Profiles that say "No Barbies and Kens"

[Tybee Swing]

Hi all,

We're familiar with the common statement in profiles, "We're not Barbie and Ken...". However, I just started noticing another twist on this since we're browsing ads a lot again, which state that they don't want any Barbies and Kens.

The whole Barbie and Ken thing seems like it is very subjective to me. One person might look at a couple and think, "reasonably attractive, nice-looking", while another person might look at the same couple and think, "Uh uh - Barbie and Ken". What the heck is a Barbie and Ken, really? Fit and attractive couples? I've seen attractive couples, even very attractive couples, but not "Barbie and Ken".

In your own opinion, what is the definition of a Barbie and Ken couple? Perhaps if I see several responses, I'll get a more clear idea here. LOL

[DBL D]

Barbie and Ken's are rare. They might not even go to parties, from what I've heard.

Really, Enough is Enough! Look at the personality. Not saying there isn't taste involved or preferences, but to deny a person based on whether they are a K&B is disconcerting, especially if it's the K&B doing the disconcerting.

I look Damn good for a 40 (even a lot younger guys too) YO and I'm 50. Will I be turned down because of a slight paunch, which I've earned? Probably. No problem here. Someone will taste the difference even if they don't see it.

Male D

[DBL D]

Uh...to answer your question though...

Barbie and Ken's consider themselves in top shape. 6-packs, ya know? No sagging...anywhere. All their hair...and teeth. There are actually some that are well adjusted.

Not sure if this helps or not.

Male D

[LOL_OMG]

I believe that most people think of Barbie and Ken as people who are physically or age wise out of their "league". They're intimidated by them for whatever reason.

I think of them as the worst pompous elitist arses I've ever met. Yeah she was all bad with her "you're dress is pretty but it's not designer", and he was all with his "I was invited to Augusta last year cause I make more money than God."

Oh crud, did I say that outloud?

[JaneAndJohnDoe]

We are one of those couples who state that we are neither Barbie and Ken, nor are we looking for them.

In our view, Barbie and Ken are defined as very fit, "typically" model-types, who spend far more time in the gym that we would ever dream of doing.

Yes, there might be a certain level of "intimidation" involved, but I think, at least for us, it is more about being comfortable. We would rather not be worrying about "are they disappointed" because we don't look like porn stars. We would much rather be with people who are "like us". Average body types. Everyday folks who can let go and not worry about body issues.

I wouldn't turn down a Ken or a Barbie...it is just that we aren't necessarily looking for them as playmates.

[sereneiders]

I've meet Barbie and Keen, several times, besides the name they were wearing evary time, nor the look, and yep, they managed to make me (us) feel unconfortable. Usually they also think it happens because they can intimidate us, but such a tought comes from the supposition that there are some "better" stuff beyond our reach, something able to set them one (or several) step above us.

There exist an stereotype of people that invest more time and effort on their external look developement than the time and effort they invest developing the remaining aspects of their persons, but's it's an stereotype based on what you can grasp at a first sight: the way people look. But the stereotype can be a missleading one, because there are people that invest time and effort in the way they look, but just as one of many aspects they invest also into to develop themselves as a whole, and in such a case these people are far from deserving to be taken for K&B.

This stereotype is a coin with an opposite face: people who want to point out for everyone around that they invest more time in the remaining aspects of their own development than the one they invest in the way they look, and to do so they deprive the external look from any importance and become careless about it. We could say these people are the proper Anti-K&B.

But IMHO the stereotype rely on the fact that our society is driven by "the market" and a "succesfulness" criteria and standards that only fit the marketing purpose. K&B are, at last, people who live to follow these standards (perhaps because it is the easiest way to fit in they feel they have), which means, they push themselves towards these sort of success, they need to show off their success, they want to surround themselves with successful people as to feel appreciated by peers, and often they require some not-so-succesfull people around as to point out how succesfull they are in comparison (as Michelle Foulcault said, in the old courts, the need to have fools, mad and disabled people, as to ensure they were intelligent, clever and perfects, thus ensuring they were resembling the image of God).

So the problem isn't the K&B alone, it is the mix of K&B and non K&B people, because of the role the formers may require the laters to fulfill, a role that, by definition, would be humilliating for the non K&B ones.

To say non K&B people are "intimidated" would be to admit the K&B standards are the right ones. And humilliation isn't intimidation.

I think it is worth to point out our lifestyle collide with the K&B standrads because (it's supposed) we have rules stating we should be respectfull about everyone's elses feelings. Most swingers wouldn't engage in an activity where the outcome risk to be humilliating for them, so to uphold the lifestyle standards K&B and non K&B trend to play in different "leages", to avoid the standards collision.

And because of this I believe people take the measure to state the attitude they have towards the K&B ones.

[2jersey]

Ditto to much of what sereneiders has said - good post.

Barbie measures in at about 36-20-34, has no wrinkles or bulges, and she can be had for about ten bucks – sounds fine to us….

Seriously, ‘Barbie and Ken’ are included in the same one-dimensional stereotype as cheerleaders and prom queens – they are (supposedly) shallow minded, and preoccupied with their appearance.

We know several very good looking couples in our vanilla lives. And we think it is unfair (and inaccurate) to assume that ‘extreme good looks’ are an undesirable personal trait. Some of these people simply have 'good genes', and they maintain healthy lifestyles which augment their physical beauty. They are also, on average, well educated, well spoken, and well rounded people (at least those in our ‘40ish’ age bracket).

Barbie and Ken couples are welcome to respond to our ad – we certainly don’t mind the fact that they will be better looking than us. Let's leave the lights on...

[J&BinNJ]

I have seen some ads that demand you be height/weight proportionate or "don't bother contacting us". Or even worse, "NO FATTIES". So "No Barbie and Ken" dosen't surprise me either.

[EvilMJ]

I am not a Barbie, however I do play with a couple that do rate as 'barbie and Ken', they are hot, have great bodies and yes even wonderful personalities. When I first me them I never thought I would play with people that 'good looking', however within minutes of meeting it became clear that the male half thought I was very attractive (turned out later so did the female ). They are very down to earth people who base their potential playmates on more than just physical appeareance.

My point here that 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 envyous.

So hey Barbie and Ken in my opinon are just people who are fit and good looking, but that doesn't mean I can't play too!!

[dallmax1]

Something that I just thought of; at the end of a correspondence I always sign off with K&B, which are our initials of me and my wife. I wonder if some of the people who don't respond back think Ken and Barbie VS our initials. Hmm...

[Tybee Swing]

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!

[good times]

I don't really have a definition for Ken and Barbie, but if they are sexy and fun, we would love to hook up with them next weekend.

[MichSexyCpl]

so would we~!! lol

[Tybee Swing]

We'll take them too!

Poor Barbie and Ken - they need love, too!!

[beaverz]

Originally Posted by EvilMJ
My point here that 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.

Thank you MJ, I hate when I get lumped into the same group as all the other KBs.

Those of you that know me know the above is not true, I will play with imperfect people if I have to.

Just kidding,

Fortunately or unfortunately we’re not a Ken and Barbie.
Personally I won’t play with Ken, but I would play with a Barbie (that’s just my preference). Sorry Ken, you will have to talk with Mrs. Beaverz.