Recent evidence suggests that certain features on the human face indicate hormonal levels during growth, and that women judge the attractiveness of potential partners based on the appearance of these features. One entrenched notion is male facial features that are affected by testosterone are used as direct cues in mate preference. Testosterone may be particularly revealing as it is purported to be an honest indicator of male fitness. Increased testosterone may impose an immunocompetence handicap on the bearer and only the best males can carry this handicap. We produced a continuum of faces that ranged from low to high levels of testosterone in male faces and asked women to choose the points on the continuum that appeared most attractive and most physically dominant. Our data indicate that high testosterone faces reveal dominance.

Looking at Clive Owen scares the shit out of me. I say, run, don’t walk.

Body types are a separate issue. From the lists, we see the V-shaped, bodybuilder, mesomorph body type is out of style.

If I sum up what I’ve tried to say here, it’s that a surprising number of men on these lists are non-jerks with non-bodybuilder body types

And if we sum up what we have tried to say in response, it’s that those two things you seem to be linking (non-bodybuilder physique and non-jerkiness, or non-wifebeating tendencies) have shit-all to do with each other.

If you really, really, can’t see that for some reason, try the female equivalent: do you think that big hips are linked to motherly tendencies? No? Good. Now apply the same logic.

Clive Owen

George Clooney

Russell Crowe

Owen and Clooney have masculine features but neither has been reported to be a wife beater or abuser. I have no idea what kind of face Crowe has.

If I sum up what I’ve tried to say here, it’s that a surprising number of men on these lists are non-jerks with non-bodybuilder body types which is the opposite of what many men like to say, i.e., “Women like jerks” and “Women like big men.” The women’s version is “Men like dumb women” and “Men like skinny women” which is disproved by men time and time again.

If we’re talking about gender presentation as opposed to body type and facial features, that’s a whole different story i.e. Daniel Craig in touch with his feminine side in Casino Royale. There is also a homoerotic scene at the end of the movie in which he is tortured and I suppose that’s a kind of gender presentation.

There really are masculine and feminine facial features that correlate testosterone levels and dominant personalities but this does not necessarily mean someone with masculine features has a dominant personality.

Well, speaking personally, I’d rather go home with the baritones than the basses or the tenors.

Mm. Baritones.

Mandy Potenkin excepted. I’d hunker down with him, too.

As for Craig’s “bitch” comment, I tend to think it was far simpler: they were playing up Casino Royale as the origin of Bond. I think the “bitch” comment was there to represent how his heart has been utterly hardened by his experience with Vesper, and he’ll stick to the “use them and leave them” format from now on, as shown in other Bond films.

Forgive me for playing at canon police again, but I think that’s kinda what Fleming was aiming for with the ‘bitch’ line…with an extra helping of bullshit and bruised masculinity on JB’s part. It mentions in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service that he visited Vesper’s grave regularly (not to spit upon it, either). Also, he has a couple of later solid relationships in the canon, including his marriage to Tracy in OHMSS. I think JB hadn’t hardened his heart so much as regretted that it was as soft an organ as it was.

A guy may think he likes a girl with beautiful eyes and a fun personality, but he’s unconsciously drawn to the one with big boobs (guilty here).”

Right, but there’s also the simpler explanation that people are just hedging their answers when asked certain questions in public. I know the standard answer for most guys when asked what we’re looking for in a woman is “someone who’s pretty, fun, has a sense of humour, open to new things… ” - which is true, so long as it comes stacked on top of a whole other heap of prerequisites that we’re not mentioning. It’s not lying, but it’s telling a half-truth. The same is probably true for women.

Note that your take and mine aren’t mutually exclusive, and that both are most likely happening at the same time. I just think it’s playing it safe a bit too much to suggest that there’s never any *conscious* double take on this question. There is - it’s part of being human.

