Join 3,572 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


It's like that scene from Amazon Women on The Moon...but less funny
November 21, 2013 8:56 AM   Subscribe

On Lulu, women can rate men in categories — ex-boyfriend, crush, together, hooked-up, friend or relative — with a multiple-choice quiz. Women, their gender verified by their Facebook logins, add pink hashtags to a man’s profile ranging from the good (#KinkyInTheRightWays) to the bad (#NeverSleepsOver) to the ugly (#PornEducated). The hashtags are used to calculate a score generated by Lulu, ranging from 1 to 10, that appears under the man’s profile picture. (The company’s spokeswoman declined to explain the ratings algorithm.) Men can add hashtags, which appear in blue, but these are not factored into their overall score. (SLNYT)
posted by sio42 (482 comments total) 20 users marked this as a favorite

 
Furthermore, the ratings are in fact way way nicer than you'd imagine.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 8:57 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I find this pretty icky, which probably makes me a hypocrite as slutty gay dudes have been doing this informally for years and similarly but without NY Times pieces about them within the last decade, but I do have to admit the tag #PornEducated cuts to the chase fairly awesomely.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 9:02 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Is it totally nutty that I kind of want all my ex-girlfriends to rate me on this so I could see the results? #amigoodinbedorwereyoujustbeingpolite
posted by ook at 9:06 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


This is just one of those things that makes me feel like I am having way too little sex.
posted by gagglezoomer at 9:08 AM on November 21, 2013 [22 favorites]


This app has had Reddit going bananas.

But it's been around for a while now and seems like most bro-type guys are actually requesting to be rated on it rather than ignored... even when they get a bad review they think 'hey I'm a player...'
posted by colie at 9:09 AM on November 21, 2013


I sometimes wonder about these places. Am I living in a fucked up bubble world of "get off my lawn" when I see this and wonder/fear for our world, and then see I'm the target age.
posted by k5.user at 9:09 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


I don't have any firm opinions of this other than I am both fond of the concept and fucking terrified by the implications. I mean, it's not like this sort of stuff doesn't get whispered about (or, well, frankly spoken about, honestly) in social circles, but like that couple-breaking-up-on-Twitter thing, the implication of such a thing becoming accessible to everyone are scary. Although, honestly, if you get tagged with #PornEducated, that's a wake-up call you desperately need, bro.

Also:
“When you Google a guy, you don’t want to know if he voted Republican or what he wrote a paper about in college,” Ms. Chong said.
I'm pretty sure you could make a fucking killing in NYC by being able to tell someone that they're about to go on an actual (i.e. not "let's have some drinks and fuck") date with a Republican.

And, from PA's link, this is a perfect self-contained capsule of I-don't-know-what:
“Wow. This is straight-up harassment. It invites women to make public electronic slander about people. I wonder how society would react if I made an app that let men rate women they knew and gossip about how slutty they are,” a Reddit user called JizzCreek complained...
posted by griphus at 9:09 AM on November 21, 2013 [23 favorites]


"I wonder how society would react if I made an app that let men rate women they knew and gossip about how slutty they are,” a Reddit user called JizzCreek complained...

They already have that app, JizzCreek. It's called society.
posted by Etrigan at 9:10 AM on November 21, 2013 [88 favorites]


I wonder how society would react if I made an app that let men rate women they knew and gossip about how slutty they are

It's called the Internet.
posted by kmz at 9:11 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


At first I thought this was really creepy - and I still think it's kind of horrible in a broader neoliberalisation-of-everything way! - but then it occurred to me that this is sort of an UMC, we-have-to-move-for-work-every-couple-of-years-and-work-sixty-hour-weeks thing where these young women actually don't have, like, a volunteer network or a political network or any way to meet dudes except OkCupid. And that sort of makes sense - if you have nothing to help you distinguish okay guys from scary revenge-porn/rapey/thinks-sex-is-like-porn ones, you need something else. It's sad that it has to be a start-up on the interwebz, and it's even more depressing that it's part of the personal-brand-building bullshit we all have to do now, but it's no worse than anything else.
posted by Frowner at 9:11 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Grindr doesn't have ratings of other people, does it? In retrospect that seems a bit of an oversight. Maybe even they thought it would be too tacky. (Although "too tacky for Grindr" is a sort of baffling concept.)
Ms. Chong no longer has need to be an active Lulu user; she is shopping for apartments downtown with her boyfriend, Jack Brockway, 33, a photographer who is the nephew of Sir Richard Branson, the Virgin Group founder, and the brother of Ned Rocknroll, Kate Winslet’s new husband. ... Ms. Chong and Mr. Brockway met last spring on Maui at a kite-surfing and networking event ... A week later, they met again, this time at Mr. Branson’s Necker Island in the Caribbean.
My guess is the Lulu social network is favoring a certain segment of the population. Even the rich and beautiful need to get laid.
posted by Nelson at 9:13 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Someone had a website like this at my alma mater back in the mid-200s, although I think it was shut down eventually after a dude was accused of being a rapist (to be fair, I'm pretty sure he was a sexual predator, so...).

It should be no surprise that the internet is often used to replace traditional F2F social structures, with all the problems therein.
posted by muddgirl at 9:14 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm not sure what to make of this. Do people actually like overcomplicating finding a partner and/or casual sex this much? It seems like too much rigmarole.
posted by Talez at 9:15 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


“The real-world application is nothing more than a way for spiteful ex-hookups to spew menstrual hatred upon those that have wronged them,” Total Frat Move concluded.

I can't decide which aspect of this to mock first.
posted by elizardbits at 9:16 AM on November 21, 2013 [51 favorites]


Ain't nothing like somebody called JizzCreek to make me rethink my position on something.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 9:17 AM on November 21, 2013 [45 favorites]


If they really wanted to make money then they would offer an IAP for guys to delist their profile, like those scammy public record sites.
posted by codacorolla at 9:18 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Previously.
posted by 0 at 9:18 AM on November 21, 2013


That scene from Amazon Women on the Moon.
posted by MartinWisse at 9:19 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Everyone else has had more sex than me.
posted by poe at 9:19 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Ain't nothing like somebody called JizzCreek to make me rethink my position on something.

