RealJock - Gay Fitness, Health, and Life

FORUMS > Gay News & Events Forum Rules

Sort by:

Taylor Lautner's Shirtless Pics: A Hollywood Double Standard?
G_Force Posts: 922	Oct 28, 2009 11:54 PM GMT http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk-taylor-lautner-pics.html[/

Hidden member	Oct 28, 2009 11:57 PM GMT Oh I hope so.
Hidden member	Oct 28, 2009 11:57 PM GMT No double standard. He looks better with his shirt off
RyanReBoRn Posts: 463	Oct 29, 2009 12:02 AM GMT A little bit but not as much as that article is trying to make out. That Taylor is virtually a legal adult while Miley Sirus was just old enough to be a freshman in high school. Also, guys don't have breasts so there's absolutely no reason why ANY guy shouldn't be able to parade around shirtless. Remember, we're men not women so it's not like we have breasts to hide or something. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just trying to shame ya out of your manhood.
TheIStrat Posts: 1775	Oct 29, 2009 12:12 AM GMT I might be a tiny minority on this site, but I think he's ugly.
inmate_665532... Posts: 243	Oct 29, 2009 12:26 AM GMT TheIStrat saidI might be a tiny minority on this site, but I think he's ugly. no. I'm right there with you. I don't see the big deal with the Twilight guys, they're fugly.
nadaquever_rm Posts: 88	Oct 29, 2009 12:27 AM GMT RyanReBoRn said Also, guys don't have breasts so there's absolutely no reason why ANY guy shouldn't be able to parade around shirtless. Remember, we're men not women so it's not like we have breasts to hide or something. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just trying to shame ya out of your manhood. Um, your chest has the exact same anatomy as a woman's- you can even lactate, so there's really no reason for women not to parade around shirtless, too.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 12:28 AM GMT I also think he is pretty ugly.
metalxracr Posts: 713	Oct 29, 2009 12:29 AM GMT I don't find him attractive either.
TheIStrat Posts: 1775	Oct 29, 2009 12:32 AM GMT Good, then I'm not crazy
KyleAD Posts: 387	Oct 29, 2009 12:33 AM GMT Looks a bit like a neanderthal...
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 12:38 AM GMT The article references "cultural critics" which I think hits the nail right on the head. We as a culture do not think a guy parading around without his shirt on is immodest or indecent. I can remember several times in high school playing sports during practice we would break up into teams doing "shirts v. skins" and nobody thought anything of it. Be it a double-standard or not, it's the culture.
MSUBioNerd Posts: 1430	Oct 29, 2009 12:57 AM GMT nadaquever_rm said RyanReBoRn said Also, guys don't have breasts so there's absolutely no reason why ANY guy shouldn't be able to parade around shirtless. Remember, we're men not women so it's not like we have breasts to hide or something. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just trying to shame ya out of your manhood. Um, your chest has the exact same anatomy as a woman's- you can even lactate, so there's really no reason for women not to parade around shirtless, too. No. Men and women do not have "the exact same anatomy" in their chest. Male mammae are extremely underdeveloped compared to female mammae, and hormonal profiles are very different. Male lactation is extremely rare in adult humans, and generally requires external hormone sources. The mere existence of similar structures, even though they're arranged differently and show different degrees of development, does not make them exactly the same, or else we'd be talking about how hip anatomy is "the exact same" in men in women, when women's hips have clearly been shaped by the constraints of the birth canal and men's have not (which is why men and women walk so differently naturally). Addressing the original question, I agree that the article overstates things. Yes, there is something of a double standard in reality -- underage females are much more often viewed as hapless victims if they have sex with an older man, while underage males are viewed as lucky if they have sex with an older woman but the bigger differences are twofold. First, and most important, a 17-year-old is different from a 15-year-old. 17 is above the legal age of consent virtually everywhere; 15 is rarely above the legal age of consent unless the other party is also close to 15. Second, the muscularity of this actor is an important element to the role he's playing; I've never read the Twilight books, but I've been told by a few who have that significant muscle development is an essential trait of werewolves in their system. A young man appearing shirtless in a film is a good way to demonstrate his muscle development. Culturally a man being shirtless in public is not an inherently sexual thing, while a woman wrapped in a sheet and displaying that she is not wearing a shirt -- and quite possibly is not wearing underwear or a swimsuit top either -- almost certainly is. As such, the Miley Cyrus photographs were more sexualized than a guy merely not wearing a shirt. This is something we should be able to recognize, even those of us who trace our sexual attraction to men primarily to the chest.
