Most classically handsome NYC providers

[Rudynate]

2 minutes ago, Strafe13 said:

Thanks for explaining this concept. I’ve long thought this about many handsome/attractive men who were nonetheless not sexy.  I agree with you 100% that Mitt Romney is a great example of this.  I respectfully disagree on Rainer, though. I’ve met him in person and he is quite sexy.  All IMHO, of course.

I was talking about Monsieur Hung.  I agree with you that Rainer is very hot.

[muscmtl]

This tread his hilarious, where rentmen boys with no face available are still considered classically handsome. So I guess the current definition of classically handsome is:  big dick with abs

[pubic_assistance]

2 hours ago, Socalguy said:

We will have to agree to disagree on this one. 🙂 The first time I saw him, my first though was how handsome he was in a very convential/classical way

Another example of how subjective physical beauty is.

Clearly this gentleman hits some PERSONAL notes in what you find sexy.

But is he Universally/classically good looking ? Most definitely not. Does absolutely NOTHING for me. But that's normal. It's very difficult to get 100 people to all agree on looks.

[Trick]

1 hour ago, muscmtl said:

This tread his hilarious, where rentmen boys with no face available are still considered classically handsome. So I guess the current definition of classically handsome is:  big dick with abs

I’m assuming those commenting on “headless” providers have seen them in person.

[Andy2]

5 hours ago, Trick said:

I’m assuming those commenting on “headless” providers have seen them in person.

Yes, I for one have actually met the "headless" handsomes.   In the case of Viktor, he immediately sent me a face picture that IMHO was classically handsome.  And he is better looking in person. 

Ditto for Jus Bloom and Kristian Elix.  (If he has had surgery, so what?  The question is whether he is handsome.  For most of us (not all, Pubic), how a guy gets to handsome is not decisive.)  

[CuriousByNature]

When I think of beauty or handsomeness in a 'classical' sense I immediately associate that with what I personally consider to be the unrealistic and narrow standards put forward by sculptors working during the Classical period of Ancient Greece, and the copies of Greek sculpture later created by Roman artists.  It's all very mathematical and balanced, but I find these pieces to lack necessary elements that would make them approachable if they were living beings.  To me, this is where beauty and handsomeness diverge from attractiveness.  Not to mention, the classical standard did not include non-Greek races and ethnicities, so this narrowed the definition of classic beauty and handsomeness even further.  Thankfully the standard is not set in stone (pun intended) - and probably for most people, attractiveness is not dependent on some global ideal of physical perfection, but rather, a mix of elements which foster connection and relationship.

Edited January 12 by CuriousByNature

[Walt]

26 minutes ago, CuriousByNature said:

When I think of beauty or handsomeness in a 'classical' sense I immediately associate that with the standards put forward by sculptors working during the Classical period of Ancient Greece, and the copies of Greek sculpture later created by Roman artists.  It's all very mathematical and balanced, but I find these pieces to lack necessary elements that would make them approachable if they were living beings.  To me, this is where beauty and handsomeness diverge from attractiveness.  Not to mention, the classical standard did not include non-Greek races and ethnicities, so this narrowed the definition of classic beauty and handsomeness even further.  Thankfully the standard is not set in stone (pun intended) - and probably for most people, attractiveness is not dependent on some global ideal of physical perfection, but rather, a mix of elements which foster connection and relationship.

EXACTLY!  Classically handsome is not "universally handsome." Classically handsome is not "Hollywood handsome." Classically handsome is not "ruggedly handsome." Classically handsome is not "All American handsome," "jolie laid," or "full of sex appeal." (Although, yes, there may ne some overlaps.)  It one specific type of handsomeness, and  is based on a narrow definition of idealized body proportions, biased toward Greek and Italian looks, celebratory of heroic/athletic types, and has a very studied type of posed casualness. Think of David in Florence.  "Classically handsomeness" has a narrow definition and indeed may or may not align with everyone's individual personal idea of "handsome."

[+ goosh69]

18 hours ago, ShortCutie7 said:

He does look very handsome to me, but yes, a bit plastic.

