Skip to content

What Is Sexy?

February 19, 2010

I’m typing this at 10:39 PM when I have to get up in 6 hours. But I digress…

What I am also doing right now is trying to clear out my RSS feed. One of the sites I follow is The High Definite. I love this site for its comprehensive and varied collection of internet pop culture posts. Anywho, I just clicked on this link from one of their posts. Why? I was interested in who they were deeming “beautiful women” and what they considered “beautiful photographs.” Beauty is subjective, after all. And everyone, including me, has their opinions. I am now on photo 24 of 30 and I am all “Wha?”

A) The women are attractive for sure, even beautiful, but if YOU were compiling a singular post of the 30 beautiful women in 30 beautiful photographs would these be the ones that you choose? Of all time? Hmmmm.

B) After photo #2 it clicked in: each of these shots is completely sexually suggestive. Now, women can be beautiful, and women can be sexual, but the two concepts are not mutually inclusive (not exactly sure if I just made that phrase up but it would be the opposite of mutually exclusive): a woman can be sexual without being beautiful and she can definitely can be beautiful without being sexual.

Every single photo in this series was of a woman who could be deemed attractive by someone somewhere (“beautiful” is arguable) and every single photo shows a woman with: her mouth suggestively parted (who walks around like that in real life? Didn’t your mother tell you that a bird would poop in your mouth if you kept doing that?) ; her legs suggestively parted; her breasts exposed; her ass exposed; her taking off her clothes; her lying on a bed; or 4 out of the above 6: all signals (presumably) that if you are a man she wants to have sex with you or has just had sex with you and it was damn good. Is that “beauty?”

I get that most of the people behind these blogs are chubby/ horny nerds who’ve never had a real girlfriend and who do indeed idealize this false ideal of what it means to be a “beautiful” woman (confusing “beauty” with “easy access?”). This may be as beautiful as a KFC Famous Bowl: hot, steamy, cheap, pedestrian, and bad for your heart.

There are a bazillion lists on the internets of “Sexy Women” and “Women We Love.” The above list of “Beautiful Women” is surely not the source-to-end-all-sources.

Why do we classify these images as “beautiful?” What are your thoughts on this subject?

5 Comments leave one →
  1. carrieb permalink
    February 19, 2010 10:44 pm

    I always thought the Afghan girl on the cover of National Geographic was beautiful…

    • mjjaaska permalink*
      February 22, 2010 4:06 am

      Beyond beautiful: STUNNING. AND it was a beautiful photograph.

  2. February 22, 2010 2:07 pm

    Very recently,I saw a movie on one of my subscription channels – Calendar Girls – with Helen Mirren and Julie Walters. It’s about this group of older “chicks” posing naked for a calendar to raise money for leukemia research. The movie is based loosely on a real life group of British women who had done this because of the death from leukemia of one of their husbands. I would love to get my hands on an actual calendar of the real women who posed. I can say, that the movie version of the calendar was spectacular! These women were naked AND beautiful and all over the age of 50!

    • February 22, 2010 2:18 pm

      OMG! Just went on-line and found a Ladies of Rylstone Calendar, selling for $150 on Amazon!

      • mjjaaska permalink*
        February 22, 2010 11:17 pm

        Buy it!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: