Fashion Friviolitry

The computer I happen to be using, is serviced by an ISP using Bing, and one of the stupid, pseudo-news headlines that come across the splash screen is about Taylor Swift being "best-dressed" or some nonsense to that effect.

The reality is this.  Taylor Swift, or Salma Hayek, or Carrie Underwood, or Kellie Pickler,  Marissa Tomei, or Mary McDonald, or a hundred other women I could name, could wear a burlap bag, or a bath towel or flannel shirts and worn out jeans and I would get just as hot and bothered as I would if they were wearing a negligee or nothing at all.

 

The pieces of material have nothing to do with why we want to look at these women.  By the way, Marissa Tomei turns 50 this year and Mary McDonald is 62. I will leave you to google Rachel Welch on your own.

I don't care how much Rosanne Barr, or Whoopie Goldberg, or Rachel Maddow, or Hillary Clinton invest in clothes or cosmetics, or the experts that can tell them how to use those things, I can't stand to look at them.

I would have to be homosexual to even begin to think of being  - gaag, gaag, ick,  spew, -    attracted to that.  That pic came from his, er, her own website.

In several decades, I've seen some women who have made dramatic changes in their lives to become very pretty compared to their former selves, so let's be clear that it is very possible to improve.

But I am sick to freaking death of seeing thinly veiled advertising in the form of "news" that gives women the impression that if you wear the same stuff ____________ does, then you can be pretty too.

You can take the clothes off of Kate Upton, or Heidi Klum and put them on an anatomically correct manikin.  Once they are on the plastic doll, I could care less how nice they look.  I wasn't really looking at the clothes when they were on Kate or Heidi.  I guess you could think of it as men having a form of X-ray vision.

I don't care what you do to the Hildebeast, or Whoopi, or Maddow.  Their ugliness goes deep down.  And I could not imagine going beyond polite pleasantries with Eva Longoria or the Dixie chicks or any other gorgeous leftist female.  Just can't go there.

This makes me realize how inadequate is the phrase, "undressing her with your eyes."  When a man sees a beautiful woman wearing form-fitting clothing, swim suits or anything of that nature, we've already thought about how wonderful it would be to experience all the various parts of that body about 0.0056 seconds into the first look.  There is no scientific way to measure these things.  It's just a guess.  We've all seen men go into a form of mental vapor-lock in the presence of a beautiful woman.  A lot of women understand this phenomenon, but amazingly some women can never comprehend it and condemn men for it.  I say amazingly, because the women on the left who are so disgusted by male behavior, also believe in evolution.  They also believe that people are born homosexual, and thus have no control or choice over their sexual preferences. 

If you believe that, don't you EVER give me a hard time for fawning or even drooling over a pretty, sexy female.  Just shut the hell up.  You don't beat a dog for eating a steak you left on the floor.

Do I still go into mental vapor-lock over pretty females?  Not since about 1985.  Becoming a mature human being (male or female) means learning to control yourself.  Are the feelings still there? Oh yeah.  Deep down inside.  But just as I control the things I eat because there are all kinds of things that I could over-consume to my detriment, I don't reveal what I'm really thinking in the presence of a hot babe for fear of looking like an idiot.  But I've digressed way too much.

Of the first group of women above, I don't know much about the intelligence of all of them except Kellie Pickler. If it were up to me, the Wikipedia entry that explains the phrase, "dumber than a box of rocks,"  would have youtube videos of Kellie Pickler from "Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader" and one of Jessica Simpson explaining the tuna she was eating from a Chicken-of-the-Sea can was really chicken.  By the time I was in my early thirties, I understood that while both of those women were incredibly hot and the purely animal part of my being could go into an erotic form of apoplexy in their presence, I could not imagine any kind of long term relationship with either of them, because at some point we would have to talk.

Maybe you noticed that I included a photo of Jewel Staite. She's not what most people would think of as glamorous, or a "knock-out," but I find her incredibly sexy.  Both from her role in Firefly and from working without a script at the fan conventions.  A "kinda" pretty woman with intelligence beats a "drop-dead gorgeous" femme fatale any day of the week for me.  Women like Jessica Simpson and Kellie Pickler remind me of what smart prostitutes know.  Men don't pay you to have sex.  They pay you to leave after having sex.  And I'm guessing that except for maybe 5% of the male population, every man pays for sex.  Money may or may not be the form of currency used.

Some people can never comprehend what happened with Prince Charles regarding Princess Diana and Camilla Parker Bowles.  Why in the world would he choose Camilla over Di?  We can never know for sure, but any mature male with enough experience can surely guess.

Can you have a beautiful woman with brains?  No doubt. Heddy Lamarr must have had an IQ off the charts.  Just check out her Wikipedia page.


Ladies, whatever you wear will only impress a man for a few seconds.  We will not remember what you wore beyond 48 hours.  The clothes that we do remember will only be because we remember how much and what parts of your flesh they revealed.

Ultimately, you women wear clothes for other women.  If a woman is really beautiful and sexy to most men, she could wear jeans and a tee-shirt or a uniform every day and we'd still have the hots for her.  And if a woman is ugly, and not just in the visual sense, she could wear a negligee and we'd be tired of her in two minutes.