The "Dad Bod" - sexist or liberating?

I think that it is ridiculous to think that men can't discuss body image, because some women think they have the only right to do so. body image issues is a people problem not a one gender problem. I think there is too much this or that side in society.

As a person who is male, and struggle with body image, I think it's high time that there is light shed on the fact that men struggle with their body just as women do. It's not about who's had what fight longer.

As for the people that say it's lazy and disgusting, well there is a difference from having a few extra pounds, and being morbidly obese. Though that doesn't mean it has to be disgusting or related to laziness.

 

My only problem is the term 'dad', in that it implies this sorta middle-age, hetero-normative male image. I don't mind the discussion, but I don't see how it's tied in with having produced offspring.

 

There's definitely a double standard between men and women's beauty standards and conversation. But although I recognise men face unfair standards and expectations, I think there's a more serious implication for women. It leads women to become sexual objects which place limits on them that are difficult to break. From my own experiences I have not encountered many men whose lives are hugely limited based on looks because there are more attainable redeeming factors. I am certain it goes both ways, but from personal experience I have witnessed more of a struggle for women so I tend to be on that side.

However I think 'dad bod' is a liberating trend. Giving it public praise and attention is a way to help alleviate the burden of societal expectations. How your body looks should not be dictated by pleasing others in an aesthetical sense but by being a reflection of good health.

 

Men do struggle with body image.

Men do not struggle with body image just as women do.

This doesn't make male struggles with body image any less real. However, to say it's on the same level as women's struggles is simply not true.

The male struggle with body image should definitely be talked about more. I would say that one of the biggest obstacles for this is how it would involve men sharing their vulnerabilities, while talking about something society relates to women.


I would add more to this, but I had to make this quick.

 

Apparently gay men are obsessed with their image and strive for the Adonis archetype so they can't look average, and God forbid they do! Gay men are impotent and can't have kids.
The simpler and nicer explanation: heteronormativity is the default state of mind. People are quick to make assumptions and imbibe labels.
Personally, this "Dad Bod" looks nice. All people can look good regardless of their weight. I can see why women claim sexist double standards when house wives are expected to be fit and attractive while their men are slobs, but this should not cause for reason to invalidate the body image struggles of men. In men, it manifests itself differently as with the obsession with hyper muscularity and is still as problematic as women's obsession with thinness.

 

I'd also add that problems with body image are higher among gay males; for example:

Gay men are thought to only represent 5% of the total male population but among men who have eating disorders, 42% identify as gay. (more on eating disorders on the LGBT population)

There does seem to be a lot more pressure among gay males to have certain body types; they almost become like a currency of sexual exchange.

I'd also guess gay males are more prone to having plastic surgery, but I've not checked any studies...just a hunch.

Edit:

Gay men are said to be the fastest-growing client base in the cosmetic surgery industry, with liposuction being a common request. (Full Story)

And I will have to say that among the 'gay community' and in the 'gay' part of the city, I see such attitudes very much in evidence; all these guys trying to look perfect, like some sorta Abercrombie & Fitch zombies...it's sorta sad.

 

It actually is difficult for men to discuss body-image, mostly because it seems sort of effeminate to worry about appearances. The thing is, it's not about your image, but it's about your health. If you are noticing that you can't walk three blocks without getting out of breath, that is a problem. You need to fix that. It's not cool, dude.

Focusing on utility and your actual ability to use your body for the means that you intend for it, that actually is masculine. Your body is a tool. It does things. Being in shape makes it possible for you to have the option of commuting by bicycle when the weather is good enough for you to enjoy it. Being in good shape means that you don't have to spend an extra half-hour, at the store, driving around looking for a spot near the door to keep you from collapsing on the way in. Being in good shape means that you can focus better on the job. It's not just how you look. It's not about having a "six-pack," and it's not about having huge biceps. That crap isn't even good for you. Too much strength training increases your blood-pressure. It's about not being crippled.

The whole "dad bod" thing is ridiculous for the same reason as excessive "curve-appreciation." It's just more treating our bodies as things to be seen, rather than as vessels that we have to actually live in.

 

Two things

1.) Who cares how someone else looks? Seriously, why is it so important? It's the single most superficial thing about a person ( well maybe second most if you consider money ). Now, if someone is way overweight and are actually at a serious risk to their own health that's a whole other story. I'm not in support of "being nice" and "beating around the bush" when it comes to someone who's life is literally at risk because of their weight. Some people need a harsh truth to slap em in the face before they wind up six feet under. Your feels being protected doesn't mean much if you're worm food.

2.) Does it matter who has it worse?

