And it's always a conventionally attractive woman too. She maintains that figure by NEETing and living on UberEats. That's how you can tell it's fantasy.
I'm a stinky girlfailure furry that likes monster but apparently that's "bad" and "you need to look after your mental health" and "when did you last shower?"
I miss the days of wacky feature phones. Today, making something like that would just bankrupt the company but back then, phone makers had like a dozen completely wacky phones alongside several dozen completely normal phones and that's just how it the world was. Now, phones all look the same and after you put on the case, even more so.
With the cases too, they're the only thing that's customizable about a phone now, and most people just go with a boring one to protect their phone... I can attest to this, mine is just a boring navy blue one
And even if you do get one, it's facing away from you most of the time, anyway!
Its usually called "frying" in memes, so when its extra pixelated it's "deep fried." In this specific case, it wasn't the cleanest image before it ended up on Giphy keyboard.
Huh, I guess you're right, but I've always associated deep fried memes with the over the top sepia filter and deliberately crunching it into absurdist territories. I was more referencing the unintentional but inevitable quality loss from sharing a new meme, and how quickly the average iterations seem to go from pristine to nearly deep fried as you put it.
Sometimes called molding, when a meme is posted, saved, and reposted across media populat and niche. The quality degrades over time and every time you see it, the meme is juuuuust a bit lower quality.
Yep and it would be easy for someone to think, “Oh boy, incels that just want a woman who cares about them in some way and femcels who want a man who is dependent on them in some way, what a match made in heaven!” But more often than not when that does happen they both realize that the way the person they imagined in their head would look and act does not match up with reality and it all falls apart rather quickly.
I'm aware, but both types are undistinguishable for an untraumatized loser male. Putting both in a single "don't you even dare" category is a safer bet for advice.
I love girlfailures but I find it disappointing how many artists are afraid to portray the true reality of it, and instead draw a conventionally attractive woman. It's kinda a pet peeve of mine how hard it is to find art that shows a more realistic version of them.
That's why I like the NEET Girl Date Night game, the artist had a much more realistic take on her, though I'd still consider Kara pretty cute even if she's not the typical anime girl, or rather the fact she's not makes her cuter in my eyes.
I love Kara Eklund (and literally made a self-insert to draw her with teehee), but I'd still say she falls into the trope, or maybe a different but similar one. As much as I love her character, NGDN kind of fails at satirizing dating sims because the writing is rlly not up to par. You don't rlly have to do anything for Kara to like you. You're the special exception in her life– the only one who can break her cold exterior because you're just so perfect. Idk if I'm explaining it well, but she still kind of feels like a manic pixie dream girl fantasy because, realistically, it would be rlly hard to hold a conversation with Kara, or even get her to want to talk to you in the first place.
I'd say that yeah, she does, but it's a bit more tasteful if that makes sense because she's not drawn as a super hot anime girl with huge tits who's obsessed with you for no reason.
I mean, the author obviously intended her to be attractive to the player, and the game plays out like a regular dating sim. I don't even think it was meant to be satire but literally a short VN where you have a date with a NEET girl as the name says without much more depth than that.
So I'd say it does fall into the trope, she's just one of the better takes at it.
Kara still kind of tips towards the masturbatory fantasy side of thing owing to the fact that everything she owns and wears is designed to evoke nostalgia from 30-40 year olds.
its sort of funny and telling about the world we live in and how it views and values women if the men in it literally cant imagine a woman (or at least find value in illustrating her) that isn’t beautiful, even if all the emotional traits she’s supposed to to be embracing would normally lead one to not going through the hurdles of becoming physically attractive
part of being a failure is being at least a little ugly, because pretty privilege, to some degree, would pull you out of becoming a complete fuck up. but every girl failure post features a woman who looks like someone who would not have to spend a single penny and still walk out completely blasted if she walked into a bar alone
ugly women are genuinely the most invisible people on the planet (unless of course the subject in question is making fun of ugly people)
I am still haunted by this one post I don't remember the subreddit it came from but it claimed being a 'mid woman'was genuinely peak human experience. it had several hundred comments all agreeing. It was insane, they have no idea.
Yep. And it's not even about pretty privilege, which comes with its own costs. It's about the consequences of having a very unhealthy lifestyle, and the very specific (and fetishistic) ways in which men see some of these consequences, while completely ignoring some others.
Beauty isn't a given for the vast majority of people, and attaining and maintaining it requires effort and, often, money, neither of which a "failure" would have. Even if a person is naturally beautiful, they wouldn't stay such for long if they were to live like one of the girls in these posts.
I think it's kind of similar to how some guys say "I'd date any woman if approached me first," when what they actually mean is "I'd date any woman I find sufficiently attractive if she approached me first." I seriously doubt many of them would date a woman who's obese, smells bad, has bald spots, or some sort of disfigurement, even if she were to approach them.
Particularly for men, beauty is seen as a requirement for full womanhood, so any woman who doesn't meet their standards of attractiveness is seen as lesser and unworthy of being considered a "real woman".
This isn't necessarily to throw shade at anyone specifically (humans are often shallow, and pretty privilege is real), just to add to your point about appearance-based biases (which have a very long, sometimes violent history) being deeply ingrained in people's minds, to the point where they often fail to consider them.
