View Single Post
Old 05-26-2009, 05:57 PM   #15
Girl Gone Strong
saef's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Atlantis, which is near Manhattan
Posts: 6,836

S/C/G: (H)247/(C)159/(Goal)142-138

Height: 5'3"


Isn't it interesting how all these weird body defects are always pointed out in women and never in men?
Well, we could go back to the 18th century, when men wore breeches & stockings, and worried a lot about the shape of their legs.

I have heard men worrying about having "chicken legs" & planning to work on that in the gym.

All such talk reminds me of my horsey youth. (Yes, forgive me. Another anecdote is on its way.) I used to pore over books on horses. Often they included a chapter on "conformation," which included drawings & photographs of ideally formed horses & also of animals that were less fortunate. Horse lingo is wonderfully archaic, since they were the mode of transport for so many centuries. There would be pictures of horses that were spavined or bow-legged or knock-kneed or cow-hocked, horses with withers that were too high or too low, horses with sloping cannons, with roman noses, etc. There is this incredible lexicon to describe physical flaws of horses. Doubtless there's one for dogs, too, since this is another animal whose breeding we've controlled for centuries in order to attain certain desirable characteristics. So it's fascinating to me to hear this transferred to human beings. And also disquieting. I start thinking of Aryan purity & Dr. Mengele & all the other unfortunate consequences of talking about human appearance as if we were animals being bred for certain characteristics.

All the cankles talk about Hillary annoyed me. So you can graduate from Yale law, work out a major health care initiative, act as a senator, run for president, and yeah, still, someone's gonna point out that your physical conformation is deficient & you have cankles.
saef is offline   Reply With Quote