What do you think. is it manli to smoke.?

Views: 1268

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I guess it depends on what you're talking about.  I don't think it's manly at all to rely on a substance of any kind.  I'm a pipe and cigar smoker and I don't feel the least bit of addiction. That being said, I do think pipe and cigar smoking can be considered manly.  There's just something about the relaxation and contemplative mood it creates that does indeed seem manly.

Enjoying a cigar on occasion is manly.  Standing outside by yourself in 20-degree weather because you need a cigarette is pathetic.

 

JB

Black tar lungs aside, nothing sexier than a man who can hold a cig with distinction:

I hate to admit it but it really is. There was a time when it was considered taboo for women to smoke because the cigarette is the symbol of a penis

Whereas if a man did it, it was manly?

Really?  If that's true ... its bizarre.  I've never heard the "symbol of a penis" theory.  You'd figure it'd be less stereotypically manly, and distinctly more womanly, to have a penis-symbol hanging from your mouth ... particularly in that day-and-age.

 

I'm sure I've seen pictures of fairly well-renown, and admired, women of the 30-60s smoking ... Marylin Monroe, Audrey Hepburn, Rita Hayworth, Marlene Deitrich, Bette Davis, Lauren Bacall, Lucille Ball (who smoked on I Love Lucy, during a time when married couples couldn't share a bed on TV, and the word 'pregnant' was banned), etc., etc.

 

It couldn't have been all that taboo.  Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.


JB

It was longer ago than that, though the sentiment did persist through those decades (and even to today, to some degree, I imagine).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torches_of_Freedom#Smoking_as_an_inapp...

And I think it's safe to say that Alexei didn't mean that smoking a cigarette literally symbolizes sucking on a penis. In my opinion it's easy enough to see it the same way a big gun might be a phallic symbol in a movie (or real life). 

The wiki page is exactly what I was talking about. Thanks for the link for everyone to see. 

 Ask yourself this: If I smoke, do I have more of a manly character then if I do not? You will have your answer.

Note: This does not mean, "do I look more like a man with a cigarette in my mouth?"

"Manly" also refers to activities befitting a man's man.  Stuff men do, not necessarily just things that make them men.  Its certainly not limited to "character building", or even character-revealing ... so long as it isn't revealing a flaw (like nicotine addiction, for instance).

Steak doesn't build character, either.  Or bacon.  Or cowboy boots.  Or pick-up trucks.  Or guns.  Or war movies.  Or any of a thousand other stereotypically "manly" things.


JB

 I realize that. I was just focusing more on the idea of character, rather then activities that men often partake in and find and interest in doing.

 Since, as you said, a lot of stereotypically manly things have nothing to do with building a manly character. (and if they have an influence it is rather unrelated to the thing itself, rather then what it teaches, and what it teaches is up to how it is used and percieved)

There is nothing unmanly in enjoying smoking every so often, it just isn't something that defines a man.

Smoking a pipe is definitely manly.  Smoking a cigarette is definitely not.

RSS

Latest Activity

Sir replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"Starting at the top of the page, here's what I see: I've helped pass and signed 38 Legislative Bills, mostly with no Democratic support, and gotten rid of massive amounts of regulations. Nice! Will be on @foxandfriends. Enjoy! POTUS the…"
55 minutes ago
Shane replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"So not even a single quote. Good job."
3 hours ago
Native Son replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"Gentlemen,  read a little U.S. History.   You want "violent rhetoric,"  let's see, Patrick Henry plainly inferred, ON THE RECORD, the head of state be assassinated,  "Ceasar had his Brutus, Charles the First,…"
3 hours ago
Vendetta replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"Ted Nugent is a moron. Plain and Simple."
3 hours ago
Native Son replied to Brandon Johns's discussion How hipster is AoM
"At present, I don't know.  It seems, though that the site has definitely evolved from the early days.  Back then, AoM purely wasn't hipster.  A lot of the site felt like it was inspired by a column in The National Review.…"
3 hours ago
Native Son replied to Nick Martens's discussion Sleeping On The Ground
"Wasn't me that iced up that year. I imagine that somebody used the memory of long-ago Army days to advise the kid on camping gear.  "
3 hours ago
Native Son replied to Braeden 2.0's discussion The Horror of Day to Day Life
"The OP sounds more like an attempt to elicit serious debate on the obvious.  If one finds the consumption of dead matter too offensive for their sensibilities, one is reminded that all life above the single cell level, depends upon consumption…"
4 hours ago
Tarquin Anstruther replied to Sir's discussion Polarization, "violent rhetoric" in the group The Great Debate
"How about reading through his tweets, or are you someone who thinks like he does and can't see that his language is harmful and undiplomatic? He acts like the school tough guy, I like you I hate him stuff. Perhaps you see it as normal behaviour."
5 hours ago

© 2017   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service