Why I Hate Metro Men
I like my men pure man. Blame it on our ancestors: the women stayed in the cave while the men hunted dinner, the wives reared children in log cabins while their husbands plowed land and settled west.
The whole idea of a metrosexual - guys who spend more time in the shower than their girlfriends, neat freaks who care more about their appearance than just about anything else – goes against everything I find attractive in a man. I’m not exactly the daintiest of creatures and metro men generally do the whole femininity thing better than I do. In a relationship I expect to be the better dancer, have better moisturized skin, and be able to occupy a room with my boyfriend without choking on his designer fragrance.
With metro men, women are constantly in competition. There are some days when I put minimal effort into my appearance. Dating a metrosexual would put an end to this—I’d feel pressure to constantly be as put together as he is, to avoid others saying “How did she get him?!” I enjoy time spent in front of a mirror primping, preening, and powdering myself to perfection and the subsequent male reaction. There’s a certain mystery to women that should remain as a mystery – I find it endearing that most non-metro men wouldn’t be able to tell my mascara and lip gloss tubes apart.
I’m not saying I want to throw down with every sweaty, dirty man’s man I see screaming at a ref through the TV, but I don’t mind an unshaven face and belching contests. I like my man to have that natural musk that comes from a day spent with firearms. An ex-boyfriend of mine had some metro qualities, and I found that they gave me anxiety if nothing else. During a five minute conversation, he would flip his gleaming bangs away from his face no less than twelve times, always one violent head jerk away from certain paralysis.
My current paramour is much more of a man’s man: he knows his way around a grill and doesn’t always make showering a top priority. He can put together a decent outfit, but his bedroom floor is the only place he keeps his clothes, both dirty and clean. It’s not that he’s a slob, non-metro guys just have different priorities that are more in line with my own. He provides a level of comfort that a metro man can’t—a surliness that lets me know if in grave peril, he could literally carry me out of harm’s way.
Non-metro guys don’t have to be physically stacked football lovers. The guy I borderline stalked for most of high school is a waif-thin skateboarder whose body is covered in scars from wipeouts and surgeries. He drives the world’s un-sexiest station wagon and prefers buzz haircuts to managing his head of curls. He just doesn’t care, and that’s the biggest difference between men and their metrosexual peers. Guys are generally apathetic about most things in life, but when they do care about something it’s not whether they should spray tan or fake bake.
My ideal man cares enough about his appearance to not show up for a date drooling in his pajamas, but his total getting ready time takes no more than half an hour. I want to feel safe with him, not like I’d be left for dead if attacked by a bear because he didn’t want to rip his favorite shirt. Oh, and my blow dryer and flat iron? As far he knows, those are just some of my arsenal of torture devices should he ever get out of line.
Photo Credit: brooke
This article is part of 4-part series: Millennials on Metrosexuality
Read the other three:
A New Kind of Candy, A New Kind of Equality
Being Metro is More Than A Label
Males Against Metrosexuality
Brittney – this article had me both nodding my heading and laughing out loud. Well written, and suffice it to say, I agree with you 100% (although I do think there's a difference between being obsessive compulsive and being metro).
I think the impetus of the “metrosexual” derives from the fact that men or “masculine identity” is in a state of crisis, or at least confusion. I get where you're going with this article, and I'm not big on political correctness either, but I think the way you approached this topic is pretty offensive–especially your title. First, why so harsh towards these guys looking to define themselves in a complex world just because it doesn't appeal to your sensibilities? Second, if I were to write “Why I hate butch women” and went on to explain that it's just silly because the softer, gentler female role is what appeals to me. God can't women just be women!!–just how well do you think that would go over? And that's essentially what you just said. Have your opinion and share it, that's fine, but cut these guys some slack and acknowledge the double standard.
I agree with the first part of what Jason said — but I think it could be said that's the same for “feminine identity” too. Who says men have to act a certain way, and women have to act a certain way?
Why I do love this article and agree with it, though, isn't because I necessarily dislike metro men because they spend more time getting ready than I do, etc. — it's more because, in my experience, metro men tend to act like jerks more often than “regular” (that's not the word I want, but you get what I mean) guys do. I don't know if it's because they expect any girl they're going to be interested in to spend just as much time getting ready as they do — or to look as good as they do, or to care about their appearance all the time, or whatever — and, if they don't care or spend the time, they think they're not worthy of their time or attention. Maybe it's that? Maybe they just think because they look pretty, they can be rude to people who maybe don't look as great on a particular day. I don't know, I'm just saying, that's been my experience, and that's why I tend to agree with Brittney.
Thanks for the feedback! This was definitely meant to be lighthearted, though grounded in experience. Jason, I understand your points and the title is definitely extreme and meant to catch attention more than anything else. Keep checking back this week because the counterpoint article will be written, as well as two from the male perspective on the subject.
I think that yes, the title framed your article all wrong for me. You're absolutely right about the the role reversal that can happen when men buy into a metro lifestyle, which is certainly decadent and a little absurd, and the hilarity that ensues. On the other hand, I think that making being a “metro sexual” into such a one dimensional idea is a disservice. It makes these guys into a stereotype where their looks and taking too long to get ready is the totality of who they are. They become branded as effeminate, non-men–and I don't think anyone deserves that. That, anyways, is the root of my sensitivity on the issue. I'm glad to hear we'll have some other perspectives on the topic. So well done, I look forward to reading them.
