The father of modern total warfare, William Tecumseh Sherman, once said “When a man is too lazy to work and too cowardly to steal, he becomes an editor and manufactures public opinion.” Speaking long before the age social media, the internet, television, radio, or even the telephone, Sherman nevertheless encapsulated the essence and origins of what is considered “public opinion”, that is, what is “popular.” It is not a particularly bold assertion that in the contemporary age, the media, with its never ending penetration into the life of virtually every person in a developed nation, has an enormous capacity to influence and control the views of the public as a whole. Taking this to its logical extent, Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill declared “There is no such thing as public opinion. There is only published opinion.”
To understand the role which the media plays in our perceptions of virtually every facet of society is a prerequisite to dismantling the narrative which is the subject of this essay. We are told, essentially from birth, what we are to think and not think. It is doubtful that there are any significant number of people in a country such as the United States that have not acquired the fundamental messages of the media, as they pertain to what society holds to be attractive, by the time they learn to read. In such a world, our views of what is attractive are never truly our own, but are the product of a social process which we are immersed in.
Although there is a myriad of such views that would be of interest to consider, the one which is the subject of this essay is the media-imposed notion that thinness is attractive, and anything larger than thin is unattractive. It would not be an oversimplification to state the view of the media as essentially the creation of a dichotomy, with little more nuance than “two legs good, four legs bad” or in our case, “thin attractive, fat ugly.” Like the Orwellian term it is modeled after, this media maxim is widely utilized by those who accept it at face value to evade meaningful discussions about what is attractive and how the media controls our perceptions.
Which brings us to the title of the essay, at least in a roundabout way. What separates those who embrace the preceding maxim from those that question or reject it? Although here it is necessary to be more careful in grouping people so as to avoid overgeneralization or obfuscation of true motivations, several general categories can be defined. The first, and perhaps most obvious, is those who simply have not been given a reason, either personally or through exposure to alternative views, to question the conventional wisdom they were indoctrinated with as children. This is the group which a great many people would be reasonably assigned to a priori under a doctrine of not attributing to malice or forethought that which can be attributed to carelessness or ambivalence. A second group, which is really consists of two subgroups, are those that have formed an opinion in favor or opposition to the maxim of “thin attractive, fat ugly” on the basis of self-interest. Those who defend the media narrative in this group do so because the status quo is (at least at the present time) beneficial to them. Naturally, those who oppose the preceding maxim out of this group do so because the status quo disadvantages them, and they have no vested interest in its continuation.
Now I will posit that there exists a third group, which is not perhaps entirely distinct one from the former two but is sufficiently important so as to warrant its separate classification. This would be a group that, on the basis of highly developed independent thought, does not accept anything without justification, including the above maxim. Although separating this group from the self-interested would be imperfect, it suffices to say that this group should be thought of as individuals that reject the maxim even though they as an individual are not necessarily disadvantaged by it. Outside of the context of this particular maxim, this third group of individuals are distinguished by a mixture of independence, self-assuredness, eccentricity, and rejection of a certain amount of convention that they find unwarranted or undesirable.
Now it is this third group that principally includes those that could be termed “real men” or more properly, “gentlemen.” The modern world has made the definition of a “gentlemen” more difficult to understand and relate, but at its core the same principles which applied centuries ago still separate gentlemen from those of less repute. In these United States, a gentleman has been defined more by behavior, and less by social and class rank, than was the case in Europe. To be a gentleman in the modern age however has taken on an additional and special meaning, as one that thinks for himself in a world where many do not. To be a gentleman signifies independence in a world of dependence, and this extends not only to independence in the sense of means, but independence of thought, action, and opinion. A gentleman today, in much the way a gentleman of centuries past, is well defined by the independence to, within reason, choose one’s pursuits, mode of living, and tastes.
