When did good grooming become effeminate or "metro" for men? (cut, shave)

[bondaroo]

Originally Posted by turf3

There is a big difference between "good grooming" (keeping shaven (your face!)), neatly styled hair, clean properly tailored clothes (that fit! not undersized) neatly pressed, fingernails without grime under them, etc. -

versus

- Being obsessed with what a bunch of large companies advertise through anorexic male models; shaving off all your body hair, wearing makeup, wearing your suits two sizes too small because fashion models do it, carefully trimming your beard so you always look like you have exactly two days' growth, and so on.

Yes this.


I know lots of men who are always clean and neat. But nowhere near what would normally be called "metrosexual". Like others have said, it's just a modern update of the word "dandy".

Dandified appearance is not something I have ever found remotely attractive in men, even way back when I was a teenager. There's only so much time in a day, and if any person spends a big percentage of that time on their appearance (man or woman), it's just not appealing to me.

[savoytruffle]

"Metro" was a last decade thing. I probably stopped hearing that word by 2013. Grooming has become more fashionable in men again - well-trimmed/shaped beards, various types of fades, etc. You see that in a lot of millennial men these days. Maybe it's easy for me to notice because I work in a government area where people dress well.

[GrandviewGloria]

Well... here's the OFFICIAL definition, as defined by the person who coined the term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrosexual

'Metrosexual' is not a word I hear in conversation. It's dated, and it's misused - and largely irrelevant, anyway.

But my original understanding, combined with observation of men who might have been applying the term to themselves, was that it was embraced by effeminate homosexual or bisexual men, who insisted (to themselves, as well as to others) that they were neither effeminate nor homosexual. 'Straight'-but-artsy guys in an architectural firm, or at a TV station, or at a newspaper, would glom-onto that designation, in order to reassure themselves, enhance their job security, and to be able to look down upon, "those abnormal types".

Metrosexuality may have been a bit of a 'movement' (if one engineered by purveyors of products). We see plenty of other "movements" created by marketers. The Medical Industry is buoyed by all sorts of volunteer "movements" (with marketers lurking in the background). Create a good-enough bandwagon, and people are likely to jump on it.

The classic Metrosexual, to me, was from a low-class or lower-middle-class family, whose women got "all-dolled-up" (he secretly yearned to be like his painted-up mama https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwBV8LYFzMg And then, there's the olive-toned version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cgr9kvb89j4). But the classic Metrosexual was a "professional" in a "big city", and so was a tad more subtle than 'Brother Boy'. He was "moving up in the world", "dressing for success", "playing the game" - married to a woman (can't move up in the firm, without a wife), or with a "steady girlfriend", or at least a mythical, "m'girl back-home".

Gender expression becomes more exaggerated, the lower one is on the Social Totem Pole. Upper Class people are naturally androgynous. But in the lower classes, men are expected to be "manly", and women are expected to be "girly-girls". They become caricatures of men and women.

But back to Ugly Betty for a moment. The show ran a bit after the early-2000s revival of Metrosexuality as a marketing ploy for hair goop, designer labels, and scented candles. There was Justin, the problematically-effeminate and fatherless son of Betty's dumb-but-gorgeous sister, Hilda. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kzKhpxHSJk Over four years, we watched Justin develop - sometimes insisting he wasn't Gay - but, in the show's last episodes, being shown following the 'out-&-proud' trajectory of Marc (a budding Publishing professional, also painfully-effeminate, and also from a socially marginalized NY background).

However, had the show gone into further seasons, I have to wonder whether Justin might have gone back to self-identification as a heterosexual. After all, we're shown TWO men who SUPPOSEDLY are "straight", but who "have to" pretend to be Gay, because "you can't get anywhere in (fashion/broadcasting), if you aren't Gay". That, of course, is anything but true. If anything, the opposite is true. But what a justification!!!! What a dandy way, to have your cake, and eat it, too.

'Suzuki St. James' gets to queen-it-up, all day long (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWr9FqLJNCc), but still tell himself he "isn't one of those", because (as it finally emerges) he "secretly" has a family in a lower-middle-class 'burb', and tosses-a-ball with his son, and "grills brats" in the backyard. Classic Metrosexual, if you ask me: a man who's an absolute salad of denials and contradictions, revolving around his effeminacy and sexuality.

