Tom's Views

I was blogging again today and wrote this response to someone on the Real Skinny blog:

I hope women understand that not all men share my particular tastes and that therefore, I speak here for no man but myself.

Some men like me, enjoy the longer, thinner legs, while others like shorter, stubby ones. Some like the big bubble butt while others, like me, enjoy just enough butt for a handful in each hand. Thus, just because I’m not attracted to a particular woman’s legs doesn’t mean that NO ONE ELSE will be. In fact, a quick walk down South Street in Philly proves this. You’ll find lots of couples strolling there when it’s warm, and most of the women I find nothing intriguing about. But the guys they’re with think they’re wonderful. Enough said?

You say that men scrutinize and judge too much.  But those words just sound so harsh and non precise. I’d rather think of it as guys just trying to find a mate that gives them the most pleasure. Now what’s wrong with that?  Don’t you do the same?

I never claimed to accept ALL women’s bodies as they are. I just accept the ones I like, and leave the rest for someone else.   Seriously though, I don’t have the capacity to love any- and every-body that crosses my path. I doubt that you do either. But I admit it, and I don’t believe that creating such an unconditionally loving nature would even be possible at the current stage of human physical and social development. To do so, you’d have to somehow short-circuit a basic building block of human evolution; that is Natural Selection.

We all have things we’re looking for, even if we’re not seeking thin bodies with long, lanky legs. And when what we want is not found in a potential lover, we move on. Natural selection depends on this behavior to keep the strong surviving, and the race as a whole improving over time. So we’re not being shallow when we’re choosy about which person to lie with; we’re just being natural.

You speak of this “losing erotic appeal” as though us guys (or gals) have a choice in the matter. In my view, we don’t. We don’t decide when the feelings of attraction come or go.  So when they leave, we’re powerless to bring them back. Tell me: Is your eroticism as easy for you to control as, say, the light in your bedroom? If so, then you need to write a book and tell the rest of us how you do it. It’d be a million-seller to be sure, and I’d want to get the first copy.

In my experience, flattering clothing and other devices (like toilet paper in the bra for example, or high heels in fact) are very often used to mislead potential mates about a person’s real appearance. If you were a man who enjoys big breasts, would you not be offended when, as you remove your date’s shirt, you saw her chest “deflate” from a 38-D down to a 34-B right before your eyes; her boobs falling onto the floor revealing themselves to be nothing more than carefully positioned wads of toilet paper? This is really bad because not only did your date lie to you about her real look, but she contemplated this lie beforehand. That makes it a pre-meditated lie; the worst kind of black lie.

But I concede that this sort of thing has happened since the beginning of humanity, when people painted their faces to hide their “imperfections”. It’s gone on a long, long time, and no doubt will continue for a long, long time. I rail against it. But it’s so ubiquitous that changing it in my life time will be impossible. So, I accept it, grudgingly.

But you know? I’ve not seen any definitive studies that show that women who wear the stuff that changes their natural shape have any better luck at sustaining long-term relationships than those who just put their natural foot forward; allowing their small boobs and short legs to hang out, figuratively of course. Of course! Where’s the proof?

Finally, though I generally find the longer legs sexier, this is not always true. It’s just a rule of thumb. In addition to the fact that she has long legs, thousands of other data points contribute to determining how beautiful I perceive her to be. Both physical and non physical, this other information also determines how sexy her legs look. In other words, it’s not just her legs that make her legs sexy. Her gorgeous legs would cease being gorgeous if I learned that she was a killer or that she is otherwise mentally ill.

So I get leery when talking about specific body parts alone making or breaking the lady. We might like a vanilla milk shake due to the taste of vanilla in it. But taste vanilla by itself, without the sugar, milk, and cream, and you probably won’t like it. In this case, the vanilla makes the shake, but the shake also makes the vanilla. Without the vanilla, the shake doesn’t taste as good, and without the shake, the vanilla tastes bitter and unpleasant. It’s only when you perceive them both together as a whole, that you get a truly delicious dessert; even if you think that what really pleases you about the shake is that subtle taste of vanilla within.

Likewise with women. The legs can make the woman, partially. But without circumstance, her personality, and her spirit to animate those legs in sexy ways, there’s very little sexy about them; even if they’re the most shapely legs on the planet. Without her mind to work them, they might as well be the legs of a mannequin.

So the accusation that men are just into shapes of bodies is not correct. Even when they tell you that you have sexy legs, they’re really saying so much more; not just about your body, but about the person they think you are too.

So ladies: Learn to read a little more between the lines.

Tom Hesley

Related Posts

• Advantage of Healthy Living
• Am I A Bigot For Wanting A Tall Thin Woman?
• Thoughts on “The Fat Ideal”
• True Beauty, Not Makeup, Wins True Love