The feature, although not particularly in-depth, called us all to celebrate the oddballs and misfits of the celebrity world – the stars that we are “afraid to admit [we] fancy”. On the face of it this seems a great idea. Anything that bounces people out of the size zero hero-worship that taints modern society has got to be a good thing, right?
And yes, having scanned through the list of misfit celebrities there are plenty that can be termed geeks and misfits: David Gest, Louis Theroux, Jade Goody... I could go on.
But there are plenty on the list that I think are not geeks or misfits at all. They just don’t adhere to the stick-thin ethos of the media and fashion world. Lorraine Kelly, Fern Britton, Kirstie Allsopp – all highly attractive women (in my opinion) and eminently fanciable. Hubba hubba, etc.
So why does bucking the size zero trend automatically label you a geek? Or even a misfit? Why should I be ashamed to say that I think Lorraine Kelly or Kirstie Allsopp are attractive women? There are countless men (and women) out there who’d be glad to tickle Lorraine Kelly’s fancy on the GMTV sofa or give Kirstie Allsopp a quick look at their basement extension in the privacy of their own home... and they’d be damn proud to brag about it too.
And then it got me thinking about the rest of the list and at what point my opinion diverges from that of the author. Are David Gest, Louis Theroux and Jade Goody geeks just because I don’t fancy them? Or because the person who wrote the feature doesn’t? I mean I don’t fancy Catherine Zeta Jones or Keira Knightley either but does that make them geeks too?
If someone is attractive then they are attractive. End of story. There’s no shame in admitting this. And everybody is attractive to somebody. So who has the right to label somebody else a misfit?
If I get my kicks ogling Supernanny, Jo Frost or moist muffin maker, Nigella Lawson, shaking the bejasus out of a bawling brat or a homemade cocktail, so what? I like what I like. And that doesn't make anybody a misfit or even a non-misfit.
Wow. I actually started this entry with the intention of waxing lyrical about the impressiveness of Kirstie Allsopp’s commodious bosom and her rapier-like high heels but seem to have ascended instead into the higher realm of social comment...
Geez. Does this make me a geek?
19 comments:
Wouldn't a genuine size zero be invisible to the naked eye?
I prefer my men with substance personally (inner & outer) and think all this size zero 'bull' is driven by the media who once-upon-a-slow-news-week probably had their eye caught by some designer trying to make a name for themselves by inventing it!
Attractiveness is about dressing flatteringly, eating/exercising well, good personal grooming and a sparkle in the eye! Ok, and nice teeth and hair never go amiss if they can be achieved! Though I do think cosmetic surgery itself should be reserved for personal misfortune in the looks stakes, rather than vanity alone.
Nigella Lawson is hot! Her roots are Italian! Hands down, she's smokin' (and I'm a chick, so you know I'm being honest.)
Steve, I knew there was something I liked about you. You have great taste in TV personalities. Too bad you're spoken for.
But I completely understand the geek-attractiveness theorem. A ton of guys like the Pam Beesly (played by Jenna Fischer), from the Office, is hot.
Laura, I prefer my women the same when all's said and done. Attractiveness is ALL about personality and as mawkish as it sounds it does come from within.
Lucy, thank you muchly for the compliment - you definitely know how to get on my right side! I've never seen the US version of The Office but after a quick Google search I will concur with your appraisal of the aforesaid Jenna Fischer...! ;-) Smokin' indeed!
Writer John Mortimer (not the prettiest of men it has to be said) always ascertains that 'looksism' is the most insidious human prejudice of all, and I reckon he's got a point, but who isn't/hasn't been guilty of it? I know I have.
Our only saving grace is that each of us has a different idea (usually) of what constitutes 'attractiveness', potentially giving everyone a 'market' including ourselves though there are known physcial traits we all agree on as being desirable (such as 'nice teeth' for example).
The irony is that Mr Mortimer himself married not one, but two stunning wives in his lifetime! (of the type that most people would agree are stunning), so a bit hypocritical really.
But yes personality is obviously the No. 1 reason why anyone should fall in love with anyone and the only thing that endures when the looks begin to fade!
You could argue that looks don't really fade, as you get older, simply change. A lot of men metamorphose from pimply-faced youths into distinguished-looking gents, for example!
Regarding the geek, I've always thought that football fans who work themselves into a frenzy, over a game, qualify more for this definition than do fans of sf who seem eminently more sane and imaginative!
As somebody who loathes football and loves sci-fi, TimeWarden, I can only agree!
Ah, the old adage of beauty being in the eye of the beholder! For me the personality thing is foremost, good sense of humour being imperative. One of my daughters (aged 10) was telling me about a friend at school, he is rather an unusual boy..."geeky" "odd" etc to others, but my gal defends him to the hilt. She says he's lovely on the inside. I'm just glad that she has worked that out at such a young age.
My children are embarrassed at the celebrities that I fancy and think that I have serious issues.
Here is a short list
Cliff Richard
Peter Firth
Alan Rickman
Anthony Hopkins
Donny Osmond
Gabriel Byrne
Vinnie Jones
What can I say? I an a sick woman!
Sagittarian, your daughter is wise beyond her years - a precious commodity indeed. Hopefully she'll have a very happy life because of it. You must be damn proud.
Ally, the only one on the list I'd seriously question is Cliff Richard! Are we talking 21st century Cliff or 1960's Cliff? It makes a hell of a difference!
I agree with you with Cliff Richard, definitely a Young One.
I'm sorry, I stopped reading after that picture of Kirstie A...
Cold shower now, I think.
Oh, did I mention John Hannah?
I know what you mean Rol, I'm so glad there's not a hosepipe ban at the moment... I keep having to run into the garden to hose myself down!
Hi Sagittarian, you haven't mentioned John Hannah until just now! But I know what you mean. I think...!
Hmmm... the part I'm not sure about it, do you prefer women bigger, or do you just have a more generous standard of beauty (eg. me; I can find almost anyone attractive, although one may be very different from another)?:-)
> A lot of men metamorphose from pimply-faced youths into distinguished-looking gents, for example!
I agree with Timewarden there. So everyone has a chance, sooner or later...;-)
Hi Eve,
I'm hoping I have "a more generous standard of beauty" - I also find Rachel Wiesz, Kate Winslet and Davina McCall also extremely attractive. I definitely have a thing for brunettes (my wife is a gorgeous example)!
I love Kirstie Allsop, there was a great quote in Viz about her
"If she could see her way to giving my extension the once-over," writes Ogilvy Mather of Berwick-on-Tweed "I'd happily gazump all over her desirable frontage and original features."
Andrew, I know exactly where he was coming from... ;-)
Fantastic beat ! I would like to apprentice while you amend your site, how could i subscribe for a thread on your site? web site? The account aided me a acceptable deal.
I had been tiny bit acquainted of this your board provided bright clear idea
Anonymous: thank you for your salutational commentary and forthwith would you like to fornicate in motion away from here post haste?
Post a Comment