Please tell me it is 'romanticizing rural America.'
posted by griphus at 9:19 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


MENSTRUAL HATRED
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 9:19 AM on November 21, 2013 [19 favorites]


I find something about this deeply offensive.
posted by nathancaswell at 9:20 AM on November 21, 2013


Y'all should really read that NYmag treatment, a lot more reality-based.

"Among Lulu’s 2.5 million reviews — 500,000 of which were requested by the guys themselves — the average score is 7.5. Among reviewers who self-identify as ex-girlfriends and hookups, 70 percent of reviews are 7.0 or higher. When the reviews come from friends, 80 percent are higher than 7.0. (One third of Lulu reviews are from hookups and exes. The rest are from friends, relatives, crushes, and current girlfriends.) According to Lulu’s calculations, the three most popular hashtags are #WillActSilly, #CleansUpGood, and #EpicSmile. Positive hashtags are selected three times more frequently than negative ones. “It’s definitely skewing positive,” Lulu marketing director Deborah Singer says. “Girls aren’t using Lulu to bash guys. They’re going on to shout about the good guys, to recommend their friends.”"
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:20 AM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


People in this article are variously described as:

an assistant at Warner Brothers
has a law degree from the London School of Economics
an actress and writer
a former member of the Jamaica Fed Cup tennis team
lives in the East Village and works for an advertising agency
attended Florida International University on a tennis scholarship
worked for Upstream, a large mobile marketing firm
family helped start the Calgary Stampede, the summer rodeo
born poor but won a lottery and used the windfall to start a tourism company
former assistant to the literary agent Amanda Urban, known as Binky
an early investor in Facebook
a founder of Jawbone
a photographer
the nephew of Sir Richard Branson, the Virgin Group founder
the brother of Ned Rocknroll, Kate Winslet’s new husband
a comedy writer
a real estate broker who lives in Brooklyn

Not saying good or bad (other than the surname Rocknroll), just amazed how interesting everybody in New York apparently is.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 9:20 AM on November 21, 2013 [14 favorites]


If they really wanted to make money then they would offer an IAP for guys to delist their profile, like those scammy public record sites.

oh my god can we do this let's make a billion dollars JOIN ME FRIENDS
posted by elizardbits at 9:20 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


MissAndry.com
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:21 AM on November 21, 2013 [14 favorites]



I have heard from men for years that it's such an awful shame that women aren't into casual sex the way men are, and why can't heterosexual relationships be more like the kind of ultra-casual ones that a lot of gay dudes have. This is for that. If many straight guys want many straight women to be into really casual hook-ups, the real of it is that there has to be some compensation for the greater dangers that women face when having casual sex with semi-strangers. Being able to find out more about a guy quickly is that compensation. It's a trade-off. It's not one that I would want to make, but I would think that straight dudes would embrace it, as it seems to offer a way to get more casual hook-ups.

(Of course, there's the commodification of the self, and brand-building, and an ever-more-intimate public record that follows you around forever, but people seem to have very little problem with that in other areas of life, so why complain here where it might get some guy laid?)
posted by Frowner at 9:21 AM on November 21, 2013 [47 favorites]


Is there a hashtag for #SaysYouCanSleepInHisBed,PromisesNothingWillHappen,ThenContinuouslyTriesToGropeYouAllNightLongUntilYouWalkHomeAt4AM? Because back when I was dating I would definitely have wanted to know that about a guy before I went out with him.
posted by KathrynT at 9:21 AM on November 21, 2013 [34 favorites]


I enjoy how thoroughly the author seems to hate everyone involved in this. Am I projecting? Possibly, but the "Binky" detail was definitely excessive in a very satisfying way.
posted by c'mon sea legs at 9:22 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


MetaFilter: I find something about this deeply offensive.
posted by billiebee at 9:23 AM on November 21, 2013 [19 favorites]


Welcome! You have been rated by Miss Andry as #GarbageLips #UterusPoison #ThumbDong #FodderForTheGoddess

Enter your bitcoin data here to begin erasing hashtags: __________
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:23 AM on November 21, 2013 [35 favorites]


MENSTRUAL HATRED is the new heavy-metal subgenre I will now invent.
posted by sandettie light vessel automatic at 9:24 AM on November 21, 2013 [28 favorites]


...just amazed how interesting everybody in New York apparently is.

Man if you think the Eloi are fascinating, just wait until you meet us Morlocks!
posted by griphus at 9:24 AM on November 21, 2013 [42 favorites]


I wonder how long it will take my husband to a) discover that he's been reviewed and b) figure out that it was me who tagged him with #FartMachine. :D
posted by Jacqueline at 9:25 AM on November 21, 2013 [53 favorites]


Man if you think the Eloi are fascinating, just wait until you meet us Morlocks!

ugh, Eloi, so stringy these days
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:27 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


I find the idea of this really creepy and gross and can't really see any way to justify it (though I'm glad I guess that most people are apparently nice about it), but I feel like the usernames of outraged guys on Reddit almost make this descent into a new ring of social Hell worth it. Potomac Avenue's link reads almost like an Onion article about this, the way it keeps giving me very serious-faced (but kind of absurd) quotes and then topping them off with the hilarity-cherry that is the user/site/tag names.
posted by byanyothername at 9:28 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Is there a hashtag for #SaysYouCanSleepInHisBed,PromisesNothingWillHappen,ThenContinuouslyTriesToGropeYouAllNightLongUntilYouWalkHomeAt4AM? Because back when I was dating I would definitely have wanted to know that about a guy before I went out with him.