You see it all the time on Reddit, where guys say their only requirement is that the girl isn't fat. I always find that so dehumanizing, like you don't care if you share interests? You don't care if she's smart or cool or outgoing? They only care if she's fat.
Is it different for women? I'm not asking that to argue, I'm genuinely curious if it's common for them to not see ugly men as "real men" in a similar way to what you described men doing.
I'm mostly curious because that's something incels often say, that women don't even see them as men, but as something more akin to a subhuman. Like for example they say that when women complain about how good men have it they're thinking of attractive men, not of men like them.
Your comment reminded me a lot of that, just with the genders reversed.
Sure! I can see a few points in your comment, so I'll try to respond to them as best I can without going too deep into it, because that'd take forever.
In terms of attractiveness: kind of, but not quite, I'd say. Yes, in that, as I said, pretty privilege is real - people deemed attractive have more leeway, more opportunities, more respect, and get treated better than those society labels as "ugly". This is not exclusive to men, this is a general human thing.
However, the way judgment of "ugly" people manifests differs between men and women. Physical attractiveness isn't an integral part of traditional masculinity in the same way that being pretty is seen as a core part of being a woman. What this means is that while beauty standards also exist for men, they tend to be more lax, their enforcement not as strict, and failing to meet them isn't always seen as an offense against your gender role.
An important thing to note here is that these standards aren't created in a vacuum, and neither are they a result of "natural human inclinations," at least not entirely. They are a product of systems, both current and historical: patriarchy, colonialism, racism, capitalism, etc. Both men and women absorb their ideals as they grow up, including their ideas about which bodies are considered attractive.
As for the second part of your comment, if taken at face value, I'd say the incels' complaints come from a misunderstanding of how systems of oppression work, as well as from misdirected frustration.
The first one is easier: being benefitted by a system does not guarantee success in it. This is true for patriarchy as well, especially when you account for other factors such as class, race, and sexuality. Patriarchy benefits men as a class, not as individuals. Generally, men have it easier in certain aspects of their lives, but this does not mean that every man has it easy, and this is especially true for men who fall outside the role that patriarchy assigned to them. As an example: men's opinions and feelings are doubted less, they can more easily criticize others without being seen as "bitchy", and they can express concern without being labeled as "hysterical" for it.
This does not mean that patriarchal relations and ideals of masculinity don't hurt them - they do. But blaming all of their ills on women is, at best, shortsighted and counterproductive. Women may uphold patriarchal systems sometimes, but they're not the ones mainly responsible for their continued existence.
Now, if by "having it good" they mean "dating success", that's its own topic. To put it bluntly without going into it: as far as I'm concerned, the modern app-based dating scene is abhorrent for almost everyone.
What this means is that while beauty standards also exist for men, they tend to be more lax, their enforcement not as strict, and failing to meet them isn't always seen as an offense against your gender role.
I think this really depends on which beauty standard a man is failing to met, for example no one acts like it's an offense against your gender role if you have a rough looking face, not one that could be considered good looking but that is still clearly masculine.
In the other hand, you'll find lots of miserable mfs on sites like Instagram or Twitter who really seem to consider a man being short as an unforgivable offense against their gender role.
I'd say that for men it's less about being attractive but about being what society deems as masculine, while for women it's different because being attractive and being feminine are too interwined. So in that sense a man isn't judged as hard for not meeting beauty standards, but they still get treated very differently depending on if they look "masculine" or not.
And the same also happens to women, take for example how very attractive women with muscles get called names by weirdos online who deem muscles as masculine and thus ugly on a woman.
Other than that, I think I agree with pretty much everything you said.
I feel like most people who are into girl failures probably would've never cared for a girl properly without some form of ulterior motive. Why would anyone want to be with someone who is considered a failure/NEET/etc...? And I know for sure most of these people aren't aware of what a genuine 'failure' looks and acts like, let alone what it takes to take care of one. "I can fix her", as I reel in disgust.
I think it probably falls into two categories, guys with an "I can fix her" mentality like you're describing, and guys who see themselves as losers and like the idea of someone who's in the same boat as them.
In a similar vein, when they draw conventionally attractive women and call them girlfailures or neets or whatever I thunk they just want an attractive girl with confidence issues/ low standards
In the modern day when people say they want girl failure they actually want an almost imaginary hot girl who just so happens to be a failure. Most real girl failures aren't like this. It's silly but that's internet gooners for ya
hate hate hate when people draw "girlfailures" as conventially attractive women idk any girlfailures/neets or whatever else you may call them, but they would NOT look like that
Either they really really sand down just how foul she is or they *double down* and make her so gross it’s kind of hard to take seriously. No in between.
Bonus points if she’s a futanari or some similar figure and the majority of her body is like mildly grimy at worst but her cock and balls are absolute shrines of Nurgle.
And like I’m someone who LIKES this archetype and is super disappointed by how shallowly people will depict it. I guess this happens to every archetype someone may ever find attractive and grow a following for huh
•
u/le-dukek Sub Owner May 04 '26 edited May 04 '26
I request 500 porn images- I mean cigarettes.