 

Yes, he does it for me!  

More than a bit plastic 

[+ goosh69]

16 hours ago, Socalguy said:

I would have to add Eric Hassan to this list. The first time I laid eyes on him I was floored. The fact that he is also an incredibly nice, sweet and intelligent gentleman in person definitely adds to his appeal.

Thedudenextdoor - Pornstar Performer, Rentboy, Gay Massage in New York City, NY | RentMen

RENTMEN.EU

---

Pornstar Performer & Rentboy in New York City, NY - Thedudenextdoor: READY TO CONNECT!

 

Biting my tongue so hard I’m bleeding. Are you sure you’re replying in the right thread?

[+ purplekow]

On 1/9/2024 at 7:46 PM, guru68 said:

The proof is in the pudding, as they say.

So some people say though I believe the original expression was.   The proof of the pudding is in the tasting.  Unless of course you are cheating on a high school math test by putting the answers in your dessert.  In that case the proof would be in the pudding and the quadratic equation is in the ice cream.     

[guru68]

1 hour ago, purplekow said:

So some people say though I believe the original expression was.   The proof of the pudding is in the tasting.  Unless of course you are cheating on a high school math test by putting the answers in your dessert.  In that case the proof would be in the pudding and the quadratic equation is in the ice cream.     

I guess we'll have to taste a lot of pudding.

[Guest]

Terrific idea—a taste test!

[+ Socalguy]

3 hours ago, goosh69 said:

Biting my tongue so hard I’m bleeding. Are you sure you’re replying in the right thread?

Yes, yes I am. Though at this point, I don't know why I'm bothering. 🙄

[Cliff]

Good morning, gentlemen! After reading through all of these comments, may I suggest that we simply agree that: 1) there are lots of handsome providers in NYC and 2) we all have our own ideas about what defines “handsome” and “classically handsome”? Lovely!! See, wasn’t that easy? Wishing all of you a wonderful weekend. 

Edited January 12 by Cliff

[pubic_assistance]

5 hours ago, CuriousByNature said:

Not to mention, the classical standard did not include non-Greek races and ethnicities, so this narrowed the definition of classic beauty and handsomeness

Your attempt to sympathise with pluralism in a conversation about "classic" beauty is interesting.

It touches on the very problem with the understanding of "classically handsome" in this conversation. The idea is NOT pluralistic and multi-cultural and it doesn't try to be. This is likely why you're not finding many examples of it in multicultural places like NYC. Physical beauty and sexual attractiveness in multi-ethnic communities don't rely on the familiarity of a refined version of a single race. But the idealism of "classically handsome" DOES. So the concept is always borne of focus and therfore has no room for multiculturalism.

All that said....I will use a single viewpoint from my own experiences of growing up in an all white, primarily Germanic community who's finer quality gentlemen were very much in the same category as the  Hollywood Hunks of the 1920s to 1970s. MY environment surrounded me with many fine examples of classically handsome men who I did find to be beautiful. But once I left this monolithic society and moved first to LA and then to New York, my experiences of beauty changed and I am now more inclined to be attracted to people who look very different from me and therefore different from the Hollywood ideal.

So this conversation keeps mixing up people's personal sexual triggers with the more narrow idea of "classically handsome" , which like the Greeks and Romans, is focused on one race and the refinement of one look.

Today I would sooner go for Regé-Jean Page than Chris Hemsworth but I am well aware that Regé is an example of the new idea of multicultural beauty, and not eligible.for the narrow idea of "classically handsome" as Hemsworth may be viewed.

The point is that what YOU PERSONALLY find to be most beautiful is not necessarily the same as someone who's interest is focused on "classical beauty".

 

[ShortCutie7]

21 hours ago, Rudynate said:

To me, "classically handsome" is white-bread movie star handsome.  Part of why they were so highly-prized is because they are rare.  The notion of "handsome" has shifted so that many different physical types now fit under the umbrella of "handsome."

 

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

Your attempt to sympathise with pluralism in a conversation about "classic" beauty is interesting.

