SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Cosmetic procedures are of increasing interest to millennial men, a new industry report found.
Thirty one percent of men said they were extremely likely to consider a cosmetic procedure, either surgical or noninvasive, according to a survey conducted by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Among that 31 percent, 58 percent were from 25 to 34 years old and 34 percent were aged 18 to 24 years. Both age ranges are members of the millennial generation.
The top reason cited by respondents pursuing cosmetic procedures to appear younger was wanting to feel better about themselves, followed by the desire to appear less tired or stressed, and then to please their partners. In the 25- to 34-year-old range, 42 percent cited wanting to remain competitive in their career as a reason to go under the knife.
The most common procedures for men are rhinoplasty (nose jobs), otoplasty (pinning back the ears), and treatment for gynecomastia (a surgery that reduces male breast size), according to Clyde H. Ishii, a surgeon and president of the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery.
Part of the reason young men are increasingly interested in cosmetic procedures derives from social media, said Dr. Fred G. Fedok, president of the academy that conducted the survey. "People are more aware of their looks from different angles," he said. A growing interest in health and self-care also plays a part. "It's sort of like exercise," Fedok said about cosmetic procedures.
Apparently man boobs have gone out of fashion.
(Score: 2) by Soylentbob on Sunday June 25 2017, @03:31PM (3 children)
Manners, [youtube.com] of course ;-)
Actually, I'd like the same question answered by you. You mentioned in some other thread [soylentnews.org] that, if it was a matter of choice (which it isn't), probably all women would decide to be lesbian, so you seem to have some firm convictions what the behavioural differences between women and men are.
Since this is social minefield, I'll make a fool of myself first by trying to give an explanation. I think that expectations and roles are based on a mix of evolutionary advantages and social rules in society. Some of the evolutionary advantage loses its edge because most societies takes care of the basic needs nowadays.
The evolutionary aspect is that women have less opportunities to procreate. Usually they are biologically limited to one child/year over a period of maybe 20 years. This is not practical, though. Realistically, I think having more than 5-7 children is already very demanding for the female body. This means, for women the choice of a mate is a huge investment. Also they are weakened during pregnancy and might not be able to provide for themselves / their offspring after delivery. What they need is a strong male, able to provide for them and to protect them, and hopefully faithful enough to do so in the long term (although, evolutionary the task is fulfilled when the offspring is old enough to build their own family). Successful men can theoretically procreate on a nighlty base and have 36 offsprings a year (with an estimate of one pregnancy out of 10 opportunities; probably a matter of careful selection of fertile women etc., and if he has to dominate the other men to keep their genes out of "his" women.) Note that the "successful" part only applies to men here. A woman doesn't deed to subdue other women to get a chance to get pregnant, she just needs to advertise herself. The biological investment for a child is therefore much less for a man, and probably they can afford go for good looks instead of character traits. There is apparently more to it, as some men and also some other primates form life-long relationships, and in these cases the investment of the men is also becomes quite substantial. But while for a woman (before invention of contraceptives) sex had always a high risk of long-term liabilities, for a male casual sex was relatively risk-free, and not necessarily related to the goal of a long-term relationship.
Nowadays the changing social context thwarts lots of the evolutionary aspects and gives women lots of new freedoms. To give some examples from German law (I just googled them, I wasn't aware before): Only since 1959 are women allowed to get a driver license without asking permission of their husbands or fathers. Only since 1977 are women at liberty to sign a working contract without permission of their husbands. Only since 1997 is enforced marital sex considered as"rape", until then the law defining rape contained "extra-marital" as part of the definition (although, to be fair, it was prior to that law-change already punishable as sexual assault). Women who spent years to raise the children are nowadays in case of a divorce entitled to get half of their husbands pension-claims, and to be alimented. If the children are still young at the time of the divorce, usually the women get full custody of the children and the former partner has to provide for them. Basically, this means that men are nowadays also taking a huge risk by having casual sex. Partially now even more so, since there are cases of sperm theft where women took e.g. the used condom to impregnate themselves, or agreed to give a blowjob and went to the bathroom. (I know personally a woman, not a friend of mine, who boasted about such practices, and how she deceived her former boyfriend. It is even publicly encouraged [youtube.com] in some takshows.)
Traditionally, women were called the weak gender. This had some implications, like men had to pay special attention to women. Like, when a ship sinks, it is "women and children first!". Hitting a woman or a girl is considered the bottom of human behaviour. Being hit by a woman is like bad fortune, you don't fight it, you don't complain, you don't talk about it. Current shift in social paradimes generates, at least by law, a far more balanced situation, and since the narrative of the weak woman is still quite active, in court-decisions often even a position of superior power for women. "The Red Pill" is a nice documentary on this topic, although probably one-sided.
Societies actualities and historical evolutionary development are therefor very contradictive, which is often confusing for men (and I assume for many women as well). So, what is expected from a man? Society tells us that the role of a provider cannot be officially advertised anymore, since it belittles the women. Showing off professional skills is also no good, since it belittles the women. Logical conclusion is that men try to be what they are looking for in women as well. They start using more makeup, putting more store into their looks and whatnot.