Aquanerd Posts: 578	Oct 29, 2009 1:00 AM GMT A 15 y.o girl vs a 17 y.o boy. Yes there is a double standard. Sex with a 15 y.o. is statutory rape in most of the country, not 17. Sexualizing a 15 y.o. girl gets you in trouble. If he were butt naked, someone would get arrested, but no shirt? Jeez, fine something more important to get worked up over.
TheIStrat Posts: 1775	Oct 29, 2009 1:09 AM GMT He's still butt f*cking ugly
Unoblivion Posts: 13	Oct 29, 2009 1:54 AM GMT He's ugly. But it's not even close to CP or anything even of concern. How about we ban teenage boys from taking shirtless mirror pictures and putting them up on MySpace? Seriously.......... wow
crownroyal117 Posts: 242	Oct 29, 2009 2:13 AM GMT commits photos to spank bank sorry what were we talking about? Oh, and the CGI in "New Moon" is 1999 quality at best.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 2:20 AM GMT Well I was not a big fan of him, but saw this pic in US magazine and he looks really hot
TrowelMonger Posts: 626	Oct 29, 2009 2:40 AM GMT TheIStrat saidI might be a tiny minority on this site, but I think he's ugly. He looks like such a douche bag. Such a god damn douche bag. Sure he has a nice body but his face looks so nauseatingly self obsessed... if that makes sense. He looks so airbrush too. I'll take Justin Hawkins over him any day... BABY YEAH
jakebenson Posts: 750	Oct 29, 2009 2:44 AM GMT G_Force saidhttp://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk-taylor-lautner-pics.html[/ A simple answer to the question: Why freak out about Miley Cyrus but not Tayler Launter. Tayler is 17 (almost legal) and fully developed. Miley was 15, three years away from being legal at the time. There's actually quite a difference between 15 and 17.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 2:56 AM GMT I agree, what's with all the hype. The scene from that movie looks lame and makes no sense to me. The guys are not good looking nor are they good actors at all. It's just something for 12 year old girls who don't understand quality in film and in men I used to be into vampires and such when I was like 15 or 16, why did it all come back all of a sudden? The old school stuff was way better than this crap
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 2:58 AM GMT He's cute....as long as you dont look too closely at that nose ...... can you say "snout"? ...It kinda weird.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:12 AM GMT I never was in to the whole Twilight thing.. hell if never even seen the first one but when I was asked by my friend to go with her to see New Moon (She's a th Grade English teacher) I saw this guys pic and I was like OH HELL YEAH! She then told me he was 17. I though to myself... handcuffs? Oh wait... in Texas he is Legal... =D but back to the topic.. 17 is a very very big difference over being 15. More over I think its just a natural guy thing to be without a shirt. I wouldn't call it a hollywood double standard but rather society's? What do you think?
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:17 AM GMT ...........
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 4:44 AM GMT I'm rolling my eyes in bewilderment. What's the big deal about a guy, at any age, not wearing a shirt? If this has become a cultural taboo that's the first I've heard of it. Last time I went to the pool this summer there were plenty of guys wearing no shirt, so it seems to me someone is making a story where there is absolutely no story at all.
andymatic Posts: 170	Oct 29, 2009 5:24 AM GMT Hot body though his face looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel.
timgoblue Posts: 50	Oct 29, 2009 5:35 AM GMT andymatic saidHot body though his face looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel. how, specifically, does he look like he was hit in the face with a shovel? i'm not a big whatever-his-name-is fan, but I also don't think he deserves bitchy unsubstantiated superficial comments.
