The one where I really like White Collar.

Nov 28, 2009 03:51

So far, any positive comments I've seen about White Collar - including my own - have made a point of saying that it's brainless (if extremely pretty) fun. But I begin to wonder exactly what we mean by that.

I mean, it is tv, which is usually not your high water mark for intellectual stimulation, and by virtue of its very premise, White Collar has ( Read more... )

white collar, men in vests, man-pretty, tv, hair

Leave a comment

litlover12 November 30 2009, 13:06:39 UTC
My best friend remarked the other day that she didn't think Neal was all that handsome. I almost blurted out, "Did you go blind and forget to tell me??"

But now I think about it, her husband keeps his hair fairly short, so perhaps she's been immunized against the charms of Magic Hair. How sad!

Reply

thepresidentrix November 30 2009, 20:00:57 UTC
Well, you never know. I often find the supposed-to-be-extreeemely handsome guys off-putting and therefore less-attractive, and I think Neal makes it right to the borderline for me, LOL.

Any more handsome or chiseled or whatever, and I'd probably like the look of him less! But as it is? I APPROVE.

Hee.

Reply

thread-jumping! tempestsarekind November 30 2009, 20:17:32 UTC
I often find the supposed-to-be-extreeemely handsome guys off-putting and therefore less-attractive

meeeee toooooo. And most of my friends do not understand this at all.

Reply

Re: thread-jumping! thepresidentrix December 1 2009, 00:11:53 UTC
Sometimes I think it has to do with this way really handsome guys have of looking... predatory. Threatening. I'm sure some of them improve upon acquaintance - like Richard Armitage, who softens with exposure - but I'm not into sharp and threatening as a look ( ... )

Reply

Re: thread-jumping! tempestsarekind December 1 2009, 00:50:55 UTC
I think that's all very true, and very frustrating. I know what my physical type tends to be, to the extent that I have one (more on that in a second), and it doesn't match up with, say, Brad Pitt (snooze) or whatever muscly guy is on the cover of the most magazines at the moment. (I don't mean to sound quite so snarky about that, oops.) But it's assumed that I will be attracted to whoever the "it" guy is, and if I'm not, then I'm weird. (A friend of mine constantly accuses me of liking "effeminate" guys, where "effeminate" apparently = "not totally ripped." Bleh ( ... )

Reply

yet more thread-jumping! valancy_s December 1 2009, 02:24:03 UTC
Didn't they do a study proving that people find symmetrical faces more attractive? I do think there's something, if not universal, at least relatively innate in what people consider beautiful. And then culture layers heavily on top of that. But I also think you're right that too-attractive or perhaps too-perfect people are intimidating. It's like in a reading I give my students, the guy talks about "presence" - how a man's presence suggests what he can do (to you). A too-perfect-looking man's presence says "I can get whatever I want" - and that lack of vulnerability or need to try is actually quite off-putting... to me, anyway.

Viva la cuteness unconventional!

Reply

Re: yet more thread-jumping! thepresidentrix December 2 2009, 03:20:12 UTC
Oh, true enough. And I'm sure there are some visual relationships we collectively have a hard time seeing around. Like, say, really close-set eyes. (Mine err on the side of too close-set, heh - makes it hard to find attractive glasses and sadly rules out the awesome colored plastic pair of hipster frames I'd totally want, were it not for the fact that even the minor thickness of a plastic frame is sufficient to make me look cross-eyed ( ... )

Reply

Speaking of boys, thepresidentrix December 1 2009, 00:43:59 UTC
(she said, starting another thread ( ... )

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, tempestsarekind December 1 2009, 00:57:32 UTC
I...think maybe we have the same categories? I might define mine slightly differently, if I were to do the exercise, and I might have a hard time separating out personality from the physical appearance, but, yeah. And category 1 makes sense, to me: there's often only a small difference between "classically handsome" and "oddly proportioned."

(I had the biggest crush on Harry Kim, by the way. It was ridiculous.)

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, thepresidentrix December 1 2009, 01:08:59 UTC
(I had the biggest crush on Harry Kim, by the way. It was ridiculous.)

Oh you AND me AND valancy_s! They were always doing such horrible things to him. He was always the one getting infected or kidnapped or threatened, and he was such a dear, LOL.

Clearly we all three like our Henry Tilney, too. ;o9

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, tempestsarekind December 1 2009, 01:31:59 UTC
I know! All of that getting trapped inside of Beowulf and whatnot! Poor Harry.

Henry Tilney is easily the Austen hero it would be the most fun to meet. He's not the swooniest, perhaps--but swooning is overrated, as Austen might say: "Beware of swoons, dear Laura....Run mad as often as you chuse, but do not faint."

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, thepresidentrix December 2 2009, 04:07:59 UTC
Oh, and I think it's clear that I, too, have difficulty sorting physical features from impressions of personality traits, LOL. Since I consider 'looks honest' a physical feature. Heeheehee.

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, valancy_s December 1 2009, 02:49:28 UTC
Can you tell who's procrastinating her seminar papers 'cause she keeps commenting?

This is intriguing. I have to think of my categories. Because I really can't separate physical attractiveness from personality and charm... not to say that I have to like someone to find them attractive, just that their features need to be enlivened by some kind of charisma or quirkiness (is this perhaps why Bryce never did it for me?) or I'm left cold.

Do your categories apply to real-life crushes or just actors?

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, thepresidentrix December 2 2009, 03:32:46 UTC
I listed all the boys, real and imaginary, including a couple of cartoons! (*cough* Dmitri *cough* - that cartoon man had such a hold on me, LOL ( ... )

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, valancy_s December 2 2009, 12:52:58 UTC
Interesting... I definitely respond to men who look thoughtful, but I don't think kindly is one of my requirements. I wouldn't, for instance, ever say Richard Armitage looks kindly. And while I'm drawn to "nice guy" types like Chuck, Ned, etc., just having a nice-guy face isn't enough. Ted on How I Met Your Mother looks like a nice guy, but I'm not attracted to him. Russell Tovey is adorable, but ditto. So I guess for me it's looks-intelligent and/or -kind and/or -charismatic + some purely structural element.

When I think back on the guys I've had a thing for they are really all over the map, skinny to built, blonde to black hair, little nose to big nose, blue eyes to brown eyes, whitest of white boys to Asian boys. But there is a certain set of attributes I'm often drawn to: big dark eyes, dark curly or wavy hair, contrasting paleness, long lean build. (Zachary Levi would be the latest instance of this pattern.) I put this down to my having imprinted on Matthew Broderick at a very young age. However, it's also weird, right ( ... )

Reply

Re: Speaking of boys, thepresidentrix December 2 2009, 16:39:17 UTC
IT'S FUNNY YOU SHOULD ASK. I was meaning to mention this the other day, and I forgot.

A few years back, my friend Brady, who is a science magazine kind of guy, told me he'd read about a study that showed people tend to be attracted to others who look just enough like them, but not too much like them, if that makes any sense. People who looked as if they could be, say, first or second cousins. The theory was that we have an evolutionary drive for self-preservation, so we're programmed to seek out potential mates just different enough from ourselves so as not to degrade the gene pool, but to do it with an unconsciously narcissistic twist. 'Cause it's our own genetic material we instinctively want duplicated, and our cousins are the nearest relatives (and the ones who shares the most genetic material in common with us) with whom it is safe to procreate.

I guess there are a lot of married couples of my experience who do like as though they could be related to one another... Though there are plenty of exceptions, too, of course ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up