I'm confused about the western man's seemingly obsessive search for a closer shave.
to many, the gradual movement towards less and less facial hair seems the logical conclusion of inevitable razor evolution. why the closer shave? because it's what's next. it's the undiscovered country. like the center of the galaxy. actually, that's not at all sensible. but to me it seems that all the obvious justifications don't stand up to reasonable scrutiny.
you could blame the assorted razor manufacturers. they need a reason to sell you new razor blades, so they try to convince you that a closer shave is better.
it could be that men are inherently lazy and are looking for the closest shave possible in the hopes that they could put one extra day between shavings, allowing them to sleep in for five additional minutes one extra day each week.
maybe it's women. they desire less friction when nuzzling with male companions. they want to get close, but fear the resulting stubble-burn left on their faces.
it could be because men simply look better when they've recently shaved. a closer shave allows them to look better, more often. so a close shave makes you look better.
problem with these suggestions is that they are are all, unequivocally, wrong. addressing them in reverse order:
men simply don't look better with a close shave. I challenge you to find any man--any man at all--who does not look better with a sexy two-day stubble. you can't find them. I believe that is because every man looks better that way.
and ladies: I know you appreciate that sexy colin-ferrell-esque stubble. and even better, after the second day, it begins to take on a (relatively) softer, beard like quality, not the rough sandpaper feel often associated with the dreaded not-close-enough shave.
this makes the lazy man a winner.
and I refuse to believe that a conspiracy in the gillette boardroom could trick most of the male population into spending hundreds of extra dollars a year on something they could get by, largely, without. however, I must concede that the gillette corporation is the lucky recipient of most all the profits of this unexplainable societal tendency.
so, ultimately, my best theory is this: for hundreds of years, western society has conditioned our species to associate a close shave with good hygiene and comfortable means. a man who shaves regularly likely showers often, and is generally clean (although that was certainly more likely to be true one hundred and fifty years ago than today. today, I find, most all of my acquaintances are clean and relatively presentable regardless of preferred shaving frequency.) as well, during that same bygone era, shaving would have been difficult for those without the means to acquire quality razor blades.
so the current sexiness of the unshaven man is a reflexive reaction to years of forced shave-based presentability.
to many, the gradual movement towards less and less facial hair seems the logical conclusion of inevitable razor evolution. why the closer shave? because it's what's next. it's the undiscovered country. like the center of the galaxy. actually, that's not at all sensible. but to me it seems that all the obvious justifications don't stand up to reasonable scrutiny.
you could blame the assorted razor manufacturers. they need a reason to sell you new razor blades, so they try to convince you that a closer shave is better.
it could be that men are inherently lazy and are looking for the closest shave possible in the hopes that they could put one extra day between shavings, allowing them to sleep in for five additional minutes one extra day each week.
maybe it's women. they desire less friction when nuzzling with male companions. they want to get close, but fear the resulting stubble-burn left on their faces.
it could be because men simply look better when they've recently shaved. a closer shave allows them to look better, more often. so a close shave makes you look better.
problem with these suggestions is that they are are all, unequivocally, wrong. addressing them in reverse order:
men simply don't look better with a close shave. I challenge you to find any man--any man at all--who does not look better with a sexy two-day stubble. you can't find them. I believe that is because every man looks better that way.
and ladies: I know you appreciate that sexy colin-ferrell-esque stubble. and even better, after the second day, it begins to take on a (relatively) softer, beard like quality, not the rough sandpaper feel often associated with the dreaded not-close-enough shave.
this makes the lazy man a winner.
and I refuse to believe that a conspiracy in the gillette boardroom could trick most of the male population into spending hundreds of extra dollars a year on something they could get by, largely, without. however, I must concede that the gillette corporation is the lucky recipient of most all the profits of this unexplainable societal tendency.
so, ultimately, my best theory is this: for hundreds of years, western society has conditioned our species to associate a close shave with good hygiene and comfortable means. a man who shaves regularly likely showers often, and is generally clean (although that was certainly more likely to be true one hundred and fifty years ago than today. today, I find, most all of my acquaintances are clean and relatively presentable regardless of preferred shaving frequency.) as well, during that same bygone era, shaving would have been difficult for those without the means to acquire quality razor blades.
so the current sexiness of the unshaven man is a reflexive reaction to years of forced shave-based presentability.
VIEW 3 of 3 COMMENTS
sketchless:
i love your hippie beard.
sketchless:
"I live my life a quarter mile at a time. Nothing else matters: not the mortgage, not the store, not my team and all their bullshit. For those ten seconds or less, I'm free. "