notes upon bringing booty back.

by dorarandom

i have ‘all about that bass’ stuck in my head today. yes, serene in my cloister, even i was exposed to ‘all about that bass.’ i first heard it about three months ago and it’s been stuck in my head on and off ever since, but i thought i had finally gotten it out of my system! accursed virulent song!

actually, as a song qua song, i find it only mildly annoying and i think the video is very cute. but it has stuck in my brain like a sticky motherfucker. (not since bad romance have i suffered such a torment.)

i thought that since even i knew from all about that bass everyone must but VDF did not. i told him i was bringing hysteria back and he wondered whether hysteria was a thing that ought to be reclaimed and i said, well, if we’re bringing booty back, why not hysteria? different strokes for different folks you know. and he was confused.

that was all by way of long introduction to say that i have never figured out how to translate “junk in the trunk.” i mean there is just no good male equivalent, it seems like, and why is this it should not be. ‘junk in the trunk’—the concept of ‘junk’ itself—it is clear what that means. it is near-polite vernacular. and so one could apply the phrase to a man but since—um—well, since men and women store their excess fat tissue in different parts of the body—it doesn’t work, obviously. does not translate.*

i mean if you’re a woman seeking a man with an unusually plenteous ass, that seems pretty specialized, i think you’d have to venture pretty far out into fetish territories. i could be wrong, but. callipygean is a very greek word and we all know what the greeks were into. (wiktionary synonyms include! : bootylicious, bumtastic, and rumpalicious.)

i do not believe that ‘bootylicious’ is synonymous with ‘callipygean.’** i demur! but whatever. i am already bored of the ass and bored of this post. and now even more frustrated by the poverty in our language.

possibly it isn’t even clear what the hell i am talking about here—which is simply the simple preference for the larger gentlemen. unfortunately ‘larger’ is comparative. larger than what? well. larger than normal but not so large as to be anomalous. because we are talking preference and not fetish here. right. nothing that requires an acronym. to put it more baldly and personally: guys who are kind of fat but not so fat they can’t buy clothes in a mall, have sleep apnea or severe fat-voice, or (yuck and God forbid) anything even approaching a mobility problem. however ‘fat’ is not an appealing word. however you can’t say ‘chubby’ in this context because it already has a technical meaning—and it is only slightly less unappealing—yeah, don’t think that as a blossoming prosy young creature i didn’t look ‘fat’ up in the thesaurus and devote hours upon hours of thought to all this.

generally what i say, if called upon to say anything, is something like: ‘you know i like {some, a little, the} {flesh, excess, fluff}.’ the best i ever saw a man do was once long ago in a post on craigslist NYC, an articulate young hipster described himself as ‘rocking a paunch.’ (and confirmed this with a photo.) but this is all too inadequate.

this is how people start writing porn, isn’t it.


* please don’t suggest ‘some meat on his bones.’ that is putrid.

** update: apparently it’s hellenistic not classical. and it’s a really famous statue of aphrodite. don’t listen to me.