Then, there's the extremely fem fashion designer 'Tavares', who has an affair with Amanda (The Receptionist from Hell), exchanging clothes, and sex with Amanda, for an "in" with Mode Magazine. This is another supposedly "straight" man who is "forced" to act like a woman all day long, because "straight men aren't allowed in Fashion" (No, 'Gay' and 'Effeminate' are not synonyms, despite the way they seem to be defined at ABC, whose Style Book seems to require that all Gay men be depicted mincing "Maricons".). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-x-AR3zBpI (not in English, but the Italian is pretty elementary).

Why the network chose to advance the idea that a "Gay Mafia" controls the creative professions, is a mystery. But the two above examples lead me to assume that their Marketing Psychologists think like me: they offer these visions of convoluted sexuality and gender expression, as a MARKETING PLOY. The show was heavily used for pushing various things at consumers. They were plugging all sorts of things, besides just hair goop for men - everything from Phillipe Starck Ghost Chairs, to Statement Necklaces. I assume they saw Suzuki and Tavares as offering some sort of conceptual bridge, to some sort of market - or latent market - a Metrosexual Market.

But back to real life. Here's a Metrosexual story happening, in NYC, right this minute. In my old metro, there was "A total dream-bubba", who captured the imaginations - and the lusts - of my Decorator and my Ad Man. These are my two closest male friends. Their effeminacy has plagued them for their entire lives (or, at least since they spoke their first words - too soon, and too well). But they package themselves in the same way that they taught my husband how to dress - like titled gentlemen in the highest echelons of Private Banking. They look like men you'd encounter on the piano nobile of an Italian palazzo, or in a Parisian bank's marble-&-mahogany office, with twenty-foot-ceilings, into which only billionaires are admitted entry. ... suits from Kiton, Brioni, and Oxxford - always with neckties - quietly attired, but quirky enough to firmly state that they are above and exempt from any sort of 'dress code'. In casual garb, they look paramilitary/tactical/ready and willing to snap your neck, if you make trouble for them. ...no discernible hair product. ...no fussy hairstyles. ...no manicures. ... no makeup. ...no "skin treatments". They do not allow their barbers to touch their eyebrows, nor do they tamper with the hair on their bodies.

But they, like we, they spend two hours at the gym, every day. It is there, that they (separately) encountered, "The Total Dream-bubba". One of them saw his butt, in the locker-room. "Like Autumn Haze Mink! I've never seen that much fur, on that much muscle. And the COLOR!"

I saw him, too, on trips back home. Bama Bangs down past his massive auburn eyebrows - dressed like a building contractor (which he is). He was in a society bachelor auction. He was building multi-million-dollar spec houses, in the state's 'Power Neighborhood'. He was built unbelievably well - short limbs, long torso - and so V-shaped. He had a beautiful live-in girlfriend. He drove a big 'dually' truck. He was so masculine. If you looked down onto the top of his head, you could not see any scalp at all - even at the 'center whorl'. He was, ostensibly, everything a man - a genuine, unaffected, all-man-real-man - should be, right down to the muscles bulging in his white carpenter's pants, and his mud-caked construction boots. My Decorator and Ad Man were ENTHRALLED.

But then, things started to go wrong. Rumor was that he'd cheated his 'Money Man' - his elderly financial backer, the richest person in the state. Rumor was, he wasn't paying his bills to suppliers. Rumor was, he was false-invoicing - charging for high-priced components in his houses, when in reality, he was installing the very cheapest.

"Why does somebody like HIM have to do that? He's so.... EVERYTHING."

"He's hiding something. He's running from something. Something very deep and old and personal. It always boils down to this with con-artists. We've been looking at a sociopath's projected, cultivated, constructed image - just a really good one: Bernie Madoff good.", was my reply.

Then, it turned out that the "Gorgeous live-in girlfriend" was a total figment. Another one, a very real and truly gorgeous blonde banker, who supposedly was "in love with him", set the record straight, "Are you KIDDING? He ruined my house (a new Country French home which, even from a google image search, was clearly botched)! I HATE him! I'm SUING him!"

