Wednesday 8 February 2012

On Being a Legs Man

This started out as a very simple post about legs and Dorothy Ward.  Unfortunately one sentence led to another and the next thing I had a paragraph, then another and now it's quite out of control.

I have always understood than men are either 'legs men' or 'boobs men'. I apologise if anyone finds this indelicate or un-pc but c'est la vie no-one objected when I made the statement on a post a few weeks ago.  

Arising out of that post and of one by someone on Facebook (I can't recall what or by whom) I made the comment again that I was of the 'legs' persuasion and in the course of conversation it was suggested that, apart from this being very shallow, it put me into a small minority. I couldn't agree more that, if that was the sole way of judging a person, it would be very shallow and, in fact, this very subject cropped up recently in SP's post Kissing Frogs . Arising out of that I commented that I had been thinking about the issue of brains v looks. What one person fancies in looks is not necessarily what another fancies. It suddenly occurred to me that when we find someone whom we fancy for their personality and wit and whatever then we suddenly see them as attractive physically regardless of what they look like to other people. If someone is looking for looks alone then I would suggest that they are looking for someone who will make them feel good in a trophy-hunting sort of way. "Look, world, what I have bagged".  Now that really would be shallow. 

However returning to the original topic of legs I think I know exactly where and when I became a legs man and it is all owed to Dorothy Ward . Who was Dorothy Ward?   For the answer to that please follow the link and you may be astonished at the fame a pantomime and music hall star could have in the first half of the twentieth century.  For me, though, it was her performance as the principal boy in Dick Whittington at the Pavillion Theatre in Liverpool when I was a youngster.   I thought it was earlier but it would appear to have been in 1957 when she was 67 years old - the same age as I am now.  She must have been remarkably fit for her age because I recall her not only looking very attractive but also spending a lot of time dancing.  There is a photo of her dated 1954 in the website which I would love to show but as it will be copyright I will just ask you to have a look at the link.  

I know that beauty is not just skin deep but nice legs do, I have to say,  have a certain attraction.

1 comment:

  1. Katherine: ’ Good’ legs probably equals fit legs which probably equals fit person which probably equals able child-bearer, which tickles your genes’ fancy. Which possibly sounds very pragmatic and unromantic. Sorry.

    GB: Well my genes may have had their fancies well and truly tickled but it didn’t stop the romance!



    Cat: Got to love those dancers! I agree with Katherine and I think this may be why so many folks are taking up dance as exercise here. Burlesque is all the rage!

    GB: Ah yes. Good luck to them!

    Librarian: Well, I, for one, am glad that there are not only "boobs" men out there - I wouldn't stand much chance then!

    GB: Even ‘boobs’ men usually fall for long legs!


    SP: Good looks are just the wrapping paper as far as I’m concerned, intelligence and a quirky sense of humour does it for me every time. SP

    GB: We’ve had this conversation before, SP, and I couldn’t agree with you more. .

    DawnTreader: Actually I think I’d have guessed that, from knowing you like ballet and art deco style; and even from certain of your own photos. Although I suppose the latter could be put down to the fact that it’s easier to sneak shots of strangers’ bare legs than... other parts. I think the immediately eye-catching kind of attraction is one thing, while the deeper kind may still take another way and surprise us. I think I tend to look at arms and hands. To follow Katherine’s line of thought, that may be my genes telling me to look for someone to lift heavy things for me! At the same time though I never felt attracted to the too obvious body-builder type.

    GB: You are, of course, correct (in my humble opinion) because we see the physicality from afar and before we learn about the true person. The two attractions may have one and the same result in the end but whilst the former is superficial the latter is the meaningful one for anyone who is not completely shallow

    ReplyDelete