Finally, we arrive at the crux of the argument posited in our title, that gentlemen choose bigger women, seemingly in violation of a commonly accepted wisdom to the contrary. However, by now, it should be clear where the genesis of this phenomenon lies, and it remains only to relate this choice more fully to the observations of the everyday. Fundamentally then, it is clear that a gentleman, being of independent thought, does not accept the media interpretation of attractiveness at face value. Instead, to the mind of a gentlemen, the media position is simply arbitrary, without sound basis in human history or evolution. Why, if for most of human history across most cultures larger women were considered desirable, is it suddenly rational to assume the opposite is true simply because the self-anointed media declares it so? From this, it follows that a gentleman will reject the media position and at that dispense with any prejudices against bigger women as partners.
This gets us much of the way toward our final conclusion but does stop short of completing the argument. Lack of prejudice is not the same as preference, so it remains to consider why a gentleman would actively prefer larger women. To do this there are a number of factors which must be considered, but before doing so it is important to note that this discussion is in terms of general reasoning, there are exceptions to the rule, and no one should take such reasoning as invalidating their particular exception to the rule.
On a basic level, one reason that a gentleman is drawn to the “forbidden women” is a desire to express independence and strength of his convictions. The same rationale attracts him to clothing, cars, houses, entertainment, etc. which may not be “popular” in the eyes of the media, but to his mind the contrarianism is much of the appeal. A gentleman does not fashion his tastes to appease society, and thereby he needs little reason to choose what others find “unpopular” as he does not seek their approval.
A second reason, and a more practical one at that, is simply the general trends in dating and courtship which emerge from the modern society and its prejudices. Insofar as those prejudices engrain a sense of self-importance and self-entitlement in those preferred by them, those same prejudices must engrain a sense of self-reliance and self-acceptance in those disfavored by the same system. To the gentlemen, self-importance, and self-entitlement, particularly as the result of a belief that is arbitrary and even malicious, are not qualities of attraction. On the contrary, the self-reliance and self-acceptance of “forbidden” women has significant appeal.
Likewise, the fact that many lesser men fight viciously over what the media declares “attractive women” because they lack the independence and self-assuredness to break with convention gives the gentlemen a strong reason to smugly rise above the fight and instead pursue the real prize that the others are too afraid to seek. A somewhat imperfect metaphor for this may be seen in the California gold rush. While some men chose to work long hours in the wilderness trying to find gold, the alure of which captivated them, others, more akin to our gentlemen, set up shop in San Francisco and made their fortunes selling supplies. Perhaps the image of striking it rich with the “Mother Lode” is more appealing, but all the great fortunes of the gold rush were made by the merchants. In short, a gentleman knows where to find the real treasure and avoids any disagreeable scrambles for what is largely illusory.
Where then, does this exposition leave us? What conclusions are we to draw, what actions are we to take, and where do we go from here? Alas, in part, those answers are dependent on the reader, to assess their own position in this and make of it what they will. For some, this essay may have no bearing, and they may well go on with little more than some interesting perspective. For others however, this essay offers a great deal to ponder.
For the gentlemen, or aspiring gentlemen, this essay provides the call to independence, a declaration of self-determination if you will. Any gentlemen which had not previously had cause to deeply consider this subject has by this point inevitably been given one. The only conclusion which I will explicitly give, since I consider it all but axiomatic, is that the dating gentlemen ought not allow the opinions of the media, or a prejudiced society in general, to dissuade him from dating women of any size, and that he would do well to embrace the notion as a way to find the best partner out there for him.
For the bigger girl, the takeaway from this is one of contradiction to the established wisdom that many have felt maligned by. To put it bluntly, gentlemen have no issues dating bigger girls and there is no reason that you cannot find the right guy who will love you for who you are. Moreover, those men who are afraid to date what the media deems “forbidden” are not to be missed or pondered as they lack the gentlemanly qualities that you deserve.
Authors Postscript
I was motivated to write this essay by the frequent occurrence of questions on GAG concerning beauty standards and the media role in them. After answering dozens or possibly hundreds of questions to that effect, I felt that a more formal treatment of the subject was in order and with the time afforded by the current crisis I saw fit to complete it.
Thoughtful and positive feedback is appreciated, especially as my hope in writing this was to answer some long running questions in a more complete format. However, if you have nothing nice to say, are interested only in regurgitating typical NPC slogans, or are unwilling to contribute supportively to the discussion kindly show yourself the exit.
Most Helpful Opinions