The Manly Man vs. The Goober

There are many different kinds of men in this world. There are manly men, nerds, geeks, and goobers to name a few. Of course there is a lot of cross over at times, but they can, and are quite often distinct. This post will talk about the sharp distinctions between the goober and the manly man, and how unwittingly woman are beguiled by the former.

A goober as I referred to in a prior post, "is a person who is socially inept, awkward, goofy, or strange. A goober is born this way and cannot be changed. While what they do and how they interact with people may be funny, it is rarely their intention to be funny. They make themselves the butt of jokes not by choice, but by just being themselves."

A manly man, as I referred to in this post, is far deeper and complete. He is full of confidence and poise. He is patient and understands the concepts of justice and sacrifice. He is not a mere technician who settles for a piece when he can have the whole. A manly man is an alpha-male.

The goober may be nice, and even have some special hidden talent with which he woos women, and for a time, that may be all he needs. Let's say he can play the guitar. But, beyond that guitar is nothingness. He may have memorized how to cook one meal from a foreign country even, but beyond that all he's got are stupid human tricks. Now, as nice as super human tricks are ladies, if you are confronted with a bear, a robber, or a gang of would be rapists, which would you prefer:

a) A man who can cross his eyes, rub his belly, and whistle yankee doodle - or -

b) A man who can break bad guys necks with the snap of his finger?

I won't answer that. I think you know the answer.

Now let's take a look at the profundity of the manly man.

A manly man knows when to be charming and articulate, and when to be quiet and deadly. He can talk about philosophy and love, and turn around and stare down a rabid wolf. He is self-assured, and deep. He can in fact say more without words than a goober can stuttering off hours of inane platitudes. He does not satisfy himself with superficial tricks, but learns instead to plumb the depths of his talents and inner-most self. He might for instance play a more obscure, but more beautiful instrument than the guitar, like perhaps the piano, or the violin. And, when he plays, his soul sings through the music.

In other words, this difference of depth between the goober and the manly man comes down to confidence. The manly man understands his innate self-worth and does not seek public praise or approval to validate himself. The goober on the other hand, doubts himself. He does not know who he is or where he is going.

However, initially it is easy to be fooled. Superficial charm and calculated witticisms can look an awful lot like the real thing. So, perhaps some of you entertain the prospect of the goober, because he could be a manly man if you give it time. No. A manly man is subtle and nuanced in his approach to romance. He is not over the top because he doesn't need to be. He doesn't need to shake his plumage to announce himself, because it is in plain sight. That's who he is.

Perhaps some of your have gone out with a goober and then come to the realization later, and wished you hadn't. Perhaps you are satisfied with goobers. I can't say. But, as they say, patience is a virtue, and it is one virtue that the goober does not have. The manly man on the other hand lives his life by that virtue. He understands what's important in life. He can wait, but will you?

For more interesting information check out this article.

The 'Ubersexual' in all of us

Can a man truly consider himself manly if he engages in certain activities? Are there certain things that are just taboo? Where does one draw the line? Let me give an example.

Let's say I know a guy named Fred. He had a floral design class this semester at college. Not only this, but he enjoyed it, and likes arranging flowers. Now, if that were all I'm sure we could easily look over his flower arranging fetish, but he also writes poetry, and even has a poetry blog. And, he likes to cook. Hmmm.....is he borderline metro? Let's look at the wikipedia definition:

"The typical metrosexual is a young man with money to spend, living in or within easy reach of a metropolis – because that's where all the best shops, clubs, gyms and hairdressers are. He might be officially gay, straight or bisexual, but this is utterly immaterial because he has clearly taken himself as his own love object and pleasure as his sexual preference. Particular professions, such as modeling, waiting tables, media, pop music and, nowadays, sport, seem to attract them but, truth be told, like male vanity products and herpes, they're pretty much everywhere.

For some time now, old-fashioned (re)productive, repressed, unmoisturized heterosexuality has been given the pink slip by consumer capitalism. The stoic, self-denying, modest straight male didn't shop enough (his role was to earn money for his wife to spend), and so he had to be replaced by a new kind of man, one less certain of his identity and much more interested in his image – that's to say, one who was much more interested in being looked at (because that's the only way you can be certain you actually exist). A man, in other words, who is an advertiser's walking wet dream."

Well I'm pretty sure Fred goes to the gym and uses moisturizer creams, but does this make us question his sexuality? Perhaps not. Perhaps he took the floral design class because he knew the ratio of girls to guys would be 20:1 and he wanted to look more caring, affectionate and get a few more dates. Perhaps he writes poetry to emulate one of the most notorious lady's men of all time, Lord Byron, and perhaps he cooks because he enjoys a good meal every now and then. Hmmm. Even if these justifications were true, it leads one to wonder. Maybe he's just ubersexual. Never heard of it before? Here's the definition:

The word "'übersexual" (from German über = above, superior and Latin sexus = gender) was claimed to be coined by the authors of the book Future of Men (O'Reilly, Matathia, Salzman, 2005). It is a variant of metrosexual. The word seems to have been inspired by the phrase "uber-metrosexual", used by the creator of the metrosexual Mark Simpson to describe David Beckham. Salzman appropriated Simpson's work on the metrosexual in 2002 to sell another book.

Simpson has pointed out that the book contains several deliberate misrepresentations of him, his work, and the history of the metrosexual.

Many of the "top ubersexuals" named by Salzman, such as Bono, Bill Clinton and George Clooney were on her list of "top metrosexuals" in 2003.

The authors of Future of Men argue that the übersexual is not derivative of the metrosexual man.

The future of men, proclaim the authors, is "not to be found in the primped and waxed boy who wowed the world with his nuanced knowledge of tweezers and exfoliating creams. Men, at the end of the day, will have to rely on their intellect and their passion, their erudition and professional success, to be acknowledged and idealised in contemporary society. Called the 'übersexual'—-a degree of greatness and perfection, an acknowledgment that this is an evolved species of man—he is so perfect as to leave little margin for error and fallacy."

Some, including Simpson and Armistead Maupin, have suggested that behind this confused/confusing marketing-speak there was something rather simpler going on: a homophobic attempt to stop the metrosexual being so "gay". Or, as Salzman herself put it proudly, the ubersexual (unlike the metrosexual) "doesn't invite questions about his sexuality".

Simpson has argued that from the beginning the appropriation of the metrosexual concept by American marketers such as Salzman in 2003 was always about trying to straighten him out. His original definition of the metrosexual was sexually ambiguous, or at least went beyond the straight/gay binary; marketers, in contrast, insisted that the metrosexual was always "straight" – they even tried to pretend that he wasn't vain.

However, they failed to convince the public - hence the uber-straight ubersexual.

Despite a large global PR push for their 'new', completely 'non-gay' metrosexual, and a slavishly uncritical press which failed to notice that the list of top ten ubersexuals was largely the same as the one's they'd been printed two years previously for top ten metrosexuals, the 'ubersexual' failed to catch on with the public and was stillborn, as Salzman has admitted herself.

That's it, he's ubersexual. Let's cut to the chase. The author of this blog post is Fred. And on a the occasion of a friend's graduation party from college he dressed up in a very well tailored pin stripe suit, hand-woven silk tie and polished black shoes with Armani cologne. This is when his friend's mother declared him an ubersexual along with her son who had just graduated. Intrigued I of course had to do some research before accepting the title. Then along came wikipedia. I suppose now I must agree.