And I’ve never heard that saying before. As a tenor, it makes me chafe. :(

A guy may think he likes a girl with beautiful eyes and a fun personality, but he’s unconsciously drawn to the one with big boobs (guilty here).

Now, I’m not saying that either side is right or wrong, but arguing over a “top 100″ list of hypothetical hunkiness isn’t really getting anyone anywhere.

As for Craig’s “bitch” comment, I tend to think it was far simpler: they were playing up Casino Royale as the origin of Bond. I think the “bitch” comment was there to represent how his heart has been utterly hardened by his experience with Vesper, and he’ll stick to the “use them and leave them” format from now on, as shown in other Bond films.

donna, name me one person, woman or man, feminist or no, who’s agreed with your embarrassingly juvenile thesis on this thread. It’s not about being for or against women,it’s about not saying inane things that have nothing to do with feminism and then all out lashing out at everyone who doesn’t agree. You’re aware that you’ve accused every man on this thread of being a wife-beater? There was a time when I thought conditional insults (”you’re a dumbass if you disagree with me, but since you don’t HAVE to disagree with me, technically I never have called you a dumbass”) were clever and non-transparent. That was also the time I thought “I can’t clean my room, I have a test tomorrow” was clever and non-transparent.

“I’m also quite disturbed at the way that the idea of girls or women enforcing gender on boys and men is instantly assumed to refer to sexual competition.”

Sexual competition may play some role in the gender socialization of both boys and girls, but I’d say the first, primary reason behind socialization at a young age is a desire to have a *proper* boy or girl - someone to play catch with or help me with dishes while we make fun of boys, as the case may be. I mean, no parents are grooming their children to be heartbreakers and players, or are thinking of their little boys and girls with their potential sexual selves in mind - or for the sake of their children, we should hope not - so the idea that men’s/women’s taste in women/men is the primary drive behind traditional sex roles is misguided.

While I agree with you, I think that’s partially a context issue.

Is Depp feminine looking? Sort of. Is he feminine looking for someone presented as a hear throb in the mainstream media? Absoutely.

One reason that we reead certain celebrity men as feminine is because we’re comparing them to other celerity men. Standards in real life are different (thank god).

“I’d also suggest, albeit tentatively, that perhaps the people most qualified to speak on the subject of how boys learn gender are those people who actually, y’know, have been boys at some point in their lives. ”

Probably. Though I’d also argue that since a lot of the gender training for men is by dint of effort as invisible as the patriarchy itself, feminist women who’ve spent a great deal of time andenergy illuminating the unspoken principles of gender are also a voice that’s quite necessary to the discussion.

Without locking ourselves into this list, I think we can all agree that there are a large number of feminine men who make ladies swoon.

Agreed. I must question, however, Donna’s implication that this is in any way a new phenomenon. Rudolph Valentino was quite the heart-throb in his day. So was Ivor Novello. Paul was considered the “cute Beatle” because, of the four members of the band, his physical attributes conformed most closely to the feminine ideal: large doe-like eyes, small delicate nose. Even in the 70s, when macho came briefly into fashion (along with big breasts for the women — the ’70s were a good era for secondary sex characteristics, possibly as a kind of backlash to both the women’s movement and to the strongly androgynous aesthetic of the ’60s), the biggest heart-throb of them all was not one of those indistinguishable moustachio’d movie stars, but instead, the relatively effeminate Shaun Cassidy.

That women are attracted to feminine men is hardly some shocking new thing. The caricature of the “pretty boy” — the feminine man who makes the wimminfolk swoon yet attracts the envy-driven hostility of the menfolk — is really a very old cliche.

That said, I agree with other posters who have pointed out that many of the men on Donna’s list are not particularly feminine. Most of them look like they work out at a gym (for that oh-so-special inflatable rubber pecs look). There are a lot of bulging muscles populating that list, and a lot of small squinty eyes, and a whole lot of absurdly strong jaw-lines. Not what I’d call feminine. I know plenty of guys in RL — several of whom have posted in this thread, in fact — who are considerably more feminine-looking than the majority of the men on that list…and they’re still conforming well-enough to gender norms that nobody gives them a second glance when they walk down the street.