Indictments were eminent. Local news sleuths were getting close to breaking the story.

In the meantime, "Total Dream-bubba" was changing in appearance. He started shedding bulk, and going more for 'tone'. He started wearing eye makeup. His clean, gorgeous Bama Bangs were gone, and replaced with a repulsive, product-laden 'up-do'. His eyebrows were "shaped" - and trimmed - and ruined. He flew up to Manhattan, for some modeling something-or-other. He got little plastic surgeries. He started pestering our favorite trainer, a former underwear model, for "connections" (and to "come over and watch the game" - uh huh - several other spectacular local male bodies were similarly invited for "games", and "barbecues", and such-as...).

Then, his mansion went into foreclosure, and "The Perfect Bubba" moved into the home of a cosmetologist. He started to look drawn and worried. He started looking like a country bumpkin's idea of a city sophisticate (greasy hair, in a repulsive "retro do"; makeup; dark, tight clothes....).

So, one day I'm on the phone to my home state, and ask, "So, how's Minkbutt? Has he washed the goop out of his hair, yet? Has he been indicted? Are the lawsuits resolved?"

"Oh... HER? We're calling her Patricia, these days. Anyway, she's moved to Manhattan. Look up her Facebook. It's a scream." (I've changed the name, of course...)

I don't 'do Facebook', but my assistants do, and while, 'Patricia' - formerly 'Minkbutt'/'Dream Bubba' had NOT undergone gender reassignment, as I was expecting, his Facebook definitely was a scream.

Instead, he's gone totally Metrosexual - a slicked-back "sophisticated" "action-businessman-on-the-go". Somebody's done gone an' done him a portfolio of shots - all around Manhattan - showing how dynamic and successful he is (along with the most blatantly self-righteous/virtue-signaling captions I've ever seen - and I've seen plenty). These include shots of him with a middle-aged and closeted reality show star - a new "mentor"/secret "best-buddy, wink-wink"? Another fabricated relationship? I dunno....

But my 'Little Birds', my best male friends, who formerly were enthralled with Minkbutt Dreambubba, now say things about him, in Yiddish, that I am NOT going to translate.

[Hulsker 1856]

Originally Posted by randomparent

It did, and yet it did not. I think a lot is blamed on IT culture unfairly. Yes, crawling around laying cable did mean that jeans and a polo were more appropriate than a suit and tie, but they're not to blame for the really unkempt look -- unshaven, untrimmed, sloppy -- that has taken the west by storm. I'm married to an IT consultant, and he neither looks like that nor works with people who look like that. You can't meet with corporate decision makers looking like you just crawled out from under a bed and expect to do well, even in IT. That's a myth.

You know what happened?

Businesses decided that talent was more important than image. That's what happened.

In a previous career in the IT department of a well-known Fortune 500 company, I worked with every variety of people. One of them was an appearance disaster. Long, uncombed hair, corduroy pants that were way too high ('floods'), a shirt that looked like he stopped at a JC Penney clearance sale on the way to work. He knew everything in IT security, he did very well for himself, and his employee record - which I could see - had the CRITICAL EMPLOYEE, RETENTION ESSENTIAL note that I only ever saw for one other person. On the other hand, there was an idiot who wore a suit every day. Guess who was widely respected, had job security, and left only because he reached retirement age? The first guy. The second guy was laid off. And those were hardly the only two examples.

The company had its priorities straight. A lot of them do. And they attract talent that would rather focus on doing what they like to do, rather than wasting a bunch of time on irrelevant image.

That's not a myth. That's reality.

[randomparent]

Originally Posted by Hulsker 1856

You know what happened?

Businesses decided that talent was more important than image. That's what happened.

In a previous career in the IT department of a well-known Fortune 500 company, I worked with every variety of people. One of them was an appearance disaster. Long, uncombed hair, corduroy pants that were way too high ('floods'), a shirt that looked like he stopped at a JC Penney clearance sale on the way to work. He knew everything in IT security, he did very well for himself, and his employee record - which I could see - had the CRITICAL EMPLOYEE, RETENTION ESSENTIAL note that I only ever saw for one other person. On the other hand, there was an idiot who wore a suit every day. Guess who was widely respected, had job security, and left only because he reached retirement age? The first guy. The second guy was laid off. And those were hardly the only two examples.