Uh, morbid curiosity but why would you sleep at the house of any guy that you've just met and you're not sexually attracted to?
posted by Talez at 9:28 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


College? Also you can be sexually attracted to someone and still not want to have sex with them at that particular time and place, particularly if you are drunk.
posted by elizardbits at 9:30 AM on November 21, 2013 [38 favorites]


Maybe you're sexually attracted to them but don't want to hook up that night? Easy.
posted by sweetkid at 9:30 AM on November 21, 2013 [13 favorites]


Uh, morbid curiosity but why would you sleep at the house of any guy that you've just met and you're not sexually attracted to?

We had mutual friends, he had invited me over for dinner because we were both broke, I was kind of attracted to him, I got much more drunk than I intended to and didn't want to have sex when I was that inebriated.
posted by KathrynT at 9:31 AM on November 21, 2013 [17 favorites]


Nope sorry that doesn't check out it say here *Holds up FedoraMeter, it's flashing [F E M A L E L I E S]*
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:32 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


And then when I was like "Ugh I am WAY too drunk for public transportation, let me call a friend to get a ride before everyone goes to bed" he was all "No no no it's OK! You can just stay here -- you can share the bed with me, I promise nothing will happen, it's just a place to sleep, you can sober up and then go home in the morning." And then NOT SO MUCH.
posted by KathrynT at 9:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


The point being "well why did you sleep there in the first place anyway" is not generally considered a good response to "some dude deliberately and knowingly overstepped my sexual boundaries and that is not okay".
posted by elizardbits at 9:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [122 favorites]


Judge Dred reporting to the FriendZone. Citizens please clear this area immediately.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


From Potomac's link:
Since Lulu doesn’t allow write-in reviews, there’s a limit to how cruel responses can be; there is no negative corollary for #AinAnatomy.
You get the feeling that a lot of the Reddit backlash was out of fear that that wouldn't be the case?
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Maybe you thought you were platonic friends and he wanted to "save you the expense and danger" of hailing a cab?

It turns out that sexual predators are pretty good at manouvering their victims into situations where they are vulnerable.
posted by muddgirl at 9:34 AM on November 21, 2013 [16 favorites]


I am disappointed that we can't add our own hashtags. I wanted to write #A++WouldSpouseAgain.
posted by Jacqueline at 9:35 AM on November 21, 2013 [21 favorites]


Do people actually like overcomplicating finding a partner and/or casual sex this much?

I think people just really really like rating things.
posted by octobersurprise at 9:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [25 favorites]


When I was single, I slept in beds with other single women and maybe once with somebody who had a boyfriend? It is totally possible to exist next to somebody you theoretically have a sexual attraction to without it being uncomfortable or turning into anything remotely approximating physical contact.
posted by Rory Marinich at 9:37 AM on November 21, 2013 [18 favorites]


I think people just really really like rating things.

Here, have an upvote.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:37 AM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


I think people just really really like rating things.

A+ comment would concur again
posted by elizardbits at 9:37 AM on November 21, 2013 [16 favorites]


I have slept unmolested in beds with at least a dozen different men who were sexually attracted to me but still respected my boundaries. It's not that weird nor that onerous of an expectation.
posted by Jacqueline at 9:39 AM on November 21, 2013 [44 favorites]


that whole "dude pretends to be nice and offers a place to sleep for reasons, no funny stuff, and then goes on to push boundaries from manipulative to straight up rapey ways" is a thing. you stay over because he's gone out of his way to insist that you're safe and then proves you're not. whatta ya know, ani difranco even has a song about it.
posted by nadawi at 9:41 AM on November 21, 2013 [20 favorites]


and, yeah, totally had lots of awesome male and female cosleeping arrangements where everyone just went to sleep. it's not an outlandish expectation.
posted by nadawi at 9:42 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


It's the fuckability rating from "Super Sad True Love Story".
posted by JARED!!! at 9:43 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


I don't really hook up, but I'm still destined for #SnoresLikeAnElephantBeingSodomized

I have woken myself up and been FURIOUS before.
posted by poe at 9:43 AM on November 21, 2013 [13 favorites]


You get the feeling that a lot of the Reddit backlash was out of fear that that wouldn't be the case?

Or hell, just to add to this thought, maybe they were mad that #AInAnatomy was even a tag to begin with
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:46 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I didn't know how to feel about this app until I got to the paragraph talking about how Lulu is making a concerted effort to reach out to sororities. My daughter will soon be leaving for college and she's likely to be assimilated into the sorority system. I LOVE the idea that she might be able to use this app as a way to steer clear of some smarmy frat bro who has a reputation of getting handsy with the ladies.
posted by photoslob at 9:46 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


"First-ever app for girls"

What the everloving fuck?
posted by Squeak Attack at 9:48 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


In my experience, nonsexual mixed-gender cosleeping arrangements are pretty common at science fiction conventions and college debate tournaments (i.e., events where you're trying to cram as many people into hotel rooms for the lowest cost per person).

We were supposed to have gender-segregated rooms at the debate tournaments, but inevitably there would be some hooking up among teammates so instead of the boys room(s) and the girls room(s) we would end up resorting ourselves into the sex room(s) and the sleep room(s).
posted by Jacqueline at 9:48 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Speaking as a guy, Lulu is a super-cool idea that I wish had existed when I was in college and single. I went through a bunch of years as a kid believing that shit about nobody cares about what you look like it's all about personality, and I was super grateful when a girl let me know that attractiveness is a quality guys can in fact possess. (Though in all fairness, my personality back then sucked too.)

Ratings are not a bad thing, and ratings that help people get laid when they're not getting laid is a pretty awesome thing! Lulu seems very fun and non-crappy in how it does things, so I approve of its general mission here.
posted by Rory Marinich at 9:48 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Huh, I translated AinAnatomy as being "this dude knows his way around a lady's anatomy" and not "monster cock rally".
posted by elizardbits at 9:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [25 favorites]


Among Lulu’s 2.5 million reviews . . . the average score is 7.5.