I'm so tired of this one. There is always someone, somewhere who has it worse. Everytime you'll always find something worse than the last thing. What is the deal with this pitty pissing contest the world has devolved into? Bad things are bad, and it doesn't matter if someone else has a worse problem. What matters is whether or not anyone is willing to do something about the bad things going on.

To me a good person who helps people get their life on track at home is a good person. A person who flies to third world countries and risks their life to take care of the sick and hungry, is a good person. A person who works at a soup kitchen for homeless people is a good person. Does it really matter how they rank? They're alll good people, and they're all doing something good.

 

As someone who doesn't even abide by the male beauty archetype, I will still have to disagree with this. Female standards of beauty are unquestionably more damaging as a result of the fact that female beauty is the basis of female worth.

Psychology, both men are women are equally capable of forming insecurities and feelings of inadequacy as a result of the standards that are set up by society.

However,

It is a tried and largely proven fact that female beauty standards have a far great sociological impact. Both men and women can be psychologically effect by not living up to beauty standards; however, men are not economically disadvantaged by not living up to the standard of what an attractive man is meant to be. The stance of a women in modern society is directly tired to here adherence to present standards of beauty. Men in society are absolutely praised for being stereotypically attractive and there is absolutely emotional backlash that comes with that; however, the beauty of a man has never been the key factor in the determining of his worth in the workplace or in general society.

Even in the field of psychology, it has been proven that on average both men and women unconsciously compare men based on their social status and women based on their physical appearance. Both can be damaging; however, the stress that is placed on the beauty standard couldn't be further from equal between genders.

 

This is all Buzzfeed's fault. They tried to make dadbod happen.

It happened...

Sigh, I don't know what to think about it. If you want to have a hunky body, go for the hunky body. If you want to have a 'dadbod', go for the dadbod. I couldn't care any less, really.

Now Buzzfeed is trying to make mombod happen. It's not going to happen.

 

Debates like this make me glad that I am fairly removed from the "social scene" of the internet. EC is really the only way I hear of them.


To call it an inherent double standard is total bs in my opinion. The idea itself affirms "feminism," if anything.

That being said, an individual both promoting this idea yet also holding women to unnecessary standards of beauty would indeed be creating a double standard.

---------------
In reading through the entire thread, I will say I agree that these "standards of beauty" are pushed much more so on women. This does not take away the fact that removing such standards for men is also a good thing, however.

 

-cringe-

Anyways, I don't think it's sexist at all for men to reject society's beauty standards. How could it be sexist? It doesn't even involve women. The only way it involves women is when people choose to compare it to women's struggles, and play the "who has it worse" game. Women may have it worse, but it does not negate the fact that men also can have body issues and are brainwashed by society to need to conform to unattainable beauty standards. It actually seems fairly unrelated to women's struggles unless you make it that way. Men have their own issues they need to work on as well. So, I would say it is liberating, I guess.

 

I think it's fine. We have similar movements rejecting traditional ideas of female beauty by embracing curves, plus sized models, etc.

 

Bless you, Gen. (With the exception of a few typos that I corrected above) I couldn't have said this better myself.

The worth of women in our culture is judged primarily based on our appearance, and specifically, to our adherence to standard norms of beauty. Women aren't obsessed with clothes, shopping, shoes, hair, and make-up because we're weird Venusian estrogen-based beings. We have these interests in large part because how we look is the basis of how we are valued...both in terms of finding partners, but even in terms of landing jobs or being listened to in a meeting. And where do these expectations originate? Mainly they come from men.

So yeah...forgive us if we feel a little *yawn* about men feeling pressure to conform to appearance standards. YES, it is wrong. YES, it is damaging. YES, you do have a right to talk about it, and it is in *all* of our best interest to have it talked about. But I can't blame any woman for being a bit shrill on the topic, after she's found herself getting turned down for jobs or promotions that are then given to less qualified men or less qualified but more attractive women.

 

Except in SanFrancisco.

And among gay men, where body-image causes a host of psychological and health related issues, compared to men in general.

 

I have a question.

How do these women know that looks was what lost them the opportunity. Are they just assuming that's the reason or is their some kind of proof?

How do these women know that the person hired over them is 'more' attractive ( which is subjective as a concept anyways though I'll yield there is a general guideline for it ) and how do they know these other women or men are less qualified?

Like this stuff is kept confidential unless the other person tells you themselves.

Your potential employer is under no obligation to explain why they didn't hire you, and the people who do get hired over you are generally strangers to you, so how do you know?

Also what I've learned in life so far is that it's "Who you know" that really matters.

The boss' golfing buddy will get the good job every time.