More evolutionary psychology or reproductive pyschology coming out from the BBC these days, and when I read this sort of thing at my present stage of red dragon riding (jumping off the tail, in case you were wondering) it always niggles at me some. Not this article so much, which was interesting and about an interesting study. (But considering the subjects don't use birth control I wonder if they could possibly get useful results without paternity testing and possibly causing strife in the community . . .)
No, it niggles at me mostly by virtue of reminding me of this article from a year back that keeps popping up in the 'most emailed' section, probably because James Blunt has just released a new album. Because I hate James Blunt. I hate his voice, I hate his songs, I hate that he outsells people with nice voices and nice songs, I hate every headline about him I ever accidentally read about what a great personality he thinks he has, and I hate that he's always on the fucking radio when I go about my business in the shops.
I hate James Blunt, and I honestly believe that any woman who prefers his sort of voice to Barry White's sort of voice has deep emotional problems that are subconsciously forcing her to try to select herself out by going after whiny big-girls'-blouses instead of rich-voiced men who could actually do her rather than sit in a corner whining about their last girlfriend/their mother/how beautiful, beautiful, beautiful the chick in front of them is.
So you'd think I'd actually appreciate this study, but I don't. Or maybe the study is great but the assumptions made in the article really grind my gears.
Example:
"However, the researchers found that when not fertile, women were more likely to be attracted to a more feminine voice signalling a more caring man, more likely to invest in a long-term relationship."
How does having a more feminine voice signal a more caring man? It doesn't to me and I'm surprised it does to anyone.
Takes James Blunt and Barry White again - and I'm so sorry if I make anything stick in your head like a splintery wooden stake - and consider 'You're Beautiful.' It's all about what some great ululating pansy thinks about a lady's attractions. It gazes up its own ass and doesn't get the lady anywhere, certainly not into a relationship, unless she also enjoys looking up asses and constant reassurance about her looks, in which case child-rearing hopefully isn't a priority.
And then take 'I'm gonna love you (just a little more).' It's all about what wanting to do stuff with you, enthusiastically, for a long, long time. Caring. Far better relationship material, surely.
See, there's an assumption here about how deep voiced, attractive men are more likely to do you wrong than a great whiny frog of a man who whines at you and sticks you on unnatural pedestals from which you can do nought but fall so that he feels forced to replace you with some other woman who will also fall, because he doesn't understand the first thing about women while thinking he does because he's feminine, whatever the hell that means. And I don't get that. It looks like a steaming heap of bullshit to me. It's the namby pamby ones you can't turn your back on, the ones who try to appeal to the entire female races' mothering instincts while projecting their animas on everything in their sights like a Blackwater employee projecting bullets in Iraq.
And on that tasteful note I am off to work. Here's Barry White to clean your head out:
2 commenti:
I find voice study really interesting. What do you make of a man like Prince, who can go so high, and conversely, so low? Even when he's singing high though, it's usually about something quite raunchy! And what about Mike Tyson? Dude has such a high-pitched voice but he's clearly one of the least "caring" men around. Hmmm....
ps - I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't see what the big deal is about James Blunt.
Prince? Maybe that he's a man for all menstrual seasons. But it's all just bally nonsense anyways.
Posta un commento