Letter to the Hoot—peddling stereotypes
"He thinks real men don`t use face cream. And finds it easier to recount how many centuries Sachin has scored in ODIs than the number of years both of you have been married. He`ll ogle at the model in sexy lingerie, but will let out a non-committal grunt when you ask him if your new haircut makes you look younger."
This was from an article on the "retrosexual men" by Anubha Sawhney that appeared in The Times of India today. An edited version appeared on the web edition at http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/572181.cms.
Note how an article, which is supposed to be on the sensitivities of men, starts with a mention of face cream. I`m not saying the author did this intentionally-- in fact we, at least those who live in cities, are already conditioned into thinking the two are connected. The article pits the "retrosexual" against the "metrosexual", who are "scrupulous about their grooming and are great consumers of men`s cosmetic Nproducts" according to Ms Sawhney. And apparently the retrosexual always insists on paying on a date. Is there really any relation between how much a man spends on his looks and whether one always pays on a date?
It doesn`t stop there, and the contrast is fetched further to show how insenstive the retrosexual could get: "A retrosexual teaches his children how to deal with bullies in a way that doesn`t involve `examining the other child`s motivation for aggression`. "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. That`s what I tell my son," that`s the revelation one Mr Mohit Makhija makes in the article.
I, for one, care for my looks but am not a "great consumer" in terms of the money spent on on my attire and cosmetics, yet I`m not an "eye for an eye" man, I can tell if a haircut makes my friend looks younger or older, would let her pay for the date if she wishes, and care more about those who are close to me than about Sachin. And I know many such people, both men and women.
Sudeep K S
Mumbai
31.3. 2004