Just like Yelp.
posted by ultraviolet catastrophe at 9:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Etrigan:"I wonder how society would react if I made an app that let men rate women they knew and gossip about how slutty they are,” a Reddit user called JizzCreek complained...

They already have that app, JizzCreek. It's called society.

kmz: It's called the Internet.

Which is not a justification for this idea. Two wrongs, and all that. But it is an interesting starting point for discussion.


Also,
Rustic Etruscan: You get the feeling that a lot of the Reddit backlash was out of fear that that wouldn't be the case?

Hahahahahahahaha, it's funny because Metafilter loves to look down on Redditors! Get it?!
posted by IAmBroom at 9:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


What's the one where men rate women going to be called?
posted by Ironmouth at 9:51 AM on November 21, 2013


Hahahahahahahaha, it's funny because Metafilter loves to look down on Redditors! Get it?!

It's funny because the default subreddits still get shit like this posted to them on a daily basis.
posted by Rory Marinich at 9:51 AM on November 21, 2013 [15 favorites]


Hahahahahahahaha, it's funny because Metafilter loves to look down on Redditors! Get it?!

It's not a joke, it's an acknowledgment of Reddit's sexism.
posted by ultraviolet catastrophe at 9:52 AM on November 21, 2013 [16 favorites]


But it's been around for a while now and seems like most bro-type guys are actually requesting to be rated on it rather than ignored... even when they get a bad review they think 'hey I'm a player...'

Ah testosterone, is there no reality you can not bend your way?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:52 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I have been sitting here trying to figure out what the hell "Ain Anatomy" meant.

Hahahahahahahaha, it's funny because Metafilter loves to look down on Redditors! Get it?!

No the funny part is when you can't distinguish the actual experience of browsing a website with satire of the same. Because if someone typed out JizzCreek's sentiments and signed them "JizzCreek" as a work of fiction satirizing creepy Redditors, readers would complain about the characterization being too on-the-nose and stereotypical to suspend their disbelief.
posted by griphus at 9:52 AM on November 21, 2013 [13 favorites]


What's the one where men rate women going to be called?

Life.
posted by elizardbits at 9:53 AM on November 21, 2013 [29 favorites]


I was going to go with Ulul, but I guess "life" works too.
posted by Rory Marinich at 9:54 AM on November 21, 2013


I have been sitting here trying to figure out what the hell "Ain Anatomy" meant.

I still am
posted by ook at 9:54 AM on November 21, 2013


this sort of thing has been going on for a long time. i know a guy who was rated on a similar webpage 5 or so years ago, to the amusement of everyone who knew him. it's a natural off shoot to online dating and hot or not type sites (which weren't exactly pleasant to the ladies).

and making fun of jizzcreek and menstrual hatred has nothing to do with "hukkahukka mefi hates reddit." those dudes are mockable and their ideas are gross. i say this as someone who spends a bunch of time on (a carefully chosen list of subs on) reddit.
posted by nadawi at 9:54 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I still am

A In Anatomy. Hung like a museum's prize painting.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 9:55 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


Hahahahahahahaha, it's funny because Metafilter loves to look down on Redditors! Get it?!

When you had to be forced to take down areas called "jailbait," "creepshots," or "beatingwomen"; some of your most popular areas are creepy and sexist, if not outright misogynist; and the general tone of the site is only slightly better?
posted by zombieflanders at 9:55 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Which is not a justification for this idea. Two wrongs, and all that. But it is an interesting starting point for discussion.

The reflexive argument of "Oh, but what if [group in power] did this?!?", especially when [group in power] does it all the time, is lazy and frankly stupid. JizzCreek's complaint is functionally identical to "Why isn't there a White History Month?"
posted by Etrigan at 9:57 AM on November 21, 2013 [17 favorites]


Someone had a website like this at my alma mater back in the mid-200s

Hoo boy, those were the good old days! I think, heh, my memories of college are kinda hazy. I like to refer to that phase of my life as my Crisis of the Third Century
posted by Hoopo at 9:57 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


also, only uninformed men think that women would be rating solely big dicks #ainanatomy. much like all men don't prefer big tits and shaved pubes, there's a lot of variety to what people who put penises inside of them prefer.
posted by nadawi at 9:57 AM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


thanks for posting a link to the actual video MartinWisse
i was on my phone and could only find one with a takedown notice.
posted by sio42 at 9:59 AM on November 21, 2013


When you had to be forced to take down areas called ... "beatingwomen" ...

Your comment made me so hopeful for a second but then I checked and found that nope, the /r/beatingwomen, /r/rapingwomen, and /r/killingwomen subreddits are all still there. :(
posted by Jacqueline at 9:59 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


What's the one where men rate women going to be called?

Well, I don't know if there is an app yet, but here are some guidelines that will probably be included.

From the "Real Men Drink Whiskey" site, though apparently written by someone well under any reasonable drinking age.
posted by Cookiebastard at 10:00 AM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?
posted by cjelli at 10:00 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


also, only uninformed men think that women would be rating solely big dicks #ainanatomy.

QFT. My wife (goddess bless her) is extremely turned on by my hands, which she has compared favorably to Michelangelo's David.

I am therefore proud of my hands, which honestly I'd not given a lot of thought to until the love of my life pointed out how much she likes them.
posted by Mooski at 10:01 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I'm trying to make sense of the fact that everybody seems to think that anonymously live-tweeting a public breakup is some unfathomable violation of privacy but publicly ranking the sexual abilities of non-consenting exes is apparently A-OK. It grosses me out if men do it and it grosses me out if women do it.
posted by no regrets, coyote at 10:02 AM on November 21, 2013 [19 favorites]


Hoo boy, those were the good old days! I think, heh, my memories of college are kinda hazy. I like to refer to that phase of my life as my Crisis of the Third Century

decade, surely?
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 10:03 AM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?


Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?
posted by elizardbits at 10:03 AM on November 21, 2013 [57 favorites]


I'm trying to make sense of the fact that everybody seems to think

It would be really interesting to correlate comments across threads by username. You could try it.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:03 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Your comment made me so hopeful for a second but then I checked and found that nope, the /r/beatingwomen, /r/rapingwomen, and /r/killingwomen subreddits are all still there. :(

Seriously!? I thought those were taken down in the Great Feminists Are Tyrants But The Media Is Hounding Us Purge of 2011. Of course, that just supports the argument as to the shittiness of Reddit's owners and the general Reddit community even more.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:04 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?


Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.
posted by The Whelk at 10:05 AM on November 21, 2013 [26 favorites]


I'm kind of interested in logging into Lulu and seeing what the actual site is like, but it's Facebook login only and it looks like they ask for a great deal of personal info. What do you guys think, should I be worried?
posted by One Second Before Awakening at 10:05 AM on November 21, 2013


I'm trying to make sense of the fact that everybody seems to think that anonymously live-tweeting a public breakup is some unfathomable violation of privacy but publicly ranking the sexual abilities of non-consenting exes is apparently A-OK.

I find that I'm a lot happier after I stopped insisting on ideological consistency, particularly across things that are only barely related.
posted by Etrigan at 10:06 AM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.


Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.
posted by griphus at 10:06 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Lovingly but unskillfully retouched by an elderly parishoner.
posted by elizardbits at 10:06 AM on November 21, 2013 [65 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.


Not an accurate representation of Jesus.
posted by Panjandrum at 10:07 AM on November 21, 2013 [42 favorites]


Set aflame in public as a symbol of resistance during the cultural revolution.
posted by griphus at 10:07 AM on November 21, 2013 [16 favorites]


also, only uninformed men think that women would be rating solely big dicks #ainanatomy. much like all men don't prefer big tits and shaved pubes, there's a lot of variety to what people who put penises inside of them prefer.

I.. don't think this hashtag is related to penis size? I read it as "A in [female] anatomy".
posted by cj_ at 10:07 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Oh yeah, also, it's funny cause a lot of Internet men are v. insecure about themselves and don't express that insecurity in healthy ways or try to rise above their insecurity, but no, it's just that "Metafilter" hates "Reddit"
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 10:08 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Well, curiousity got the better of me and I looked at it. (It just asks for facebook login for ladies, no other personal info; not sure about dudes). And I am surprised by all of the people I know on it.

So now I have all these questions. Like, do dudes necessarily know they are on it (seems like no - mine had a number of gay guys, for example)? Does this app get access to pics of everyone who is facebook friends with someone who has installed the app?

But I will also report that of my facebook friends, exactly the ones that I would have expected to have been rated already have been rated.
posted by likeatoaster at 10:08 AM on November 21, 2013


I thought that "A in Anatomy" meant "can find the clitoris, g-spot, and/or a-spot", not "is attractive."

I guess that's the problem with hash tags.

On preview, ditto cj_.
posted by muddgirl at 10:08 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I think this is nifty, with just a touch of superfluous creepitude.

If I were a woman, I'd definitely use this, though likely more as a "ha ha" thing than a real reference. What with Google, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. etc. I can't really dig the "dating without a reference is scary" vibe on the level that this rating site is going to be able to help with.

(Not saying dating without a reference isn't scary, just saying that viewing a potential date's existing profile(s) would likely be just as or more informative).

You usually can get a pretty good idea of someone's mindset by perusing their status updates and tweets, and I don't think it's that uncommon to be friends with someone on FB when you're getting to know them.
posted by Debaser626 at 10:09 AM on November 21, 2013


Burned by your mother to hide evidence of your misdeeds.
posted by Panjandrum at 10:09 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Metafilter: where generalizing negative images about other people is UNACCEPTABLE (unless they're engineers, Republicans, middle-class white people, or ever visit Reddit).
posted by IAmBroom at 10:09 AM on November 21, 2013 [13 favorites]


that's not even how that joke works come on
posted by griphus at 10:10 AM on November 21, 2013 [47 favorites]


Downloaded and was pleased to see that none of my dude Facebook friends are rated on it at all. I did rate the local union organization that only has a personal page on Facebook: #rebel #CallsOnTime #Man'sMan #LadiesFirst #LocalCeleb #LifeOfTheParty
posted by c'mon sea legs at 10:12 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


I find that I'm a lot happier after I stopped insisting on ideological consistency, particularly across things that are only barely related.

Insist? Not at all. Just curious about the general tones of each thread since to me this seems like a much greater invasion of privacy. I'm clearly in the minority.
posted by no regrets, coyote at 10:12 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Metafilter: just put any words here wooo party time
posted by elizardbits at 10:13 AM on November 21, 2013 [39 favorites]


It's awesome how MeFi can turn a discussion about a sexist, privacy-invading site into a discussion about "there are sexist asshat men on the internet".

I guess 50% of people are undeserving of certain kinds of rights because they have penises and there's a history of injustice against people without penises and because a number of present-day dumbasses also have penises and are mean to people without penises.
posted by crayz at 10:14 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I guess 50% of people are undeserving of certain kinds of rights because they have penises and there's a history of injustice against people without penises and because a number of present-day dumbasses also have penises and are mean to people without penises.

