Exam Question

Ercole-- · 2017-05-21T21:49:59+00:00

(c) men's sexual desires

James Bond is for men.

Atlas_B_Shruggin · 2017-05-21T22:21:58+00:00

James bond is a character designed to appeal to MEN,, never to women.

IIHotelYorba · 2017-05-21T21:56:04+00:00

C: the mainstream popularity boom of bodybuilding and the steroid age. Like today, advertising sold all manner of things back during the early 60's. Looking like Bond or different popular tropes was very much attempted by men. But at the time bodybuilding was thought of as a weird thing that guys with inferiority complexes did.

Also interesting is that Craig actually looks similar to the physique Connery had during his bodybuilding years as a teenager in the 1950s. But at that time and when Connery became popular, you certainly didn't see any leading actors sporting that kind of physique, including Connery himself.

IamTheWalkingMenu · 2017-05-21T22:39:53+00:00

They both look kind of ick to me. I haven't seen any James Bond movie tho as far as I remember. Why do they look like that? That's who the movie makers thought ppl wanted to see and could make them money?

badnews4u · 2017-05-22T10:57:32+00:00

i think you need to look jacked to be believable when theres all these other movies/tv shows that do it. ultimately it doesnt matter who its for, since you need it or else you look ridiculous. kind of like a pro wrestler thats not jacked will never appeal to most amount of people

alreadyredschool · 2017-05-21T21:49:22+00:00

The lack of chest hair in the new bond is really disturbing. Oh god I guess there will be a harsh awakening when the new Baywatch movie comes out! Back then in the hippie times hair was more normal and natural but they also had shittier shaving solutions.

Back then hard working proles had "good" bodies, rich people had fat. Now lazy people have fat. And rich people have time to work out, afford a good diet.

Pale skin was popular because it meant you were indoors and not working out in the fields. It was a status symbol. only the wealthy could afford not to get a lot of sun.

Coco Chanel is widely credited -- or blamed -- with changing all that. In 1923, the story goes that Chanel, the French fashion designer, accidentally got a lot of sun while sailing aboard a yacht to Cannes. When she returned from the Riviera golden brown, a fad was born. Before long, so was an industry.

It became vogue and a sign of wealth to get a nice tan while vacationing in sunny places. I think that combined with the work force mostly moving indoors after the industrial revolution switched the status symbol.

I guess it's all about indicators of high status/wealth and status symbols. And I think media and advertising just reflects that, it doesn't dictate that.

Also I am pretty sure that when he started playing bond he looked slightly better, younger, more defined.

AutoModerator · 2017-05-21T21:34:48+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

disposableboyfriend · 2017-05-21T23:31:08+00:00

With regard to muscle definition, the answer is

(c) None of the above.

This is a phenomenon similar to the popularity of tanning. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_tanning#Cultural_history:

Tanning has gone in and out of fashion. In the United States and Western Europe before about the 1920s, tanned skin was associated with the lower classes, because they worked outdoors and were exposed to the sun. Women went to great lengths to preserve pallid skin, as a sign of their "refinement".

Women's outdoor clothing styles were tailored to protect against sun exposure, with full-length sleeves, and sunbonnets and other large hats, headscarves, and parasols shielding the head. Women even went as far as to put lead-based cosmetics on their skin to artificially whiten their skin tone... Nowadays, most people work office, or at least indoor, jobs. Most are pale. Being tanned suggests that you have time and money for leisure activities.

Just like being tanned, being muscled suggested that you worked a manual job, as a farmer or a factory worker. Being thin suggested that you did not do manual labor, and was a sign of being upper-class. And likewise nowadays, being muscled suggests that you have time and money for gym membership.

The lack of hair, however, puzzles me.

exit_sandman · 2017-05-22T02:21:21+00:00

a and b (and a produces b).

I'd argue that casting handsome guys in order to maximize appeal to women is as much a marketing strategy as casting pretty women in order to maximize appeal to men.

It's just that in the last decades the expectations when it comes to men's looks have increased, especially when it comes to genres where priorities have shifted to cater more to women than before (like superhero movies for example).

Entropy-7 · 2017-05-22T13:23:14+00:00

Here from an actual James Bond movie has Craig with not as much definition as in his publicity shot.

It's a fashion trend for men to have little or no chest hair, plus, body hair tends to hide muscle definition as well as tattoos.

Chest hair was largely out in 20's and 30's, kind of iffy in the 40's and 50's but was common through the 60's to 80s, and then the pedulum stated to swing. The exceptions were the bodybuilders turned actions stars (Steve Reeves, Arnold) and others who had really ripped physiques (Stallone). But the likes of Chuck Norris, Tom Selleck and David Hasselhoff all had chest hair and didn't have extreme muscle tone or bulk.

Women's preferences seem to orbit the centre. A relatively recent poll said 66% prefer men with no chest hair. It was probably the reverse 40-odd years ago, give or take.

Meanwhile, men are being held to higher standards of appearance and famous athletes and movie stars trend towards being clean shaven, or at least trimmed down among those who get buy on good looks but no necessarily a tip-top shape body (although there are some exceptions like Jason Statham who goes hairless in some movie rolls and modelling shoots and a bit furry in others). There is an influence of "the media" to the extent that famous guys trend one way and regular guys will emulate them. How much of that is the stars themselves and how much is their handlers (agents, photographers, directors, advertising execs etc.) is difficult to tease apart.

Entropy-7 · 2017-05-22T14:01:55+00:00

This discussion makes me want to re-watch 300 and Sparticus and get back to my lifting schedule.

Centurion53 · 2017-05-22T20:18:50+00:00

Lmao how much is this question worth teacher?

b.

Gorgatron1968 · 2017-05-23T04:45:32+00:00

Geez old school james bond was one furry ass getting mofo. Daniel craig does look like half a greased up porn gorilla

IckyStickyPoo · 2017-05-21T23:36:28+00:00

Women like more neotenous-looking men these days. Clean-shaven and fresh looking.

Daniel Craig represents more what men want to look like now and also what women want now (forgetting age and cultural background).

I'd say it's part driven by people in general wanting to be young as long as possible, advertisers wanting to sell skin, waxing and grooming products to men, and women increasingly preferring 'clean looking' men that look younger than their counterparts of yesteryear.

I think we're in an age where we want to extend youth as long as possible. Young people stay at home longer and get married much later. Men are waxing chest hair and forgoing the moustache for a clean-shaven look (apart from hipsters etc). Even the 'gym' look of ripped muscles is indicative that you actually have time to devote to such a pursuit (youth).

So, a mix.

-clickhere- · 2017-05-23T06:51:57+00:00

Neither.

The producers decided the most recent iteration should be in the vein of the "Borne" movies, which were popular at the time of "Casino Royale". So they wanted more of a 'street level brawler' than a 'high class tuxedo' kind of guy. Hence, Daniel Craig.

Recently they are thinking of going back to the high-class suave kind of 007, hence why they were thinking of Tom Hiddelston.

Bonus: I like your post, so I'm also going to answer your underlying question, even though it doesn't apply to "Bond" for the reasons I just provided, I believe 'leading men' are turning into living Ken-dolls, or living 'GI-Joe action figures', just as women on screen were turned into Barbie.

Movies/media were primarily driven by men, and thus why women were idealized as Barbie-esque so quickly. It was only a matter of time before men were idealized as well, the perfect specimen, etc.

Title	Exam Question
Author	wub1234
Upvotes	5
Comments	105
Date	May 21, 2017 9:34 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/6cj5ik/exam_question/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/exam-question.267998 https://theredarchive.com/post/267998

Comments