I would like to have enough hair to just try it… stupid male pattern baldness making anything but a buzz cut look bad, at least to me anyway.
5 Likes
Even trying would totally strip my hair follicles, I already know.
And I feel bad for Girlizmatic;
She wants multicolored hair like most of her friends, but her hair is as dark as mine, with a severely sensitive scalp, so I won’t risk using any harsh chemicals on her just for fashion.
11 Likes
So there are loads of new bleaches out of Korea and Japan that are not as harsh!
But you need to find a cosmetic supply place and someone that knows their stuff!
But all those Harajuku girls and their multicoloured hair have lifted from black and are now pastel pink!
Its doable, but she can’t be picking up Splatt from Walmart and thinking that’ll it do it!
One of my besties is from Ecuador and she has crazy dark and fine fine hair, and she lifts to white to go pink and purple! I will ask her she uses cuz her hair is never fried and its so fine I swear its like cat hair. LOL
11 Likes
Please! Otherwise it’s waiting to go grey enough for it not to matter. (Well, for my use case, anyway).
5 Likes
You still need to bleach grey hairs!!
Bleach opens up the hair so that colour can be deposited, you can’t put fun colours straight on unbleached white/grey hair! Don’t listen to them if they say you can! You cannot! They LIE!
8 Likes
Oh, I’m sure; hair chemicals have come a long way since I was a kid.
6 Likes
Yup. My gray hair is dye-resistant. So it absorbs less color, and consequently fades faster than the rest of my hair.
7 Likes
I’m so glad this thread is carrying on. I was afraid it might turn out to be another of those Nice Things that We Can’t Have.
I, personally (and possibly unhelpfully), don’t feel a need to look at this thread as satirical or anything. I’ve always wanted to live in a world wherein lechery and ogling aren’t one-sided and predatory. I wish I could look at someone I consider attractive, and fully indulge and enjoy the experience without thinking I’m staring at someone who welcomes neither my gaze nor any of my attention, and would not want me thinking naughty thoughts about her. I’m inclined to think that a majority of the fellas pictured in this thread are probably pretty much okay with being viewed as eye candy. They’re sculpted, they’re well-turned-out, they’re fetchingly dressed and usually alluringly posed (yes, yes, yes, all conditions that apply to female cheesecake photos, BUT!), and if there’s a long history of men feeling devalued and dismissed as nothing more than meat, well… gee, it’ll be news to me.
I can’t speak for any of them (you’ll find a conspicuous absence of beefcake photos of my happy ass in this thread, and it ain’t 'cause I’m shy and modest around whatever admiring cameras might theoretically exist), but I’ll go out on a limb and say that I expect that nearly all of these dudes actually do enjoy the attention these photos bring them. And I devoutly wish such could be the case with every person of any gender who appears in a photo used for aesthetic appreciation, however prurient it might be.
'Cause I do so love reciprocal or at least welcomed LUST. When used right, it really does make life worth living for some of us.
17 Likes
Yes, I have noticed that in the photographs, many of these men are facing the camera, some are cover photos for magazines which tells me they’ve been paid, and chose professions where they can be gazed at by millions of people and earn a lot of money for it.
12 Likes
You didn’t know that Trudeau is a bonafide hottie?
6 Likes
I’ve always wanted to live in a world where lechery and ogling were considered wrong regardless of the “object.”
1 Like
Yes indeedy. I know that that is also the case for women in (ahem) gentlemen’s magazines like Playboy as well, which to my way of thinking is somewhat problematic because so many men don’t understand the dividing line between professional models on a page (or screen or wherever) and regular women they might meet in day-to-day life… and indeed if the professionals (who have to go out in the normal world to eat and shop and live just like anyone) meet fans in real life, sometimes that professional line gets blurred and they can be treated with too much familiarity, as it were. Or worse. And yeah, I imagine that’s also the case with famous dudes, who might get mobbed by adoring fans. This doesn’t look like a comforting tableau to face as one exits one’s hotel lobby:
But y’know, the way the Playboy Playmate of the Month pictorials were created and presented, it was kinda made to look very friendly and girl-next-door-y. You read the “vital stats” in what was presented as her penmanship, learning her “turn-ons and turn-offs,” hobbies, hometown, etc. The idea being to make the viewer think that the Playmate is friendly and 100% accessible, that she really wants to be posing for him, and nothing is there to dissuade him from the gentle fantasy (“gentle,” that is, to his way of thinking) that she’d love to get together in person. That right there is the turn-on, and to be honest, it was always a pretty attractive fantasy. Harder-core magazines specialized in pictorials that indulged in more coercive scenarios, and occasionally Playboy dipped its toe into this subgenre as well, but it really seemed, during the time I read it (very occasionally in the 80s and early 90s) as if the fantasy that Playboy peddled was a world in which everyone enjoyed sex, nobody had any hangups, and everyone was available and ready and willing. Which sounds like a fun world.
But we don’t actually live there.
8 Likes
Sure, because of the baggage attached to those words. They’re one-sided. They don’t presume consent.
But in a world wherein we only leered at people who actually liked being leered at by us, can we still call it leering? If not, what do we call that thing my wife and I still occasionally do?
13 Likes
In high school my friends and I just called it “watching the scenery”. Never did we try to actually meet any of the “scenery”, no matter how attractive. We did try to avoid leering; ideally we wouldn’t be noticed by the “scenery” at all. Because we were teenage girls and that could backfire on us badly, and just out of courtesy for the scenery.
As with a lot of things, context is important, as Matt McConaughey explains so perfectly:
11 Likes
Who said anything about revenge? This is about, “Hey, we females do unto you as you do unto us!” Why does it have to be revenge?
12 Likes
I think that this is important to highlight: Men don’t have the same opportunities for objectification and so miss out on what it may feel like to be adored.
Adoration from desired parties can feel amazing and/or restrictive. From unwanted parties, it can feel icky, threatening, and dangerous. What qualities can be considered worthy of adoration and objectification (and by whom) are what’s up for grabs in this thread. It’s very engaging.
13 Likes
Sounds a lot like revenge to me.
Imma add Andrew Scott:
So stinking cute.
8 Likes
Thought that was the Golden Rule.
Which, and I correct myself, actually reads, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
But what happened to “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander?” Oh waitaminit…
Why can’t we look at some men the way some of us women are looked at by some other men? Because it’s pleasant to do so, it’s aesthetically pleasing, I would think. How is that revenge?
12 Likes