"penises" is a pretty funny word
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 10:15 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Great now penises doesn't even look like a word.
posted by The Whelk at 10:15 AM on November 21, 2013 [15 favorites]


MetaFilter: In the name of the most holy and individual Trinity: Be it known to all, and every one whom it may concern, or to whom in any manner it may belong, That for many Years past, Discords and Civil Divisions being stir'd up in the Roman Empire, which increas'd to such a degree, that not only all Germany, but also the neighbouring Kingdoms, and France particularly, have been involv'd in the Disorders of a long and cruel War: And in the first place, between the most Serene and most Puissant Prince and Lord, Ferdinand the Second, of famous Memory, elected Roman Emperor, always August, King of Germany, Hungary, Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Arch-Duke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, Marquiss of Moravia, Duke of Luxemburgh, the Higher and Lower Silesia, of Wirtemburg and Teck, Prince of Suabia, Count of Hapsburg, Tirol, Kyburg and Goritia, Marquiss of the Sacred Roman Empire, Lord of Burgovia, of the Higher and Lower Lusace, of the Marquisate of Slavonia, of Port Naon and Salines, with his Allies and Adherents on one side; and the most Serene, and the most Puissant Prince, Lewis the Thirteenth, most Christian King of France and Navarre, with his Allies and Adherents on the other side.
posted by sandettie light vessel automatic at 10:15 AM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


Metafilter: where generalizing negative images about other people is UNACCEPTABLE (unless they're engineers, Republicans, middle-class white people, or ever visit Reddit).

Dunno where you get engineers or middle-class white people are, considering that probably describes a non-insignificant minority of MeFites, and I don't recall any posts generalizing them at all, let alone negatively.

As for Republicans and Redditors? When it comes to the former, sane Republicans really have been enabling the crazy ones for the last several years. And as to the latter, well, the evidence is right there on the front page and popular subreddits.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:15 AM on November 21, 2013


“Meeting someone out in the world when you’re not in school or don’t work with each other or have mutual friends — you have no idea what you’re getting yourself into.”

Which is far more appealing to me than the alternative. Reading this made me almost glad that I am old, broken, live alone, and no longer have to even consider any of this stuff. As long as the incipient arthritis in my right wrist remains manageable, I'm good.
posted by Decani at 10:16 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


There's a difference between live-tweeting two people undergoing the painful, uncomfortable dissolution of an intimate relationship, and making comments like "this dude sounds like a Ron Jeremy script" to somebody who's looking for a casual-hookup.
posted by Rory Marinich at 10:16 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I guess 50% of people are undeserving of certain kinds of rights

If you don't like being on Lulu as a guy, just email them and they take you off right away.

It's a bit of fun and guys generally like it. It is impossible to describe Lulu as 'sexist'.
posted by colie at 10:16 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I guess 50% of people are undeserving of certain kinds of rights

Yes. That is exactly what this discussion is about. The right, inviolable and codified in the law of the land, of people not to be talked about ever in any way, and in particular in ways such as their interactions with other people. Thank the gods you are here to keep us from straying down that path of oppression.
posted by Etrigan at 10:17 AM on November 21, 2013 [13 favorites]


#FreedomFighter #WhatAboutOurRights
posted by elizardbits at 10:18 AM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


A moment of silence for the spurned #FartMachines of the world.
posted by griphus at 10:19 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Does this app get access to pics of everyone who is facebook friends with someone who has installed the app?

Yes. It has a proprietary system for determining if you are female from examining your Facebook account when you give it permission, and you are also giving it permission when you sign up to upload all your male friends' pics and names to Lulu. It's pretty radical, and the 'women only' aspect is quite game changing...
posted by colie at 10:19 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


50% of people are undeserving of certain kinds of rights because they have penises and there's a history of injustice against people without penises and because a number of present-day dumbasses also have penises and are mean to people without penises.

I'm ok with this. Go to town on my rating knob for Women's Rites.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:20 AM on November 21, 2013


#ConfirmedRedditor
posted by colie at 10:20 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


I guess 50% of people are undeserving of certain kinds of rights because they have penises and there's a history of injustice against people without penises and because a number of present-day dumbasses also have penises and are mean to people without penises.

Yes, being talked about (more likely than not in a good way) on a site that you can remove yourself from, linking to another social networking site that invades your privacy in ways the NSA is envious of, is completely similar to centuries of institutionalized injustice.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:22 AM on November 21, 2013 [18 favorites]


People calling this rude and sexist seem to have reading comprehension difficulty.

"WOMEN OVERWHELMING RATE PEOPLE POSITIVELY ON THIS SITE"
"80% OF RATINGS ARE BY FRIENDS OR STRANGERS ABOUT THEIR CRUSHES"
"CAN'T WRITE EVIL HASHTAGS, RESTRICTED TO CUTESY OR POSITIVE TAGS"

Meanwhile on every other corner of the internet.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:24 AM on November 21, 2013 [15 favorites]


I wasn't allowed to use the app because I haven't stated my gender in my facebook profile. Oh well.
posted by jessamyn at 10:27 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


There's a difference between live-tweeting two people undergoing the painful, uncomfortable dissolution of an intimate relationship, and making comments like "this dude sounds like a Ron Jeremy script" to somebody who's looking for a casual-hookup.

I guess I'm just a lot more shy than everyone else. I'm friends with plenty of people who I've hooked up with and if I found out they'd ranked me on a site like this -- even positively -- I'd find that damn near unforgivable.

(I'm also pissed that certain people in this thread are making it all "what about the menz". The site isn't sexist. It's just gross.)
posted by no regrets, coyote at 10:27 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


"I'm kind of interested in logging into Lulu and seeing what the actual site is like, but it's Facebook login only and it looks like they ask for a great deal of personal info. What do you guys think, should I be worried?"

I logged in and rated my husband just to see what the fuss was about for myself, and then went through the process of writing a second rating (on my cat) to write this comment.

Here's how it works from the female user's standpoint:

1) Search for a man from your Facebook friends list to rate and click on his name.

2) If he already has reviews, you'll see them. If you want to add one, click the "Review him anonymously" link.

3) Select your relationship to him: Crush, Ex, Friend, Hooked Up, Together, Relative

4) Rate him on his sense of humor, first kiss, manners, ambition, sex, commitment, and appearance from a scaled set of text descriptions. For example, appearance can be rated from a low of "the reason we don't go out in public much" to "so perfect I'll overlook anything."