ssguy69 Posts: 199	Oct 29, 2009 5:58 AM GMT timgoblue said andymatic saidHot body though his face looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel. how, specifically, does he look like he was hit in the face with a shovel? i'm not a big whatever-his-name-is fan, but I also don't think he deserves bitchy unsubstantiated superficial comments. Here Here!! The feedback on his looks went overboard and turned into an attack fest. Reel it in RJers.
xKorix Posts: 190	Oct 29, 2009 6:01 AM GMT Wow some of you guys are incredibly judgemental towards a 17 year old. He's just a kid who had to bulk up for a job he wanted.
nysexy Posts: 1518	Oct 29, 2009 6:07 AM GMT Meh..they're entertainers..they're paid to look good..they pay ppl to help make them look good and their livelihood thrives on showing how good they look. We get something pretty to gawk at and they get a crapload of money. Sooo...if a celebrity want to flaunt whatever they're flaunting, i don't see the big deal. If someone doesn't like it then...well...don't look.
ManMachine23 Posts: 249	Oct 29, 2009 6:36 AM GMT inmate_6655321 said TheIStrat saidI might be a tiny minority on this site, but I think he's ugly. no. I'm right there with you. I don't see the big deal with the Twilight guys, they're fugly. I agree. I don't see what all the hype is about ?
SinnernSaint1... Posts: 618	Oct 29, 2009 7:06 AM GMT xKorix saidWow some of you guys are incredibly judgemental towards a 17 year old. He's just a kid who had to bulk up for a job he wanted. hmmm wasnt ENVY one of the 7 deadly sins?
inuman Posts: 145	Oct 29, 2009 7:22 AM GMT I had this super long response about the comments in here and his looks and the like and I thought, "nah forget it" I'll simply say in Hollywood everyone needs something to talk about, might as well be that of shirtless boys and sexy showing girls
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 8:16 AM GMT you guys!!! In nearly all of Europe he´s past the age of consent, and I´d do him. (I´ve never seen any of this vampire stuff.... pretty homo erotic from what I can see. I should watch the film)
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 8:20 AM GMT He's not for me. He's not ugly but he's far from attractive, and it doesn't appear that he can act. At least his body looks good.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 8:21 AM GMT Tapper saidAt least his body looks good. that was mainly what i was looking at. I think he´s lovely rawr.
Bunjamon Posts: 917	Oct 29, 2009 9:03 AM GMT andymatic saidHot body though his face looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel. I don't think there's anything wrong with his face OR his body, and if he were staying over at any of your houses I'm willing to bet he wouldn't be sleeping on the couch!
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 10:15 AM GMT TheIStrat saidI might be a tiny minority on this site, but I think he's ugly. Oh totally right there with you!
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:13 PM GMT Bunjamon said andymatic saidHot body though his face looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel. I don't think there's anything wrong with his face OR his body, and if he were staying over at any of your houses I'm willing to bet he wouldn't be sleeping on the couch! You're right.. I'd happily let him have my bed.
jarhead5536 Posts: 1255	Oct 29, 2009 3:17 PM GMT cbicm79 saidThe article references "cultural critics" which I think hits the nail right on the head. We as a culture do not think a guy parading around without his shirt on is immodest or indecent. I can remember several times in high school playing sports during practice we would break up into teams doing "shirts v. skins" and nobody thought anything of it. Be it a double-standard or not, it's the culture. Depends on who you ask. My newspaper ran an ad for a traveling male revue this past weekend. The photo was a glamour shot of an oiled headless torso (sort of like a lot of avatars hereabouts), with some text overlayed on top to obscure the nipples. The phones here went nuts with outraged subscribers, crying indecency. Male sexuality is still taboo...
MercuryMax Posts: 242	Oct 29, 2009 3:20 PM GMT I agree...i didnt know he was 17 tho...damn does that mean i'm a pedo? Anyway....so he's not the best lookin guy in the world, but I'd take him over ...well everyone in this forum who's responded so far (including myself). So stop being so mean......cause it might be thrown back at you.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:21 PM GMT MercuryMax said I'd take him over ...well everyone in this forum who's responded so far. And thus died my crush on Max.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:23 PM GMT If he were 5 years older, he'd still be 'underage' to me.