Interestingly, my impression is that many women miss the old-style "real men". Maybe thousands of years of evolutionary pressure are not overcome by four decades of changed social context. According to surveys, most women are still looking for a rock in the breaking waters, a strong provider, expect the potential partner to be career-wise at least as successful as themselves. Talking to women and men, the feeling of jelausy is often distinctly different as well. While many women appear to be more concerned about losing their partner than about the question if his penis penetrated another woman, many men appear to be more concerned about their wifes sexual faithfulness, which makes sense following the evolutionary thoughts: If the woman gets pregnant with another man, her husbands heavy investment is in vain. The woman knows the child is theirs, even if the man might have been less than faithful.
As a good lady-friend of mine once said: "Equal rights are absolutely essential for society, and fundamental for practical aspects of a relationship. But unfortunatley they are not at all erotic." She was a strong women, didn't take any shit from anyone and was a successful business-woman, but on a date had very clear notion of who had which role. Interestingly, she (catholic) lives for ~15 years with her liberal-muslim boyfriend, with whom she has 5 children. She earns the money, and should they ever separate, it is clear the (catholic baptised) children would stay with her in her house.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday June 25 2017, @08:20PM (2 children)
This is a long screed of evo-psych BS that assumes what it wishes to prove. You're essentially saying "I doubt a straight woman would choose to be gay, because (insert a bunch of stuff we know, or think we know, about straight women)."
Nooooooo kidding. This is the same error Uzzard committed up there when he says he knew a guy who "chose" to be gay. No, he didn't. That is a bisexual. If there is any choice involved, it means you swing both ways.
The entire damn *point* is that there *is* no choice. I didn't choose to like women. My own mother says she knew what I was at age 4 somehow. It's not from trauma or dislike of men as men, they just don't "do anything" for me.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Soylentbob on Sunday June 25 2017, @08:37PM (1 child)
I think you got me wrong. I *know* (and also confirmed in my post) there is no choice of being gay or not.
1. I asked you about your opinion, what you think what makes a man. You seem to have an opinion, because you wrote that if there was a hypothetical choice, women would chose to be gay rather than putting up with men. This implies to me that men are, all things considered, the worse companions and therefore must have some distinct negative traits in your view.
2. I tried to answer, why it might be difficult for some men to define their own manhood. Society is changing fast. Expectations are changing fast. And for some reason we are not able to simply decide what we are attracted to, but have some attractions that cannot be by current needs and context. The type of women I'm attracted to is not necessarily the type of women which would be best for me or even the type of women I want to be attracted to. And the same holds true vice-versa.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 26 2017, @03:33AM
In response to point 1) please let us NOT kid ourselves here about how much it has sucked to be a woman in a relationship with a man throughout virtually all the world and all history. And in a lot of places it hasn't improved that much. Even here in the first world you'd be surprised how long it took, for example, for courts to admit that marital rape is a thing. Straight relationships are *dangerous* for women, and I'm saying this with full knowledge that it's f/f couples who have the highest REPORTED rate of DV incidents (reported is not the same thing as actual, mind; I would guess the numbers for straight DV are a lot higher).
Do you know why so many of us, yes, even gigantic looming six-foot me, cross the street if it's late at night and we're alone and we see men? Why so many of us carry pepper spray?
Why some of us (granted, only one data point here, me) carry knives? Because enough men are the kind of person that would commit rape. Enough men are the type that would injure or kill a woman for rejecting his advances. I don't even want to think about how bad all the tiny skinny women I know must be frightened of stuff like this.
Yes, it's true, Not All Men. Not Even Close To All Men. Only A Very Few Men. But *we* only need to get unlucky once. You can think of this as "Schroedinger's Rapist." There is simply no way to know. My sister was violently raped at 14--guess what, she's still straight.
And despite all this, the vast majority of women still pursue men and only men. And why? Because this is how the vast majority of women are wired. I have had straight friends tell me to my face they wish they were gay, had at least two I can remember say I'm *lucky* to be a lesbian, and you know, I've been agreeing with them for the last several years.
Regarding 2): Society poisons our boys and men. It tells them impossible things about what being manly means. It tells them never to ask for help, never to have (or at least show) emotions, not to bond to people, not even other men, except in shallow, ritualized ways lest they be perceived as homosexual (i.e., woman-like...). We still mutilate our baby boys' perfectly healthy sex organs at a hideous rate. It must sound really weird hearing this coming from a gay woman, especially since society paints us as violent misandrists, but I really, really hate what society does to our men and boys.
This is also what gets me in trouble with a lot of...er...less self-aware feminists, even to the point of being called traitor: because I recognize that plenty of this is more about class than sex or gender, and that the elite are pushing this toxic trash on non-elite men to turn them into disposable cannon fodder. This is what is meant by "the patriarchy hurts men too."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...