Metrosexual, Schmetrosexual

The line between what is male and what is female continues to blur. Stereotypes are dropping every day. A doctor is not automatically a man; a nurse is not automatically a woman. A pilot can be a female; a flight attendant can be a male. A jerk can be a man or a woman. Someone buying makeup is not necessarily a woman. Today there is even a category of men called, "metrosexual." No, that doesn't mean people who like to have sex on the subway. It refers to men who pay attention to their appearance in a way that stereotypically used to be considered strictly female. The latest woman-man crossover is the girdle for men. It was bound to happen, wasn't it?

Some call this men's girdle a "mirdle." It's not exactly a girdle because of where it's worn. However, it has the same "compression technology" that has been used for some women's undergarments. (An example of this technology in female underwear is actually called the "bra-llelujah)." The most popular of these new male mentionables is a T-shirt/undershirt that emphasizes a man's muscles and minimizes his fat. To me, it just looks like a fifty-dollar undershirt.

For decades, women have campaigned to be entitled to whatever men have. Now it's the male gender's turn to feel entitled to something that has often been the province of women – spending money to move fat around their bodies. (I never really understood the physics of this. If fat is squeezed in one area of the body, doesn't it just pop up somewhere else)?

So in addition to all of the male cosmetics that have become big sellers in recent years, now we have the male slimming garment. I'm sure soon there will be men wearing "mantyhose." There are already underpants for men that have padding in them to give the illusion of having a bigger butt. (Why would ... who knows)? In this era of the sexual equality of spandex, both women and men can satisfy their obsession with making some body parts look smaller and other parts bigger.

But why now? What is it about this era, this zeitgeist that's making men grab $58 slimming T-shirts off the racks faster than they can sing, "I Feel Pretty?" We are in a recession. Money is supposed to be tight, not underwear.

I assume those buying these garments rationalize it. Maybe they'd say it's cheaper than plastic surgery – as if accepting how you look isn't even an alternative. Maybe they're hunting for a job, want to look their best, and feel this new kind of underwear will help them get hired. Okay, but I just can't picture a guy going for a job interview without that butt padding and then after he leaves, those who do the hiring talking about him like this: "He was very qualified, his references were good, and he really seemed to have a handle on what we do here. Obviously, we can't hire him. His butt's too small."

It's possible that all this male over-primping might actually be costing guys jobs. Say a man has a job interview in the morning. He gets up and weighs himself. Then he takes a shower using lavender soap. He washes his hair with a volumizing shampoo followed by an almond conditioner. He dries himself off and looks in one of his way-too-many mirrors. He applies a male cover-up to a blemish. He shaves very carefully, making sure that his shave doesn't make him look as if he's shaved. (Could someone please explain this fashion to me)? Next, he puts on his new slimming and muscle-popping undershirt. He slips on his underpants with the butt pads. He finishes getting dressed and checks himself out in yet another mirror. He looks great. Everything's perfect. So why won't he get the job? By the time he finishes primping and getting dressed, he's two hours late for the interview.

Is Wall Street Bluffing?

According to the Los Angeles Times, some Wall Street firms don't care if a new job applicant went to business school or studied finance. The applicant probably didn't even have to graduate from high school. The firms are much more interested in how the young man or woman plays poker. That's right, sometime during the job interview, the interviewer takes out a deck of cards and deals. Another demonstration of Wall Street's love affair with poker is that at least one trading firm has their new traders play poker for one full day a week.

Many of those who apply for investment jobs are good at poker because of their experience playing online and watching on television. What is the typical personality of someone who spends hours alone at home playing poker with other people who are alone in their homes? He or she doesn't exactly sound like a "people person." In televised poker tournaments, the players who are successful are often dressed like cowboys or sport heavy jewelry like Mr.T used to wear. In this time of precarious finances, would you want these people to handle your money just because they once won a big pot with a six-high-straight?

Some financiers take this poker thing quite seriously. Aaron Brown, an executive director at Morgan Stanley has written a book called "Poker Face Wall Street." In it, he advises investors to embrace risk, not avoid it. Isn't that what got America in so much trouble? Is that what we need now, more risk and less caution? Are these "experts" so unhappy with the economy making somewhat of a comeback that they want to see it fall apart again? Try telling the autoworkers in Detroit who have finally gone back to work that risk should be what guides their pension plans again. They'd be tempted to run you over with that new Camaro.

Some point to the fact that people like Bill Gates, H.L, Hunt, and Kirk Kerkorian liked to play poker when they were younger. They probably also liked to sleep, but nobody is pointing to a good mattress as the key to riches. I have the feeling that there were other things besides playing poker with his buddies that made Bill Gates one of the most successful people in the world. It's just possible that in addition to knowing that a flush beats a straight, Gates is inventive, smart, and creative.

I'm not saying that game playing can have no part in preparing one for success. If you were to ask President Obama about games, I have the feeling he'd say that basketball teaches the player about preparation and teamwork, and about winning and losing. I'd have to agree, but I still wouldn't ask Charles Barkley to invest my money for me.

About those poker playing investment traders: While there is something to be said for people having the experience of gambling with their own money before they gamble with a client's, I don't want someone who's investing my money to think of it as a game.

Poker might not even be the best game that prepares a young trader for his profession. How about leapfrog? That teaches people how to jump over others, not caring if they knock them over. That could be a game that helps Wall Street types get ahead. Tic-tac-toe teaches you that some people will play the same game over and over again even if nobody wins. That's perfect training for grinding out commissions over and over again. One of my favorites is the preschool game of "Duck, Duck, Goose." I have no idea how this game could prepare someone for Wall Street, but I'd still love to see a video of those guys in their three piece suits, telling their assistants to hold their calls while they run in a circle calling out, "Duck, Duck, Goose."

Theoretically, a poker face makes it impossible for anybody else to know what you're holding. Then you can bluff and finally you can put all the money in the pot. They call that "big time poker." A little while ago, that kind of manipulation was called, "selling sub-prime mortgages and worthless paper."