Are we Metrosexuals?

[acstoon]

Personally I don't care a lot what anybody else wears.... There are limits, however. Grease-stained overalls at the symphony don't cut it. But within some sort of rather wide "norm", I don't really judge a person on what they wear. To me a gentleman is not the guy who "looks good", but who treats others with honor, decency and civility.

Looking good and decency don't always go together. Also, looking scroungy and being a jerk don't always go together, either. I might also add that fancy degrees and big titles don't always go with dressing nicely, and there's no correlation whatsoever between those things and how the person treats other people. At least that's how it works in my isolated environment here at Stanford.

Most of the guys who throw at the Games are anything but "natty". A lot of them rip the arms out of their t-shirts, make sexually inappropriate jokes on the field, insult each other in the beer line, and pass gas a lot. They're definintely not "gentlemen" status and "metrosexual"??? NOT. For professions they do anything from policeman to bus driver to harbormaster to software engineer. But "metrosexual"???? I don't think so.

However, I've seldom met as welcoming and as inclusive a group as the Masters Highland Athletes around here, and the women athletes are absolutely outstanding in that respect. Scroungy? Yes....but gentlemen and gentlewomen? You bet.

Amen.
There's an old saying that goes something like:
"Those that spend time in front of the mirror, have no time to spend on others".
While I do not advocate sloppiness, I certainly would not put much stock in a man who assesses another's value, based upon appearance... too many variables. A well dressed drug dealer, perhaps? A hard-working farmer, fresh in from the fields? One sharply dressed, the other, a bit tattered looking. Both give a firm handshake, look me in the eye, and introduce themselves in a positive manner.
Sorry, nope, the clothes do not make the man.
Vanity is not an enviable trait, in my book.