“Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all” is not a blank check to bitch about the inherent “unfairness” of basic biology. Especially as it relates to attraction. Yet our 21st century first world problems largely consist of tedious fluff about gender fluidity. Fat pride. How controlling the need to projectile vomit when objecting to coitus with a transperson is tantamount to genocide. My what a privileged time when live in. Our nation’s founders fled religious persecution. Modern self-appointed gender heroes flee triggering jean sizes.
Biology isn’t about fairness. Attraction isn’t about equality. What gets a man or woman hot is not politically correct or motivated. Attraction never was and never shall be determined by what butch-cutted social justice warrior lesbians at BuzzFeed say it should be. Keep blue for our oceans. Not armpits.
Which brings me to Newsweek. They’re flabbergasted. Despite a barrage of hate aimed at “toxic masculinity,” after years of dismantling triggering gender roles, women still flip their hair for tall, dark and handsome men with cash. Leaving skinny-jean hipsters to pine in their mothers’ basements. Consoled with nothing but trashy magazines. Looking forward to nothing but next week’s Antifa protest. Having eyes only for their lowly potted plant, which is subjected to regular masturbatory abuse.
Here’s a poignant pull quote:
The study at Coventry and Aberystwyth universities in the United Kingdom, published in Feminist Media Studies in August, analyzed images over a period of three years since 2014.
The photos and comments focused on the men’s biceps, pecs and chest as well as perceived sexual ability. Items that indicated wealth such as smart suits, watches and phones were emphasized. Pictures showing other representations of masculinity, such as fatherhood, and more emotional and awkward-appearing men were far less frequent.
I’d also recommend to Coventry and Aberystwyth (English naming may be one reason we tossed their tea into Boston Harbor, good Lord) read up on romance novels. Wherein the heroine typically falls for a rich and handsome man with a tormented past/soul. Basically Beauty and the Beast. Note that nowhere in female erotica is there a skinny-jeaned whiner swiping right on women out of his league. When he gets no response, he complains about “women just don’t like nice guys like me.”
That’s right, gents. Just as you enjoy the bouncing bosoms of ladies like Kate Upton, so too do women enjoy the devilish smirk of a handsome man. Just as you enjoy the hip-sashaying motion of a woman’s graceful gait, so too do women enjoy the chiseled shoulders of a yoked bloke, tensed as he lifts something impressive. “Impressive” here is not the burden of male privilege, stop it. Just as you enjoy a woman’s warmth and tender care, so too does a woman long for the decisive leadership of an ambitious gent.
Naturally those who fall outside the Venn diagram of desire find the laws of attraction unfair. Like fat feminists with faces resembling the undercarriage of a tow truck. These shrill, herd-bound land whales trundle across internet landscapes in hopes of changing how we perceive beauty. Usually by testing the limits of the human stomach, with displays of cascading fat roles and unsightly abdominal hair. Call them beautiful or be eaten. Men instinctively tuck their manhood inside themselves and sprint the other direction. As if being chased by a ravenous wooly mammoth. Not much difference between a mammoth and a modern day fat pride feminist. Instincts.
On the flip side, women with hormones operating at primal levels do not find the limp-wristed beta male — of the pajama (or Antifa) boy variety — to be worthy of her commitment. Lady folk prefer a virile man who can, in modern terms, run down prey to feed her family. Which she cannot do if she’s nursing and caring for babies. In 2017, this is a man with a good job/career. Who, as Newsweek points out in astonished surprise, wears a power suit and tasteful watch. Not to be confused with wrinkled t-shirts pulled from the hamper. Or a yard-sale Timex.
Yes, that’s why women like men of wealth. Women finding men with means attractive is just as natural as a man finding a woman with assets desirable. We roll our eyes at fat pride feminists whining about “piggish” men liking small waists and big boobs. So too do women roll their eyes at pudge boy box-office seat-warmers whining about hot (but “shallow”) women drawn to lawyers.
What draws a man to a woman and a woman to a man, on a primal level, is how to successfully perpetuate the species. What each sex finds attractive in the other is, at its most basic, about making and raising babies. Factoring zero into our attraction is how Newsweek judges our natural preferences. Or what a Reddit meme says about how you accept yourself for the beautiful thing you are. Et cetera.
Biological gender engineering via militant leftism has failed. For years the left has tried shaming men (and women) into expanding their beauty definitions. To embrace and love all of their flaws. To settle for what they have, not to strive for anything better. Even if personal betterment takes the form of improved health, or pursing a valuable career. Not to be confused with gender studies.
Seems women are as unaffected in their natural desire for muscled men of means, as men are to swimsuit models. No amount of leftist shaming has convinced men to write love limericks to Tess Holliday. Nor have leftist toxic masculinity lectures put a dent in women’s female gaze at the weigh-lifting investment banker.
Sorry, pajama boy pansies. For every one of you watching porn, there are just as many young women dreaming of a rich and handsome man who can carry her across a threshold. Of a house. Not to be confused with whining to get her on your futon.
P.S. Note this column is focused on physical attraction only. Spare me the hate tweets about how personality and character traits factor into a relationship. We’re not talking about marriage here. We’re talking about attraction.