, and showing a kind of callousness in assuming that there is some sort "balance" to be restored: They're just scared of any change in the status quo.

No they are not. Ok, maybe some are, but most of the time, I'd say that they just wonder why it is politically and socially incorrect to be them when the society in general celebrates the "be yourself" culture.

It's stange really. I am niether straight nor "manly" enough to be accepted in the stereotyped retrosexual hetero world, and I'm definiely not queer enough to be a part of that community. Now both sides are waving the "We just want to be accepted." banderoles, and they still can't give me, caught in the middle, a fucking break.

#L

 

[sweetnpetite]

Gays were put down (sometimes literally, like dogs). Blacks were unfairly treated in much of the western world for a long time. Those people are completely justified in turning the oppression around and declaring their pride in what they are.

But "I'm a (retrosexual) normal man and proud" is just a stupid thing to say. Straight males who feel threatened by the relatively small amount of queer media around these days are really majorly overreacting, and showing a kind of callousness in assuming that there is some sort "balance" to be restored: They're just scared of any change in the status quo.

I see Raphy's point, and for some it might be what he said, but yeah, for the most part I agree with you Joe. That's the gist I get from the original 'retrosexual' post. Reactioinary, return to the status quo, backlash.

ps. I ment 'Hey!' The t is right next to the y, lol. But het, well I guess that is sort of on topic, huh? Gotta prove I'm a *manly man* Raph- what you say is true, for sure, but the post wasn't about that. It was a set of rules that said 'hey the retrosexual is the *real* man- the cave man' It absolutely rejected one extreme in favor of another.

 

[raphy]

I see Raphy's point, and for some it might be what he said, but yeah, for the most part I agree with you Joe. That's the gist I get from the original 'retrosexual' post. Reactioinary, return to the status quo, backlash.

ps. I ment 'Hey!' The t is right next to the y, lol. But het, well I guess that is sort of on topic, huh? Gotta prove I'm a *manly man* Raph- what you say is true, for sure, but the post wasn't about that. It was a set of rules that said 'hey the retrosexual is the *real* man- the cave man' It absolutely rejected one extreme in favor of another.

I think you all are confusing Rumple's 'retrosexual' list with the 'Real Men' list that also floats around the internet.

The two lists contain similarities. They are not the same list.

That's the point I've been trying to make. You sure wouldn't see anything about tying a Windsor knot on a 'Real man' list, that's for certain.

 

[raphy]

Oh yeah, and you can sign me up for the "'Real men' are cavemen" signs. If the qualities on the 'real man' list are the only ones you possess, then I pity you.

But if you possess some of those qualities *AND* other balancing ones, don't be ashamed of ANY of them.

You see what I've been trying (very badly) to say?

 

[GodBlessTexas]

Oh yeah, and you can sign me up for the "'Real men' are cavemen" signs. If the qualities on the 'real man' list are the only ones you possess, then I pity you.

But if you possess some of those qualities *AND* other balancing ones, don't be ashamed of ANY of them.

You see what I've been trying (very badly) to say?

I'm with you, Raphy, and I understand what you've been saying. It's all about balance, as several others mentioned. I too pity anyone who is so one-sided that they can't appreciate well-roundedness.

Kill the "retrosexual" label...simply call it being "well-rounded and proud of it"

 

[raphy]

I'm with you, Raphy, and I understand what you've been saying. It's all about balance, as several others mentioned. I too pity anyone who is so one-sided that they can't appreciate well-roundedness.

Kill the "retrosexual" label...simply call it being "well-rounded and proud of it"

Absolutely. I was only sticking to the word 'retrosexual' because that's what the original list posted by Rumple had said.

Well-rounded is definitely a much better term.

Of course, what people fail to appreciate is that well-rounded means that you're going to have qualities from BOTH sides of the debate. Yes, even the side you don't like. Just because I have neanderthal qualities, it does not make me a neanderthal, as those who've heard me play Paganini on the guitar will testfy to. And just because I have culture and sophistication, that does not make me a 'faggity-ass queer boy' as those who've seen me win medals at martial arts tournaments will testify to.

Well-rounded. Yes.

 

[cloudy]

You GUYS say it so much better than I was actually trying to.

One question: What about the well-rounded woman?

I've met several men who are intimidated by my ability to work on cars, and clean a gun, but delighted by the other side of the coin.......Do you guys appreciate a woman with "both" sets of qualities as well as we appreciate men like that?

(just keeping this oh-so-interesting discussion going, ya know)

Cloudy