Photo HotChicksWithDouchebags.com.
Doesn't it seem like the website Hot Chicks with Douchebags is both a refutation of huge chunks of the "hypergamy" meme and a pretty big hint as to whether the (mostly male) notion is descriptive or prescriptive.
Photo HotChicksWithDouchebags.com.
Because who, exactly, is registering disapproval of the gentlemen depicted? More to the point, who's registering disapproval of the choice of the women who seem attracted to the gentlemen in question?
Tool through some random pages on Hot Chicks with Douchebags for more examples.
Sort of by-definition it isn't the women themselves.
Chances are at least above average that it's not other women.
The website's author is a man, as are virtually all commenters.
I mean, there are a couple of possible explanations.
Photo HotChicksWithDouchebags.com.
First, of course, it could be that men's understanding of what women find attractive is different from what women actually find attractive, hot, or cute.
Another possibility is that for every Jack there's a Jill, but that outside certain fevered dreams the criteria doesn't revolve around obvious manifestations of wealth, taste, class, fame, appearance, flamboyance and ostentation, whatever you'd call the opposite of flamboyance and ostentation.
Photo from My Darkest Days' Myspace page.
Another possibility is that just like the stereotypes about men, women distinguish between who they'd like long-term relationships with vs. who they're drawn to for one-night stands. (Although this would conflict with the "hypergamy" and "evolutionary psychology" theory that all women all the time desire only long-term monogamous relationships.)
Or it could be that, as with men, there's simply no such thing as "what women should find attractive" even though on average both men and women might be drawn to potential partners who match conventions of attractiveness.
Photo HotChicksWithDouchebags.com.
I'm sort of leaning towards the first item, and definitely towards the last.
Question: What's your take?
Bonus question: are there any websites run by women that register similar objections to women who don't fit stereotypes of attractiveness but nevertheless do in fact have conventionally attractive male partners?
Note: One of these pics, above, is not like the other ones. Mainly because we do have independent verification that at least one person thinks at least one of the gentlemen in question is extravagantly no-strings-attached attractive "assuming he agrees not to talk and to wear an industrial-strength condom."
Tags:
From the pictures here, and
Submitted by Ginny (not verified) on Thu, 2011-08-04 16:00.From the pictures here, and looking at another handful from the sight, I'm really confused about this guy's definition of "douchebag." It seems to mean "Man I don't particularly like the look of who's standing with a girl I do like the look of." I see attractive guys, unattractive guys (though not actually that many... most are average-to-cute), rich-looking guys, poor-looking guys, geeky-looking guys, jocky-looking guys... I'm wondering if there are any men not personal friends of the site's owner who wouldn't automatically become "douchebags" when paired with a hot girl.
Well that sort of supports my
Submitted by figleaf on Thu, 2011-08-04 16:35.Well that sort of supports my main thesis, eh? Because it's not the women themselves who find these guys repellent. It's a heterosexual man complaining, basically, that what women are actually doing violates some basic order of how things are supposed to work. He's saying, in effect, the men aren't "worthy" of the women in question. (We won't point out that often the women are as 'douchebaggy" in terms of their own fashion sense goes, such that it's not just a matter of "for every jack there's a jill," it's more like "birds of a feather flock together.") Thanks, Ginnny. --fl
That's what I was going to
Submitted by svollga (not verified) on Fri, 2011-08-05 01:43.That's what I was going to say.
Personally, I find the guy on the second picture quite cute, and the last two are pleasant for my eye.
It reminds me of the opposite process that I usually witness among celebrity fans, when the celebrity male (who might or might not be conventionally attractive) finds a female pair and his female fans start to downgrade her whether she is conventionally attractive (then she is dumb) or not (then she is ugly/old). The stragnge thing is, they never downgrade *his choice*, only *the woman* who "doesn't deserve him". Though the very idea of judging someone's choice of a partner by your personal or collective criteria is ridiculous, it's interesting to see how the woman is always at fault whether she has a mate that is considered inferior or superior to her.
Who's to say that the women
Submitted by chingona on Thu, 2011-08-04 16:36.Who's to say that the women in question aren't also douchebags?
You beat me to it. Exactly.
Submitted by chingona on Thu, 2011-08-04 16:38.You beat me to it. Exactly. Just because they might look good to someone doesn't mean that someone would actually want to be with them, if he got to know them.
Well, making a shocker-sign
Submitted by Argyle (not verified) on Thu, 2011-08-04 17:54.Well, making a shocker-sign for the camera's a moderately douche-y move (a la the first pic), but hell, that group's pretty young, I could chalk it up to "immature behavior he'll grow out of eventually."