>>…in my experience, metro men tend to act like jerks more often than “regular” guys do. I don't know if it's because they expect any girl they're going to be interested in to spend just as much time getting ready as they do — or to look as good as they do, or to care about their appearance all the time, or whatever — and, if they don't care or spend the time, they think they're not worthy of their time or attention. Maybe it's that? Maybe they just think because they look pretty, they can be rude to people who maybe don't look as great on a particular day. <<
You could say the EXACT same thing here but reverse it to make it about women who spend a lot of time on their appearance and it would be just as true. I agree with Jason – double standards.
How would you define 'pure man'? Try looking at it this way:
Masculinity: Having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men, i.e. strength and aggressiveness.
Tradition: The transmission of customs or beliefs from generation to generation.
A really long time ago, a bunch of primitive male ancestors decided (pretty much without any real thought whatsoever) that they'd use aggressive force to survive and get what they want/need. Which was great and necessary in caveman times, but the world is nothing like that anymore and we're so slow to catch up with that.
Traditions remain similar to life in those days because people rarely challenge things they are told, especially if they're ancient, they like to stick to what they're taught and what they're used to from childhood, which is usually what their parents learned from childhood. Society, particularly the media and our parents, siblings and role models teach us that men have to be like this and women have to be like that because that's the way it's always been and you mustn't deviate.
Consequently, when guys do decide to try and make themselves less oafish and women decide to relax and do away with the extremely high maintenance that is almost demanded of them by society (think models airbrushed to impossible perfection that all girls are encouraged to aspire to), some bystander looks on and says something like “I hate metrosexuals”. Though they might use some other label deemed appropriate for a non-conformist.
Perhaps this is because they'd prefer life to be just how they were raised to believe it would be, and get frustrated when it's not. Men are like our dads, women are like our mothers. Nobody is ever any different to their parents, right?
Hah – I found svb123's comment funny for one particular line, “…when guys do decide to try and make themselves less oafish…”
If I understand the argument correctly, it's that by being metrosexual, men are breaking out of traditional gender roles, and therefore doing something positive by liberating society from backwards thinking.
While I think it's great that traditional gender roles be left in the past, what I fail to see is the connection between a guy spending thirty minutes blow-drying his hair, and spending hundreds of dollars on a pair of jeans and the dissolution of the negative stereotypes of gender roles.
Do we think that because a man pays attention to fashion and moisturizes he'll be less likely to adopt sexist attitudes? Will a guy who spray tans be more likely to be a stay-at-home dad? There's no connection.
We need to see the differences between traditional gender roles that matter, and should change, and those that don't matter, and can go one way or another. How a man dresses, doesn't matter, and we should all feel free to go back and forth on whether metro is absurd or not. How a man treats women does matter, and that shouldn't be debatable.
Get it together people. Metrosexuals were created by marketers who wanted to sell more hair gel. Unfortunately the brainiacs at insight inc missed a key one: guys don't want people to think they are fags. Even if they are fags. Who gives a fluck? It doesn't mean they get facials. Well, maybe. Bur that's not the point. The point is that most guys flee at the mere mumur of the word metro. It's time to invent fancy new marketing stereotype for men who like to wear cologne.
Good point, and I totally agree with that. I don't know that it's a double standard — you could write an article about “why I hate girly-girls” or whatever — just that it's “typical” girl behavior?
I guess that depends entirely on what a metrosexual is to you. 30 minutes of blow drying probably wouldn't make your hair look good.
>>Do we think that because a man pays attention to fashion and moisturizes he'll be less likely to adopt sexist attitudes? Will a guy who spray tans be more likely to be a stay-at-home dad?<<
Yes. A man who isn't afraid of being labelled 'girly' by men that can't get past the neanderthal state of mind is likely the same man who doesn't get all screwed up over a woman that brings home more money than he does. I'm sure he'd see the logic in staying at home as the primary caregiver without it questioning his 'manliness'.
>>How a man dresses, doesn't matter<<
If a man wants to, it doesn't matter. If he doesn't want to, it doesn't matter. Just as it shouldn't matter whether women do or don't want to. It has little to do with gender, people can either choose to look good or choose to not bother, but for some reason people are clinging to the notion that women should and men shouldn't.
>>How a man treats women does matter, and that shouldn't be debatable.<<
As does how a woman treats a man. Nothing really separates men and women besides culture and a few physical differences. The belief that men are this way and women are that is a myth, you get plenty of manly straight men that have feelings, cry sometimes, like chick flicks, gossip with people and eat chocolate – they just don't talk about it with people that would judge them for it based on these cultural beliefs, and may even judge themselves and feel guilty about it. Which sucks.
I felt myself saying “yes! yes!” when I read this. Another thing though that I think needs to be addressed in terms of metro guys: body hair. As far as I'm concerned the only place a razor should go is on the face. It gives me the creeps when I see men with baby smooth chests, arms, and legs. Don't get me started on overly groomed eyebrows either
I agree wholeheartedly with Jason's response to your article.
Most “metro” men are not former “man's men” who woke up one day and decided to try something new. They're just guys who were likely raised behaving the same way as they do now. I'll confess that a lot of my friends think I'm metrosexual and sometimes even ask me why I'm like that, as if it were something I'm doing on purpose. I don't understand your point, I guess. Is there some dearth of “man's men” or “real men” or whatever that makes you need to “hate” (as you put it) men who aren't like that?
If you're not attracted to them, just leave them alone.
I agree 100%. My daughters and her female friends often comment on the recent feminization of american men. The “lotiony” hands, etc.
Kinda makes you worry about the future of the nation.