# Metrosexual



## Me Died Blue (Feb 24, 2004)

What do you all think of the new classification &quot;metrosexual,&quot; meaning men who have several qualities that are typically thought of as feminine in our culture, such as types of clothes, like to cook, etc., but are not homosexual in any way. I personally don't see any problem with it, because some of the qualities Americans consider &quot;feminine&quot; were simply defined that way by our culture, not the Bible. But I've gotten the impression from a few people that they think it is a violation of biblical manhood and womanhood. What do you all think?

Chris


----------



## wsw201 (Feb 24, 2004)

Not real familiar with it. Can you explain alittle more as to what it is about?


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 24, 2004)

Wayne,it'sa pretty new and still loose term, but it's becoming well-known, as they just mentioned it on the news here in Cincinnati last night. It's just a general term describing young or middle-aged men who have many of the qualities that are typically attributed to homosexual guys, but are not homosexual in any way. For example, if a guy really enjoys cooking, puts on scented lotion, spends a lot of time in front of the mirror each morning, or has other so-called &quot;feminine&quot; qualities, they would probably be considered metrosexual. A very loose definition is on http://www.wordspy.com/words/metrosexual.asp: &quot;(met.roh.SEK.shoo.ul) n. An urban male with a strong aesthetic sense who spends a great deal of time and money on his appearance and lifestyle.&quot;

Hope that helps,

Chris


----------



## blhowes (Feb 24, 2004)

So many new terms to keep up with... Are they gonna start calling us &quot;metrophobes&quot; next?


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 24, 2004)

Could you be more specific, Josh? What about it?

Chris

[Edited on 2-24-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## Gregg (Feb 24, 2004)

I like to eat so I have to cook:biggrin:

Nice avatar Josh:thumbup:


----------



## Bryan (Feb 25, 2004)

It's another attempt to &quot;homosexualize&quot; the society. Well take people with some attributes we have and link them with homosexuality so the culture becomes more accepting.

BAH :flaming:

Bryan
SDG


----------



## Doodle Bug (Feb 25, 2004)

I think it's disgusting. It's another worldly attempt to focus attention on self instead of God and others with a bit of gender bending thrown in.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 25, 2004)

[quote:1ba2e3e633][i:1ba2e3e633]Originally posted by Bryan[/i:1ba2e3e633]
It's another attempt to &quot;homosexualize&quot; the society. Well take people with some attributes we have and link them with homosexuality so the culture becomes more accepting.[/quote:1ba2e3e633]

But the whole point of the term is to [i:1ba2e3e633]distinguish[/i:1ba2e3e633] between homosexuals and guys who simply have non-traditional styles of fashion and/or habits. They want to be called &quot;metrosexual&quot; precisely because they do [i:1ba2e3e633]not[/i:1ba2e3e633] want to be associated with homosexuality [i:1ba2e3e633]in any way[/i:1ba2e3e633]. They're simply exercising a few qualities [i:1ba2e3e633]our culture[/i:1ba2e3e633] (not the Bible) typically classify as &quot;feminine.&quot; The Scriptures definitely set down God's ordained differences between men and women, but I do not believe the things &quot;metrosexuals&quot; are doing are part of them. As an analogy, since earrings are not mentioned in the Bible, earrings for guys are only sinful if they represent femininity in the guys' culture. But they are no longer solely a feminine symbol in our culture today, even though they were for years. Same concept with &quot;metrosexuality&quot; - it's just things like fashion (not drag-dressing, though), habits, hobbies and things like cooking.

[quote:1ba2e3e633][i:1ba2e3e633]Originally posted by Doodle Bug[/i:1ba2e3e633]
I think it's disgusting. It's another worldly attempt to focus attention on self instead of God and others with a bit of gender bending thrown in.[/quote:1ba2e3e633]

While it is true that we are supposed to focus on God ultimately and not the self, does a new term to describe a new trend in habit/fashion necessitate an unhealthy focus on the self? No more than does something like the introvert/extrovert distinction, or the perfectionist/casualist distinction. Again, they're simply descriptions of our habit/fashion.

I agree that the idea (and even just the sound of the term) can sound like just another liberal swing trying to focus the society on the flesh even more. But I think that when it's objectively weighed for what it really is, it's just a creative way of describing part of someone's personality, and one that does not [i:1ba2e3e633]necessarily[/i:1ba2e3e633] violate Scripture--even though of course it could if taken too far.

Just my :wr50:, and I don't feel very strongly about it anyway. It was just a new thing I heard about and was wondering what impressions it gave people. But if anyone wants to discuss anything else about it, I'm more than glad to do so.

Chris

[Edited on 2-26-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## Gregg (Feb 25, 2004)

Reply...

Especially when they have holes in the toes of their workboots like me.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 26, 2004)

[quote:dab4bf03e1][i:dab4bf03e1]Originally posted by [/i:dab4bf03e1]
I just think it's garbage. It's an attempt to Oprahize men...soften their spines...make 'em jellyfish.[/quote:dab4bf03e1]

So do you think that every man should be the type of man John Eldredge describes in his [i:dab4bf03e1]Wild At Heart[/i:dab4bf03e1]? Is that the sole way God's created all men?

[quote:dab4bf03e1][i:dab4bf03e1]Originally posted by [/i:dab4bf03e1]
The problem I have with it is it causes vanity. For these men to be so preoccupied with how they look, etc. is silly...it's VAIN. It's garbage. [/quote:dab4bf03e1]

Is it any more vain than women putting their make-up on every morning, or men shaving every morning? Metrosexuals aren't necessarily heavily preoccupied with that stuff--it just happens to be the kind of external and habitual things they drift toward.

