The Vital Fagly Accessory

Posted: April 18, 2011 in Uncategorized

This is a fashion model. Just because he looks so very…gay doesn’t mean he is gay. And just because he likes nice paisley trousers doesn’t mean he is gay ok? And he may be rocking that Matt Smith scrawny scowly cherubin look but he’s not you know, gay. But, if you really really do not believe us and you still are under the lame impression that metrosexual mode = homo, here is the model with that vital Manly accessory: A WOMAN. Yes she looks miserable and uncomfortable. Yes he looks awkward and unhappy to be in her company. But she is A WOMAN and he is A MAN and so this fashion shoot is: NOT GAY

Here they are again: still miserable, and she is walking two paces behind she is so unenthused by his presence, but still MAN/WOMAN=Heterosexual

And again- weary, unable to show any chemisty, maybe he has drugged her? But, MAN plus WOMAN = MANLY MAN. NOT GAY. METROSEXUAL MANLY. IN ALL GOOD STORES NOW!*

*girlfriend not included in price

http://www.ohlalamag.com/

Comments
  1. typhonblue says:

    Dude. It’s a hipster relationship. They are bound by chains of ennui and boredom. Love is passe. Affection is too earnest to be cool. Unless they’re being affectionate to be ironic about their lack of affection.

    • very good typhonblue. Hipsters are just…not sexual at all.

      • elissa says:

        I have nice memories of the L.A. beach boardwalk scene – Santa Monica, Venice Beach, and even Zuma – and I certainly can sympathize to how depressing it would be to stroll with a dude who has better hair.

        She does manage to steal his camera in the third frame though…..well done

  2. When I was getting my head out of my armpit* years ago, these pictures exemplify the problem with my conceptions about attracting women:

    I had to have that guy’s figure.
    I had to have that guy’s hair.
    I had to have that guy’s face.
    I had to have that guy’s attitude. (And facial expression)

    Since I had the first and the third, and they hadn’t been working out for me so far (and I was genetically unable to grow the second), I concentrated on the fourth (unhappy face.)

    Fuck-all that did. After a little adjustment from a PUA book I picked up (show the happiness that you want to share with the women you encounter) I started showing a subtle smile that said I’m-pleased-with-ever-minute-of-my-life without doing that shit-eating-grin and it started working.

    Those male models seriously fucked up my game when I first started.

    • typhonblue says:

      “without doing that shit-eating-grin and it started working”

      Yes, but a good shit eating grin is so hot now and again.

      • I was referring to this look:

        If that’s hot (even now and again) then I don’t want to be hot.

        • Also, typhonblue, let me say how much I appreciate your comments over at FeministCritics and elsewhere.

          You remind me of my wife – except she’s too much of a giant, squirting pussy to go online and say what she says about these matters at home and among friends.

          • typhonblue says:

            “You remind me of my wife – except she’s too much of a giant, squirting pussy to go online and say what she says about these matters at home and among friends.”

            Interesting imagery.

            and …thanks…:\ I think.

        • typhonblue says:

          No, that’s not a shit-eating-grin, that’s more a ‘I’ve just been fishbatted’ grin.

  3. OH shit, forgot this:

    * Head-Out-Of-Armpit is my way of saying: “Looking so critically at yourself that you begin to exude the stench of self-doubt and disrespect.”

  4. Mark says:

    Maybe she’s there to convince the photographer he’s not gay.

    But you’re right: the male model doesn’t look very happy with his accessory.

    And what kind of romance in Venice are we recalling here? Something by Thomas Mann? With the chick as Dirk Bogarde?

  5. Scott says:

    She’s a very attractive, if comatose, support. Yes, she is clearly there to prop him up, in all his doomed hipster otherwordliness. And this may or may not be about an oh-so-complicated sexuality. But this is also a very old form of heterosexual dominance in very new clothes. Call it… alpha-passivity.

  6. john says:

    Who is the target Audience for these photographs?

  7. Okay, your breakdown of the photos is kind of hilarious.

  8. supermarky says:

    Black shirts are back!

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