DNA’s Sexiest Men Alive and the Top lists routine.

So I hate “Top-anything” lists.
But why?
I do because it is simply impossible to point out something as “the best” of any kind of subject, theme or media without leaving behind lots of other things as good as the chosen one that you may not even know that exist – not to say that many times these top lists are actually full of things that are far from being good. It is even worst when people insist on doing “the best ever made” lists. If it is difficult to pick the best album, song, movie released or book published at any given year, why would it make any sense something as stupid as trying to point out the best ones ever made? No, it definitely does not. Top lists are nothing more than an old practice on media that has been turned into a blog routine on the internet by lazy people who do it because it is easier to list stuff without giving any explanation. It is an internet plague so popular and disseminated that it it ruins even the easiest task.
Take something that is not exactly the most thought-provoking duty, DNA’s Sexiest Men Alive list, for instance. It is not difficult at all to group the 60 most sexier man alive – though I think it is a silly thing to do precisely because there are lots of more of them out there – but even still the Australian magazine makes it a complete failure.
First, since all the men are listed in no specific order I suppose the magazine’s editors believe all of them are equally appealing. But, for example, how would I assume that this guy

would be comparable to this one?

Second, among the really jaw-dropping actors, models, sportsmen, porn models/actors who were listed, be them famous or not, the magazine has thrown some men on the list merely for the sake of diversity, political commitment and correctiveness. Because, Lord, no, Barack Obama and Dustin Lance Black can’t be listed along with Ryan Reynolds, Chris Evans, Sam Worthington, Jakub Stefano, Chris Rockway and Leo Giamani as the sexiest men alive simply because the former ones aren’t. It is clear the only reason they have made the jump into the list is because both are admired by people as political figures – and, sorry, as much as intelligence can be some kind of a turn on to someone it is far from the one aroused by physical attributes. Third, it is time to update references: after so many years, George Clooney’s beauty or sexiness can’t be paired to Justin Hartley’s. Yes, Clooney can still be considered attractive but it is clear he is far from that level of sexiness which Hartley easily sports. Because of these mistakes the list seems too big – among the sixty guys there I would pick only half of them, if much.
That’s why top lists rarely work, no matter what people are listing. So, instead of filling the web with them I think it is better to simply point out something as one of the best in a subject or field. It seems the same but actually it is not: if you say that something is among the best ones of its kind you are leaving room for you to keep listing many others as you keep discovering new ones that you may even find are better and at the same time it also gives your audience the chance to point the ones they also like – this way you are sharing knowledge rather than showing off yours. After all, the beauty of the internet is sharing, isn’t it?