MercuryMax Posts: 242	Oct 29, 2009 3:24 PM GMT Lostboy said MercuryMax said I'd take him over ...well everyone in this forum who's responded so far. And thus died my crush on Max. hehe, i can't help it .....i have a fetish for tight abs and a sculpted chest...meooww
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:25 PM GMT Definitely NOT a pretty face... don't know what all the hype is about. Lots of people can get abs like that if they are "paid" to work out for 10 hours a day. I can't stand him, he is UGLY! but what's even uglier is that he thinks he's hot and he's milking it for all it's worth!
MercuryMax Posts: 242	Oct 29, 2009 3:33 PM GMT I think you're all being too critical about his looks and missing the whole point of the topic.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:34 PM GMT Bunjamon said I don't think there's anything wrong with his face OR his body, and if he were staying over at any of your houses I'm willing to bet he wouldn't be sleeping on the couch! WELL SAID!! lol
jarhead5536 Posts: 1255	Oct 29, 2009 3:37 PM GMT cdncuteboy said Bunjamon said I don't think there's anything wrong with his face OR his body, and if he were staying over at any of your houses I'm willing to bet he wouldn't be sleeping on the couch! WELL SAID!! lol That BOY is a child. I would never in a million years go anywhere near a child like that. His physical maturity is meaningless. How many men here hvae sons that age? I sure wouldn't want some grown man lusting after my 17 year old son still in high school...
MSUBioNerd Posts: 1430	Oct 29, 2009 3:54 PM GMT I'll actually disagree with jarhead on this one. A 17-year-old's physical maturity is essentially meaningless for those who know the individuals age but choose to engage in sex with that individual anyway. It is not meaningless, on the other hand, when it comes to the existence of lust in the first place. Finding a guy like this sexually attractive is more a matter of hormones than it is of conscious thought, and I don't see anything remotely immoral about having a visceral, physical reaction. Just because I think a guy's hot doesn't mean I would actually have sex with him if the opportunity arose. Thoughts aren't immoral; actions can be. It's also important to keep in mind that guys like this are way out on the flat end of the bell curve. Part of the reason I was in the closet in high school was that, frankly, while I was fully aware that I was gay, I wasn't really physically attracted to the guys at my school. There were a handful I thought were hot, and a good number more that I thought had potential to grow into attractive men, but for the most part we all (and I fully include myself) looked like boys, not like men -- and I was at a large enough school that it's not likely that that's the result of a small sample size, given my graduating class was over 400 people. The average 15-year-old girl looks far more like an adult woman than the average 15-year-old boy looks like an adult man. Those of you afraid of adult men lusting after your high school aged sons would do well to recognize that for the most part they probably won't be viable lust objects until they're 20 or so, as far as the majority of the adult population is concerned -- this actor really is an exception. Your daughters being lusted after by adult straight men are a different story.
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 3:55 PM GMT MercuryMax said Lostboy said MercuryMax said I'd take him over ...well everyone in this forum who's responded so far. And thus died my crush on Max. hehe, i can't help it .....i have a fetish for tight abs and a sculpted chest...meooww
MercuryMax Posts: 242	Oct 29, 2009 3:56 PM GMT Lostboy said MercuryMax said Lostboy said MercuryMax said I'd take him over ...well everyone in this forum who's responded so far. And thus died my crush on Max. hehe, i can't help it .....i have a fetish for tight abs and a sculpted chest...meooww Um.....
coolarmydude Posts: 3039	Oct 29, 2009 3:57 PM GMT Back on topic, I think the biggest difference is that Miley Cyrus posed in a sexually seductive manner whereas Taylor was acting in a non-sexual role. As far as I'm concerned, there is no double standard. Besides, if the paparazzi snapped a photo of him swimming or playing beach volleyball while his shirt was off, would that be the equivalent of a double standard? Nope.
Melos Posts: 67	Oct 29, 2009 4:04 PM GMT coolarmydude saidBack on topic, I think the biggest difference is that Miley Cyrus posed in a sexually seductive manner whereas Taylor was acting in a non-sexual role. As far as I'm concerned, there is no double standard. Besides, if the paparazzi snapped a photo of him swimming or playing beach volleyball while his shirt was off, would that be the equivalent of a double standard? Nope. I agree completely. For women to be shirtless, it implies something of a sexual nature. Just the glimpse of side boob is enough to send some straight guys gaa gaa. Now if this guy was shown from behind with a glimpse of his butt crack or if his pants were lowered so that his pubes were on display, it would be a completely different story. Then we have an instance where he too is displayed in a sexual manner with ulterior motives, and hence "scandalous".