It touches on the very problem with the understanding of "classically handsome" in this conversation. The idea is NOT pluralistic and multi-cultural and it doesn't try to be. This is likely why you're not finding many examples of it in multicultural places like NYC. Physical beauty and sexual attractiveness in multi-ethnic communities don't rely on the familiarity of a refined version of a single race. But the idealism of "classically handsome" DOES. So the concept is always borne of focus and therfore has no room for multiculturalism.

All that said....I will use a single viewpoint from my own experiences of growing up in an all white, primarily Germanic community who's finer quality gentlemen were very much in the same category as the  Hollywood Hunks of the 1920s to 1970s. MY environment surrounded me with many fine examples of classically handsome men who I did find to be beautiful. But once I left this monolithic society and moved first to LA and then to New York, my experiences of beauty changed and I am now more inclined to be attracted to people who look very different from me and therefore different from the Hollywood ideal.

So this conversation keeps mixing up people's personal sexual triggers with the more narrow idea of "classically handsome" , which like the Greeks and Romans, is focused on one race and the refinement of one look.

Today I would sooner go for Regé-Jean Page than Chris Hemsworth but I am well aware that Regé is an example of the new idea of multicultural beauty, and not eligible.for the narrow idea of "classically handsome" as Hemsworth may be viewed.

The point is that what YOU PERSONALLY find to be most beautiful is not necessarily the same as someone who's interest is focused on "classical beauty".

 

Interesting that a lot of us are associating whiteness with “classically handsome”.  I (being white myself) personally have found cubanbd and “Gustavo” (whom I assume are both Latino) to be the most classically handsome men in this thread.

 

2 hours ago, Socalguy said:

Yes, yes I am. Though at this point, I don't know why I'm bothering. 🙄

I am glad you posted Eric and agree that he is very handsome, albeit not in a classical way!

 

2 hours ago, Cliff said:

Good morning, gentlemen! After reading through all of these comments, may I suggest that we simply agree that: 1) there are lots of handsome providers in NYC and 2) we all have our own ideas about what defines “handsome” and “classically handsome”? Lovely!! See, wasn’t that easy? Wishing all of you a wonderful weekend. 

Exactly!  That is why I started this thread; to have a respectful dialogue of what makes a guy classically handsome and a list of handsome (classically or not) guys in NYC as examples and add them to my docket of guys to consider contacting when I just want to stare into some gorgeous eyes.

[CuriousByNature]

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

Your attempt to sympathise with pluralism in a conversation about "classic" beauty is interesting.

It touches on the very problem with the understanding of "classically handsome" in this conversation. The idea is NOT pluralistic and multi-cultural and it doesn't try to be. This is likely why you're not finding many examples of it in multicultural places like NYC. Physical beauty and sexual attractiveness in multi-ethnic communities don't rely on the familiarity of a refined version of a single race. But the idealism of "classically handsome" DOES. So the concept is always borne of focus and therfore has no room for multiculturalism.

All that said....I will use a single viewpoint from my own experiences of growing up in an all white, primarily Germanic community who's finer quality gentlemen were very much in the same category as the  Hollywood Hunks of the 1920s to 1970s. MY environment surrounded me with many fine examples of classically handsome men who I did find to be beautiful. But once I left this monolithic society and moved first to LA and then to New York, my experiences of beauty changed and I am now more inclined to be attracted to people who look very different from me and therefore different from the Hollywood ideal.

So this conversation keeps mixing up people's personal sexual triggers with the more narrow idea of "classically handsome" , which like the Greeks and Romans, is focused on one race and the refinement of one look.

Today I would sooner go for Regé-Jean Page than Chris Hemsworth but I am well aware that Regé is an example of the new idea of multicultural beauty, and not eligible.for the narrow idea of "classically handsome" as Hemsworth may be viewed.

The point is that what YOU PERSONALLY find to be most beautiful is not necessarily the same as someone who's interest is focused on "classical beauty".