(Something odd: having done two ratings now -- one for my husband and one for my cat -- the actual text of the scaled choices seems to change when you start a new rating? I guess I'll have to try rating my dogs next to verify. [Yes all the pets have their own Facebook accounts.])

5) Select as many hashtags as you want from a pre-written list of ~100 "Best" qualities.

6) Select as many hashtags as you want from a pre-written list of ~75 "Worst" qualities.

7) The site then averages your ratings across categories (with all other ratings left for that man? not sure) to give a final numerical score as well as a text summary. For example, the very fast, minimal (one hashtag each for Best and Worst) for my cat produced a score of 6.3/10 and a text summary of "He might not be an Abercrombie model, but when it comes to commitment, he's a total prince." (Which is actually a disturbingly accurate assessment of my cat!)

So that's what you're missing out on if you don't/can't bother playing with it yourself.
posted by Jacqueline at 10:28 AM on November 21, 2013 [22 favorites]


It may not be sexist, but its at least as rude as the break up tweeting guy from yesterday. If guys could opt in there would be no issue, and they might even have an incentive to if women used this as a filter. But unless its pro actively notifying guys they're being rated and at least giving them an opt out (without them having to know about the site and somehow check themselves), its pretty creepy. Of course, its hardly the only thing on FB that's creepy.
posted by wildcrdj at 10:28 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


"WOMEN OVERWHELMING RATE PEOPLE POSITIVELY ON THIS SITE"
"80% OF RATINGS ARE BY FRIENDS OR STRANGERS ABOUT THEIR CRUSHES"
"CAN'T WRITE EVIL HASHTAGS, RESTRICTED TO CUTESY OR POSITIVE TAGS"


My objection has nothing to do with being afraid of being rated negatively, I don't want to be fucking rated at all like a piece of Chicken Kiev on Yelp or some product on Amazon. I'm a goddamn human being. Why is it so hard to get that objectification sucks for everyone, not just women?
posted by nathancaswell at 10:29 AM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


Who in the fuck is saying that objectification only sucks for women?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:30 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


So that's what you're missing out on if you don't/can't bother playing with it yourself.

The whole purpose of the site is to facilitate those who don't/can't bother playing with it themselves.


...Carry on.
posted by delfin at 10:31 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Here's a tip: if you're sole committment to gender equality is to say, "It wrong when men do X, and its also wrong when women do X", then you're doing it wrong.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:31 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Honestly, back when I was dating I would killed for a site that just said nice about me as being told I was "unfuckably ugly" to my face, in public, was a not uncommon occurrence.
posted by The Whelk at 10:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


Are you saying that's my sole commitment to gender equality? You don't even know me.
posted by nathancaswell at 10:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Select your relationship to him: Crush, Ex, Friend, Hooked Up, Together, Relative

Does it...does it let you continue if you choose that? Or do I just not want to know?
posted by zombieflanders at 10:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


I have heard industry info that there have been several apps submitted to the Apple App Store after Lulu launched this Spring that do the same thing for guys to rate girls, but all have been rejected by Apple. Apart from the sexism/not sexism thing, this is because the guy apps couldn't find a way to emulate/respond to the jokey hashtag system that defuses the tension on Lulu (and obviously required the skills of witty scriptwriters/journalists to create, instead of the ramblings of outraged MBA bros).

Its users have started to use it in different ways as well, with many hashtags cropping up as both positive or negative (e.g. #VideoGamer).

I liked the guy who got fed up with getting the #OwnsCrocs tag all the time and so replaced his profile pic on Lulu (which they encourage guys to do) with a pic of him holding an alligator.
posted by colie at 10:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [13 favorites]


Man, this is quite the turn for an indie web publisher, he thought.
posted by Apropos of Something at 10:34 AM on November 21, 2013


[Folks, it's really your choice if you want to turn this into a "Let's fight the gender wars over and over again" thread or not. Your. Choice.]
posted by jessamyn at 10:34 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


This just doesn't seem at all like objectification to me, for the many reasons stated above that make this system fair and fun and useful. If you're not ok with being evaluated as a person then, idk, that's just how people roll. This isn't public, only other women logged into the app can see it. I guess some guys disagree....doesn't make much sense to me. I stand by my record dammit! [#FellAsleepDrunkOnFloor #WokeUpCrying #GreatPoemTexts]
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:35 AM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.


With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.
posted by octobersurprise at 10:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [16 favorites]


> or ever visit Reddit

I visit reddit plenty and happily generalize the shit out of it. It's so easy! Their rating system conveniently presents to me the posts and comments most indicative of the site culture, and many of these happen to be really, really terrible, in the same ways, over and over again.

I dislike this Lulu thing on principle, based on what little I suddenly know about it via the Times, but think about what this would look like as a system for guys to rate women. And then think about how many different ways that already exists, whether informally or explicitly (heck, Facebook itself started as a way to competitively rate students on attractiveness), and how deliberately vicious it is. And Lulu is primarily positive, with ratings by friends and lovers? Similar presentation, different intents, different power structures being enforced.

That said, it still seems like another incarnation of the "interpersonal taxonomy! permanent records! we are the product!" kick that social media encourages, and which is despicable. But sexism isn't really the main problem here.
posted by postcommunism at 10:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


"Angie, I'll pay you $1000 to rate me on this site as #HungLikeABear, #AnAbsoluteSweetie and #GrabHimWhileYouCan."

I think I saw that movie back in the 1980s.
posted by delfin at 10:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


elizardbita: Huh, I translated AinAnatomy as being "this dude knows his way around a lady's anatomy" and not "monster cock rally".