The company had its priorities straight. A lot of them do. And they attract talent that would rather focus on doing what they like to do, rather than wasting a bunch of time on irrelevant image.

That's not a myth. That's reality.

Are you making this personal? Presenting yourself well is important, whether that's in a suit or khakis & a polo, even in IT. And, yeah, my spouse has been on the critical employee list, too, and he did not dress like a slob at the time nor does he now. But I will tell you this, when consulting firms hire people to work with Fortune 500 companies and pay them very big bucks to do so, they don't look for the guy with greasy, uncombed hair and sloppy, poorly-fitted clothes. They expect their high-earning consultants not only to know their **** but also to look like they do. I know this for certain. If someone wants to spend a career as a cubicle dweller and get a tidy little pension at the end of thirty years, clothing likely doesn't matter all that much. If someone wants more than that, he (or she) must look the part.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by randomparent

Are you making this personal? Presenting yourself well is important, whether that's in a suit or khakis & a polo, even in IT. And, yeah, my spouse has been on the critical employee list, too, and he did not dress like a slob at the time nor does he now. But I will tell you this, when consulting firms hire people to work with Fortune 500 companies and pay them very big bucks to do so, they don't look for the guy with greasy, uncombed hair and sloppy, poorly-fitted clothes. They expect their high-earning consultants not only to know their **** but also to look like they do. I know this for certain. If someone wants to spend a career as a cubicle dweller and get a tidy little pension at the end of thirty years, clothing likely doesn't matter all that much. If someone wants more than that, he (or she) must look the part.

You just described me to a T. I was a consultant (medical electronic design engineer) for the last 20 years of my career. My customers were majorly corporate.

I was surrounded by employees wearing t-shirts, jeans and athletic shoes. I wore dress shoes, slacks, dress shirt, tie, and my appearance was identical to managerial colleagues except I never wore a coat. (you put that on a hanger as soon as you get to work)

I dressed like management because my image was like management, my peers were management, and I didn't want them lumping me in with t-shirt, jeans wearing, athletic shoes slob engineers.

Well it worked. If you want success then dress like success. I earned 2x what the employees were paid.

Singling IT out as an industry is irrelevant to this topic. Most of them were cable draggers, PC fixers, and server nerds. I can do all that and I have my own dedicated server in EU.

I gotta admit the IT gang were always my best on-the-job friends.

Please google BOFH archives. Bwa-haha!

[reneeh63]

Originally Posted by Suburban_Guy

I don't think men being neat and groomed in general is what some are criticizing, but the need for some men to shave and wax body hair, underarms, chest, private areas, etc.

Why men need to do that, ridiculous.

I certainly appreciate a bit of trimming in some areas!

[Mikala43]

Originally Posted by reneeh63

I certainly appreciate a bit of trimming in some areas!

It's required!!!

[Oklazona Bound]

Originally Posted by randomparent

This is an interesting perspective. It seems that at some point, dressing up became the sign of a striver rather than a mark of accomplishment.

I find myself wondering if some of this revolves around the rise of the automobile. Bear with me if that doesn't make sense off the bat, but it strikes me that in a time of public transportation moving the vast majority of people back and forth to their jobs, the symbol of your professional attainment was your attire. A well-cut suit, a hat, fine shoes, and a leather briefcase were the mark of an accomplished man. Now, we signal our elevated place in the world via our luxury cars. This may be the reason that big cities remain more formal than the rest of the county. People spend more time moving from place to place in the public eye and less time hidden away in cars.

I suppose. I am in my mid 50's and the automobile has been central in most peoples lives for my entire life everywhere I have lived. When was public transportation moving most people around? Pre WW2?

In the big cities I have lived in its the poorer class thats taking public transportation. I have seen people waiting for the bus in a suit. It looks very odd.

However NYC may be different, never lived there.

Anyone can put on a suit and shave but not everyone can drive down the street in a 80K automobile.

[Oklazona Bound]

Originally Posted by Hulsker 1856

You know what happened?

Businesses decided that talent was more important than image. That's what happened.

That's not a myth. That's reality.

I would agree that substance is much more important that style.