 

I was only saying that the term 'classic handsomeness' can be taken back to the Greek notions of what they considered to be beautiful - and that was a very narrow definition that is not broad enough to include what many of us today would consider to be beautiful.  It isn't that the subject of a Greek statue should be considered unattractive, but rather, that the ancient measure of classic handsomeness is but one, fairly narrow definition.

[pubic_assistance]

39 minutes ago, CuriousByNature said:

that was a very narrow definition that is not broad enough to include what many of us today would consider to be beautiful. 

Maybe you should READ what I wrote again. You seem to have missed the point

I find lots of people are beautiful who aren't the definition of "classically handsome".

[pubic_assistance]

54 minutes ago, ShortCutie7 said:

Interesting that a lot of us are associating whiteness with “classically handsome”.  I (being white myself) personally have found cubanbd and “Gustavo” (whom I assume are both Latino) to be the most classically handsome men in this thread.

Being born on a Latin Island doesn't necesaarily make you look "Latino". Cubanbd looks as white European as anyone. Lots of families in Latin America are desendants of the Spanish colonials and never intermarried with the indigenous people or with the African workers.

"Latino" generally refers to a geographic and cultural background but doesn't mean your bloodline following the usual multi-ethnic typology.

[CuriousByNature]

13 minutes ago, pubic_assistance said:

Maybe you should READ what I wrote again. You seem to have missed the point

I find lots of people are beautiful who aren't the definition of "classically handsome".

I didn't think otherwise.  Like you, I also find many people to be beautiful that would not necessarily fit the definition of 'classically handsome', and particularly the definition based on the standards of Bronze-age Greece.

I've edited my original comment a bit to hopefully improve the clarity of the point I was trying to make - that the term 'classical' makes me think of representations made by Greek and later Roman artists - not that I consider that to be an accurate definition myself.

Edited January 12 by CuriousByNature

[dutchal]

Here's a collection of guys who would qualify as [modern standard] "classically' handsome:

https://www.pinterest.com/maryamaroadams/hallmark-hunks/

[Rudynate]

2 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

 

Today I would sooner go for Regé-Jean Page than Chris Hemsworth but I am well aware that Regé is an example of the new idea of multicultural beauty, and not eligible.for the narrow idea of "classically handsome" as Hemsworth may be viewed.

 

 

Yes Regé is wonderful.  I love that car commercial where he gets out of the car, looks up, and his beautful smile gradually lights up his face.

[pubic_assistance]

6 minutes ago, Rudynate said:

Yes Regé is wonderful.  I love that car commercial where he gets out of the car, looks up, and his beautful smile gradually lights up his face.

Something about the guy. I've never seen a single photo where he looks bad. Doesn't need a "good side" or special lighting. Every random paparazzi shot looks like a modeling gig. Beautiful man.

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

20 hours ago, muscmtl said:

This tread his hilarious, where rentmen boys with no face available are still considered classically handsome. So I guess the current definition of classically handsome is:  big dick with abs

Many ancient Greek statues exist of classically handsome men; many without heads.  The more things change, the more they stay the same. 😊

[Rudynate]

On 1/8/2024 at 10:23 AM, pubic_assistance said:

Which is problematic when you ask OTHER PEOPLE their opinions regarding physical appearance.

For example:

I don't find MONSIEUR_HUNG to be the least bit attractive. I don't know if I would fuck him if he paid ME !   That's how little I am attracted to the fellow.

Rainer, I would definitely do, but I also wouldn't describe his look as "classically handsome".

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and you're never going to find twenty people to agree on who's handsome.

The other problem in NYC is that this is a very international crossroads. So you get people from all over the world..and you're always going to find a very broad range of types of men advertising on Rent.men.  It seems to me that what sells in middle America (All-American White boy with muscle and a fat cock) isn't necessarily what sells in multi-cultural New York. Same when you ask about "classically handsome" ...which has a broader range of Hollywood Hunks who fall into that category. I don't really see them passing through here much. Maybe there isn't much of a demand.

San Francisco  - same way.  When my mother used to come to visit, the ethnic mix made her very uncomfortable.