The Swingers Board - View Single Post

Tybee Swing · 05-10-2006, 02:10 PM

Thanks everybody for all the responses! There are a LOT of definitions of Barbie and Ken, I see. Here's a round-up from this thread so far --

Barbie & Ken's physical features:

Health-oriented, healthy lifestyle, fit, work out frequently.

Genetically blessed, naturally beautiful.

More time in the gym than we would spend there.

Model-types.

Barbie & Ken's other characteristics:

Elitist people who flaunt wealth/success/designer clothes/status.

They care more about emphasizing their appearance than developing intellect, personality.

They need to show off and mirror their success off of "lesser" people in order to win admiration from peers.

Out of my league (whatever one's league may be).

MJ said, "It is easy to lump all the good looking, fit, hot bodied people into one group and say they are shallow and only want to play with other perfect people, but that would be incorrect. Unfortunately that is what tends to happen to people who tend to fit the Barbie and Ken mold. People get intimidated, worry that they be rejected or embarrased or in some case are just plain envious."

I'm getting the impression that people who mention "no Barbie and Ken" in their ads may be insecure and that the "Barbie and Ken" thing really isn't about others, it's more about how they feel about themselves? In that case it's not B & K who are mirroring themselves off of others, it's the anti- B&K's who are doing so. No offense intended toward anybody with B&K references in ads -- just thoughts.

I also wonder -- if a couple is rejected because they're perceived as Barbie and Ken (even just at a glance, not knowing their personality yet), is that because some couples fear their spouse having sex with someone better looking or more fit than themselves? Maybe that is a threat to them?? Again just thoughts, and I'm curious.

Thanks!

05-10-2006, 02:10 PM	#11 (permalink)
Tybee Swing Swingers Board Addict Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 1,845 Location: Georgia Status: single female	Re: Q. re: "No Barbies and Kens" remarks Thanks everybody for all the responses! There are a LOT of definitions of Barbie and Ken, I see. Here's a round-up from this thread so far -- Barbie & Ken's physical features: Health-oriented, healthy lifestyle, fit, work out frequently. Genetically blessed, naturally beautiful. More time in the gym than we would spend there. Model-types. Barbie & Ken's other characteristics: Elitist people who flaunt wealth/success/designer clothes/status. They care more about emphasizing their appearance than developing intellect, personality. They need to show off and mirror their success off of "lesser" people in order to win admiration from peers. Out of my league (whatever one's league may be). MJ said, "It is easy to lump all the good looking, fit, hot bodied people into one group and say they are shallow and only want to play with other perfect people, but that would be incorrect. Unfortunately that is what tends to happen to people who tend to fit the Barbie and Ken mold. People get intimidated, worry that they be rejected or embarrased or in some case are just plain envious." I'm getting the impression that people who mention "no Barbie and Ken" in their ads may be insecure and that the "Barbie and Ken" thing really isn't about others, it's more about how they feel about themselves? In that case it's not B & K who are mirroring themselves off of others, it's the anti- B&K's who are doing so. No offense intended toward anybody with B&K references in ads -- just thoughts. I also wonder -- if a couple is rejected because they're perceived as Barbie and Ken (even just at a glance, not knowing their personality yet), is that because some couples fear their spouse having sex with someone better looking or more fit than themselves? Maybe that is a threat to them?? Again just thoughts, and I'm curious. Thanks!