Other than that, I just see . . . guys. As others have pointed out, the judgement of actual douchebaggery (or not) can't be made without meeting the person in question. But I tend to go with the whole "innocent till proven guilty" think in that regard.
Those first couple of pics
Submitted by Kaija (not verified) on Fri, 2011-08-05 05:40.Those first couple of pics look badly photoshopped...like a different head was pasted on a body. It's still a problematic site and "social weirdness illustrated" though :P
As someone who is mostly into
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2011-08-05 06:11.As someone who is mostly into guys, I decided to go the other way around, and consider the men on an attractiveness scale and the women on an "would I want to hang out with her?" scale, and, surprise: the guys are reasonably cute, but the women don't look like someone I'd spend a nice afternoon of D&D with. Which makes me think that these couples are probably reasonably well matched, and the dudes on that website just not good at judging what makes a guy attractive (probably because they're not attracted to guys, and also because of the same bullshit beauty standards that plague girls).
"Douchebag" is totally a
Submitted by Mary Kaye (not verified) on Fri, 2011-08-05 08:15."Douchebag" is totally a behavioral insult for me--it is baffling seeing it used to mean "unattractive." And they aren't, to my tastes, even unattractive. On the whole they are less conventional-looking than the woman, many of whom seem to have standard "I am performing Beauty" type hair, clothes and makeup. The message seems to be "You can't have a conventionally pretty girl unless you are conventionally handsome yourself."
By the way, Figleaf, can you pretty please change the default from "Notify me when new comments are posted" to "Don't"? I missed that button once and it was a pest to get the blog to stop mailing to me. I can't believe that the majority of posters want an email for every single response here.
One of my favorite shows is
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 2011-08-05 13:40.One of my favorite shows is Top Gear (UK version, of course). One of the funny things they keep asserting is "Women are wildly turned on by a perfectly executed handbrake turn."
Something tells me the guys on that site think the perfect boyfriend is the male equivalent of the perfectly executed handbrake turn.
I can say that I am wildly
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 2012-02-08 04:13.I can say that I am wildly turned on by a perfectly executed handbrake turn.
Or at least, I could, if I could stop laughing...
I have two comments. 1. I
Submitted by Christina (not verified) on Fri, 2011-08-05 16:02.I have two comments.
1. I do actually have very different standards for a one night stand, a friend with benefits and a serious relationship.
2. The ¨hot chicks with douchbags¨ meme is generally associated with ¨Nice Guys¨ and drenched in misogyny. I don´t see why this site (the one you cite) is any different. The author and commentors are probably ¨alpha males¨ justifying their misogyny or ¨Nice Guys¨ who are more conventionally attractive than the guys in the pictures justifying their misogyny.
These pictures could have as
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2011-08-08 02:28.These pictures could have as well come from a blog titled "Stupid bitches getting all the beautiful and nice men I'd want to date :'( "
...rrrr...I find the idea
Submitted by Candice (not verified) on Mon, 2011-08-08 04:12....rrrr...I find the idea that someone would disrespect other men / people in public like this quite upsetting. No wonder I read blogs by men who are feeling sensitive about their appearance and ability to find a nice girlfriend. How about we reframe this? Nice but average looking men (we are all mostly average) find sweet and cute girlfriends who think they are PERFECT!
ooo....and the nice guys thing ...nice guys are the best...and most men are really nice and decent! <again, let's reframe and reclaim the territory back for the good guys...>
Thanks for the post Figleaf ....:-)
As has already been said
Submitted by Xiao Liu (not verified) on Fri, 2011-08-26 08:26.As has already been said above - this whole idea, and that site, reeks of "Nice Guy" syndrome. Chaps bitter at women's stubborn failure to love them despite their (spurious, self-avowed) niceness.
As for your hypotheses, Figleaf, I bet it's a little of each - in particular the first one, with a dash of number 3 as well. Take the third photo, for instance - I can see how, to your average whiny "But I'm A Nice Guy!" single hetero man, that pic's a bit mysterious - he looks so scruffy, and she's so picture-perfect! I like the look of that guy. I can't explain it, but that guy just looks like he'd be really good in bed. It's something to do with - he just looks as though he'd really enjoy his partner's pleasure as well as his own. He looks like he likes women, and fun, and his life. He also looks like he might have a lot of female friends, something that site's contributors might not consider possible.
Of course, he may in fact have massive personality problems and be utterly unsuitable for anything but a quick, fun encounter. But if I were single and looking I would definitely eye him up for at least that!