Chris

[Edited on 2-26-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## wsw201 (Feb 26, 2004)

So that's a &quot;metrosexual&quot;. Well, I don't have a &quot;feminine&quot; side and the only thing I moisturize are my cowboy boots so the leather won't crack. I guess that just makes me a &quot;TEXAN&quot; :spin:


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 26, 2004)

[quote:8ca137da54][i:8ca137da54]Originally posted by wsw201[/i:8ca137da54]
So that's a &quot;metrosexual&quot;. Well, I don't have a &quot;feminine&quot; side and the only thing I moisturize are my cowboy boots so the leather won't crack. I guess that just makes me a &quot;TEXAN&quot; :spin: [/quote:8ca137da54]


----------



## Gregg (Feb 27, 2004)

I don't moisterize my boots. I like em nice and dirty and worn out lookin



[Edited on 2-27-2004 by Gregg]


----------



## blhowes (Feb 27, 2004)

:thumbdown: quiche :thumbdown:


----------



## A_Wild_Boar (Feb 28, 2004)

Maybe Absalom was &quot;metro&quot;?


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Feb 28, 2004)

metro vs. homo??? Hey, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...


----------



## pastorway (Feb 28, 2004)

The whole deal is an attempt to desensitize the culture into thinking that behavior is not homosexual or heterosexual.....it just depends on whether the behavior is engaged in by a heterosexual or a homosexual.

What does that mean?

They want us to think that there is no such thing as homosexual tendencies and behavior. It is how you are born, because after all, they tell us, even a strong heterosexual man can use moisturizer and wear nice clothes......

Bleeeck....

:flaming: 

God give us MEN......

[Edited on 2-28-04 by pastorway]


----------



## Gregg (Feb 28, 2004)

If you saw how beat up/rough lookin my hands were, you might recommend moisterizer.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 29, 2004)

[quote:0390d17683][i:0390d17683]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:0390d17683]
The whole deal is an attempt to desensitize the culture into thinking that behavior is not homosexual or heterosexual.....it just depends on whether the behavior is engaged in by a heterosexual or a homosexual.

What does that mean?

They want us to think that there is no such thing as homosexual tendencies and behavior. It is how you are born, because after all, they tell us, even a strong heterosexual man can use moisturizer and wear nice clothes......

Bleeeck....

:flaming: 

God give us MEN......

[Edited on 2-28-04 by pastorway] [/quote:0390d17683]

I actually can definitely see how the homosexual desensitization you're talking about could [i:0390d17683]very[/i:0390d17683] likely come out of this new emphasis, especially in today's American culture for that matter. I just don't think that [i:0390d17683]everyone[/i:0390d17683] who describes themselves with the term is trying to do that. But I do agree that it's not especially a [i:0390d17683]good[/i:0390d17683] thing either, if for no other reason than for the large possibility of the desensitization result. People just need to get their priorities straight.

Chris

[Edited on 3-1-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## Craig (Feb 29, 2004)

Uh oh...I use moisturizer...My skin cracks and eventually bleeds.

Also, winter makes the rest of my body dry and itchy, so I can't fall asleep. Would I be manlier to just ignore it, not sleep well, and have blood shot eyes?

Being metrosexual goes far deeper than moisturizing skin.

If it doesn't I am one...but I'm not georgous or anything...does that help? 

Also, I'd buy very nice clothing if I had the moolah...

Being well groomed and moisturized is an issue of taking care of one's self...I think the more effeminate days were in England with all the wig wearing and white makeup. 

I think some may be mistaking american machismo for genuinely masculine roles.

I could be wrong, though. I guess there's just something womanly about cleaning the dirt from under my fingernails when I'm done with some sort of labor. I am sure I'm depriving someone of my masculine filth by cleaning that out. At the next potluck at church, I'll be sure to avoid using toilet paper during my restroom break, not wash my hands, and make sure I reach down deep inside the potato chip bag (assuring myself not one chip is left untouched) before grabbing a handful. It's my duty as male. 

Seriously, though. Let's not mistake good manners/grooming with femininity. To a certain extent, it's taking others into consideration (my example above......for example)

Metrosexuals, according to the definition, go too far, i think.


----------



## Gregg (Mar 1, 2004)

[quote:5474547fc7][i:5474547fc7]Originally posted by [/i:5474547fc7]
I speak not of common, courteous grooming and hygeine, but of vanity. [/quote:5474547fc7]

Does this mean I can let the barb wire grow on my face an extra day before having to shave it off?:thumbup::roll:


----------



## blhowes (Mar 1, 2004)

I feel kinda bad for those guys (I'm sure you've met them) that seem to be effeminate and are thought to be gay, but are not. Things that are beyond their control, such as having a high pitch voice, sometimes give the wrong impressions.

BTW, in case you're wondering, when I use to sing in the choir, I either sang bass or baritone.

[Edited on 3-1-2004 by blhowes]


----------



## blhowes (Mar 1, 2004)

[b:b6b61fb59c]Josh wrote:[/b:b6b61fb59c]
Ya see, I'm not so much talking about effemininity as vanity. 

Actually, my comment was just a comment, not directed at anybody in particular. I agree with the point you've been making about the vanity.


----------



## Gregg (Mar 1, 2004)

[quote:279ea52163][i:279ea52163]Originally posted by [/i:279ea52163]
You can allow it to grow all you like...just keep it clean, pal. [/quote:279ea52163]

Reply...

Thanks Josie


----------



## Gregg (Mar 1, 2004)

Someday little  hopes to grow a beard and own a big chainsaw.


----------