Hidden member	Oct 29, 2009 4:09 PM GMT MercuryMax saidI agree...i didnt know he was 17 tho...damn does that mean i'm a pedo? anywhere but Texas maybe lol.
Webster666 Posts: 1230	Oct 29, 2009 8:04 PM GMT I didn't see anything to get excited about...
Hidden member	Nov 01, 2009 5:13 PM GMT
Hidden member	Nov 01, 2009 5:32 PM GMT Maybe there is, but in the scheme of things, probably not all that big of a deal. The age difference is significant. There is a world of difference between a 17 year old and a 15 year old. Secondly, she was supposedly exposing some "private parts", namely her breasts. He is only shirtless, and doesn't seem to expose any of his privates. However, his pictures are no less sexualized. Also, the target audiences are different. She appeals signifcantly, though certainly not exclusively, to pre-teens. I'm not so sure that is true about him. Lastly, never underestimate the desire of parents to deny their duaghter's sexualization while doing the opposite concerning their sons.
GQjock Posts: 5769	Nov 01, 2009 6:21 PM GMT I think that's a little different They had a 15 year old girl posing on a stripper pole kinda bad taste If Lautner did a scene where there was a butt plug on a table I'd call it even
G_Force Posts: 922	Nov 01, 2009 6:34 PM GMT timgoblue said andymatic saidHot body though his face looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel. how, specifically, does he look like he was hit in the face with a shovel? i'm not a big whatever-his-name-is fan, but I also don't think he deserves bitchy unsubstantiated superficial comments. Am I missing something? I guess, I'm not quite seeing either how he is ugly or looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel. From what I can see he is very good looking.
G_Force Posts: 922	Nov 01, 2009 6:37 PM GMT Bunjamon said andymatic saidHot body though his face looks like he was hit in the face with a shovel. I don't think there's anything wrong with his face OR his body, and if he were staying over at any of your houses I'm willing to bet he wouldn't be sleeping on the couch! I agree. I don't think anyone would send him away, if he wanted to stay at your house.
G_Force Posts: 922	Nov 01, 2009 6:41 PM GMT Teens are always running around with their shirts off here--no big deal to me. When I was in high school, you had to take your shirt off in phy ed class if you were on the skins team. lol
Hidden member	Nov 01, 2009 6:58 PM GMT The fact that he's worked out to improve the look of his body doesn't change the fact that he's a kid. He's underage in many states, Personally, he's about 20 years too young for me.
G_Force Posts: 922	Nov 01, 2009 7:15 PM GMT bgcat57 saidThe fact that he's worked out to improve the look of his body doesn't change the fact that he's a kid. He's underage in many states, Personally, he's about 20 years too young for me. 17 is underage in the US and I can't even take ANY pics even with their shirt on, unless the parent or legal guardian signs permission. But I would assume that his parents or guardian gave permission for him to be filmed without his shirt on, so there is nothing wrong with this. I myself have taken pics of teen models shirtless with a model release signed by their parents.

G_Force Posts: 922	Nov 01, 2009 7:31 PM GMT jarhead5536 said cdncuteboy said Bunjamon said I don't think there's anything wrong with his face OR his body, and if he were staying over at any of your houses I'm willing to bet he wouldn't be sleeping on the couch! WELL SAID!! lol That BOY is a child. I would never in a million years go anywhere near a child like that. His physical maturity is meaningless. How many men here hvae sons that age? I sure wouldn't want some grown man lusting after my 17 year old son still in high school... The law states that any underage model can not have their picture taken or filmed with or without a shirt, unless a model release is signed by the parent or legal guardian of the model. A 17 y/o can not even buy a car himself without a parent or legal gaurdian's signature. It's the law. But Hollywood teen models do have their parent's or guardians permission for modeling and acting.