In the article, "The Death Of Poetry"
by Pat Archbold, is about her definition of pretty and how girls/women are no
longer aspiring to be pretty. Archbold’s argument is that the definition
of pretty is the “combination of beauty and innocence”. She also writes: “Pretty
inspires men’s nobler instincts to protect and defend” and “most men prefer pretty
over hot”. This is absolute bullshit. First of all, is she some kind of man
expert? Secondly, I don’t think we, us girls, wake up every morning and decide
to act or dress with a man’s preference(s) in mind. I do recognize that this is
Archbold’s opinion but she simply states it as facts.
“Dadbod: A New Word for a Timeless Physique” by
Spencer Kornhaber, explains “the rise of dadbod probably marks not shifting
tastes but rather shifting ways of talking about tastes”. I think the term “dadbod”
is a way to make boys, without visible abs” feel better about not having that
definition. Kornhaber confirms that “a lot of men feel liberated”. Wouldn’t it
be cool if men also embraced women who don’t have cute, flat tummies? I really
like how Kornhaber ends the article with “A catchy name for your physique doesn’t
mean you’re special; it means that finally, you’re just like everyone else.” I
just don’t understand why men would take pride in looking like a dad when they
aren’t and why women are attracted to men who have bodies like their dads'.
I completely agree with what you’re saying about how when Archbold states,” most men prefer pretty over hot?” is BS. Most girls do not even have the energy to put makeup in the morning, or try to look “hot” every single day. Even if she was right, I believe that guys are the ones that changed pretty to hot. If you go on twitter or other social medias, you’ll see multiple guys retweeting pictures of “bae goals” or just saying what they want in a “bae”. Most of the time it’s about if a girl has a big butt or chest…other than if she’s actually pretty or not.
ReplyDelete