To get back to the question of who enforces gender on men, though, I am frankly somewhat astonished at the idea that this could even be in dispute. I would have thought it obvious that both women and men play their parts in imposing gender norms on boys, just as both men and women play their parts in imposing gender norms on girls.

I’m also quite disturbed at the way that the idea of girls or women enforcing gender on boys and men is instantly assumed to refer to sexual competition. What gives with that? Is that a reflection of the whole “women=sex” thing? Because seriously, it’s silly. Long before boys become concerned with questions of attracting the sexual attention of others, they’re internalizing gender. And who teaches gender to them? Their parents and caretakers do. Their peers at nursery school or daycare do. Boys have Mommies long before they’re worried about getting girlfriends, and I somehow think that Mommy quite often has something to do with the fact that Junior isn’t going off to school in a dress. And if Junior did go off to school in a dress? I can promise you that the kids who would make fun of him for that would include both boys and girls.

I’d also suggest, albeit tentatively, that perhaps the people most qualified to speak on the subject of how boys learn gender are those people who actually, y’know, have been boys at some point in their lives. There are many topics on which men really need to learn to shut up and listen to women. This, however, is IMO probably not one of them.

Additionally, while you’re busy accusing your opponents of wanting to reinforce traditional gender roles and traditional notions of manliness, you might want to take a moment and reflect on how many men on your list are there because of fame achieved through action movies or professional sports.

After all, it doesn’t matter all that much if you pluck your eyebrows; as long as you can still take your team to the Superbowl or kill 15 terrorists with a bazooka, you’re still the epitome of traditional manliness.

—Myca

donna darko Writes:
November 17th, 2007 at 8:32 pm

I love how the men don’t read women’s comments carefully here.

As one of “the men” where are you getting that from? I looked at your comments in this very thread, and found:

donna darko Writes:
November 13th, 2007 at 12:42 pm

The 100 Sexiest Men in the World [ed.: Daniel craig is listed at #8] are all metrosexuals. There’s not a single manly man among them. [ed.: with the apparent exception of Russell Crowe, as per Donna's comment in the following post: "Russell Crowe is #94. I missed that one. He’s the one manly man in a sea of metrosexual, feminine men. Did you look at the other 99?"] This is the list that comes up most when you google “100 sexiest men” or “100 hottest men.” Daniel Craig (#8) looks manly but his feminine qualities made him arguably the sexiest Bond ever.

and also

donna darko Writes:
November 13th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
To the normal people on this thread, the 100 sexiest men in the world are decidedly feminine, meaning their looks are feminine. …The 10 hottest bachelors in the US [ed.: this includes Daniel Craig, I think] are decidedly feminine. …Notice Daniel Craig replaced Sean Connery, a wifebeater. There’s probably a correlation between the desire for feminine men and men who aren’t likely beat you who are more romantic and sensitive. …
Check mate. The game is over.

Rather than accusing all the men in the thread of being incapable of reading your posts, you might reread your own stuff. I can READ it, but I don’t UNDERSTAND it and I also don’t AGREE with it.

I and most men have no particular reason to be defensive about daniel craig, though I personally do wish that I had a BMW with missiles in the headlights. And I have no particular reason to be defensive about whether “women want feminine men;” I’m happily married, and what OTHER women want in their partners is irrelevant.

But i do wish you’d stop accusing us being defensive because we’re disagreeing with you. As I pointed out above, I’m disagreeing with you because I think you are wrong.

Feel free to backtrack from what you said before, i certainly think it’s worth doing. But don’t go accusing others of ignoring you because you post a confusing position.

ALL THE MEN’S DEFENSIVENESS about the overwhelmingly feminine features or bodies or personalities of the hottest men in the world proves my point. Women like change, men resist it.