Monster Cock Rally makes me wish for a NitrousBurningFunnyWang tag.
posted by dr_dank at 10:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


So I have to spam 25 people in order to get my "well I was a living as man for like, ever, now I WTF who knows I guess I am a woman, o hell" Lulu for Dudes Score?
posted by Annika Cicada at 10:36 AM on November 21, 2013


Meanwhile on every other corner of the internet.

No. There seem to be a lot of people who hang out in really shitty areas and then become convinced "This Is How The World Is". That’s not how it works. There are shitty people, in real life and on the internet. Quit hanging out with them.
posted by bongo_x at 10:37 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


5) Select as many hashtags as you want from a pre-written list of ~100 "Best" qualities.

6) Select as many hashtags as you want from a pre-written list of ~75 "Worst" qualities.


Any chance you/somebody would copy/paste all the possible tags? Do they still offer #BigFeet?
posted by 0 at 10:37 AM on November 21, 2013


Sad that Jessamyn can't use it to rate all of the Mefites she is friends with.

Cortex, Friend, 8/10, #GreatUkes #CrescentFresh #TooManyBlogs
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Wait can we just add this to the Mefi contact system? Pretty please?
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


The most valuable one for me which does not exist would be #CriedUnashamedManlyTearsAtGladiator
posted by elizardbits at 10:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

A little high and just out of reach?
posted by bongo_x at 10:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.


Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.
posted by cjelli at 10:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [14 favorites]


"You are also giving it permission when you sign up to upload all your male friends' pics and names to Lulu."

That's a little sketchy, right there.

The thing is, if you're a guy, you can't see if you're on the site or delete yourself without downloading the app and/or giving them access to your FB profile including:

your public profile, friend list, email address, relationships, birthday, education history, hometown, current city and photos and your friends' relationships, birthdays, education histories, hometowns and current cities.

If I cared, I'd be hypothetically bothered, but that's the wonderful thing about being happily married.

As a guy, my words to the dudes who are bothered by this are, "Are you really bothered by this? Or is it more a "Hey! this is vaguely unsettling, but meh. HOWEVER, if we did this we'd be in deep shit! THIS IS BULLSHIT!" I only ask, because that was my initial reaction. Honestly, chalk this up as girls can do vaguely smarmy things too (with or without the best of intentions)...

The most difficult thing about life is not the usual suspects: Death, loss, danger, or sickness. It is and always will be other people.
posted by Debaser626 at 10:39 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


Do they provide/sell info on women present on the site and review lists by user? Definitely think you'd get more useful dating info / crazy avoidance that way, seeing what someone says about others.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 10:40 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.


Painted life-size by Chuck Close.
posted by griphus at 10:41 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


The article doesn't say if there are tags for sexually coercive, physically or emotionally abusive or gaslighting, which are the kinds of things that the unofficial girl grapevine tends to warn against for people in the know.
posted by NoraReed at 10:41 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


How much info does the app get from Facebook about the guys, rather then just the uploader?
posted by Solomon at 10:42 AM on November 21, 2013



Monster Cock Rally makes me wish for a NitrousBurningFunnyWang tag.

SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY GET READY FOR MASTERS OF MONSTER COCK RALLY - NOW WITH TRUCKZILLA.
posted by The Whelk at 10:43 AM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


Also, Reddit mostly sees the internet as a phone, Metafilter mostly sees the internet as a magazine. Seems to be the root of a lot of conflict.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 10:45 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


bongo_x -- I'm not sure I came across as intended there--I was trying to point out that on many places on the internet (and in the bar and the office and on the radio and so on) men are rating women merely by their looks. Just for contrast to this relatively inoffensive app thing. Are you saying this isn't happening? That's odd. I know some guys are respectful and never objectify women, but I'd say they are the exception rather than the rule.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:45 AM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.


Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

If I were a guy I'd be really irate about being added whether or not it was good feedback. The app is invasive, and although I can understand and share the glee about the batteries of vast objectification turning on the other gender, I'm uncomfortable about the whole two wrongs making a lol thing.
posted by winna at 10:46 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


i didn't realize it was not ain anatomy until someone up thread actually uses the phrase.

i was wondering if ain was sort of deformity or a thing from anime or what.

#doesnothashtagwell
posted by sio42 at 10:46 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


has a law degree from the London School of Economics
an actress and writer
a former member of the Jamaica Fed Cup tennis team
attended Florida International University on a tennis scholarship
family helped start the Calgary Stampede, the summer rodeo
former assistant to the literary agent Amanda Urban, known as Binky
the nephew of Sir Richard Branson, the Virgin Group founder


I'm pretty sure these are just the character breakdowns from a forthcoming Wes Anderson movie.

I found out a former girlfriend had a little black book once, with ratings. I asked her to share her entry on me. I got high marks, but lost points for "cruelty."

I actually think she was too kind. I was in my early 20s, and would have docked myself points for:

-- Mansplaining
-- Dominating conversations
-- A lack of humility
-- No job
-- Parent issues
-- No drivers license
-- Not as funny as he thinks he is
-- Fliberygibbet

Come to think of it, the last one sums up the earlier ones, but for cruelty, which was often unconscious but still unforgivable, and is the thing from the list that I have worked hardest to overcome.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 10:47 AM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


ain was sort of deformity or a thing from anime or what.

same thing.
posted by The Whelk at 10:47 AM on November 21, 2013


Great now penises doesn't even look like a word.

It's "Penises don't even look like words."
posted by entropone at 10:48 AM on November 21, 2013


I wonder what Ain's hashtags would read like...

#LOVEBENDER
posted by Annika Cicada at 10:49 AM on November 21, 2013


Maybe yours doesn't.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 10:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


aang. damnit.
posted by Annika Cicada at 10:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


How much info does the app get from Facebook about the guys, rather then just the uploader?

Well, a lot of people come up with not that much info besides name and profile picture, but for some people it will show relationship status, location, college, or age. (Probably depends on facebook privacy settings?) And then that becomes part of Lulu's database of searchable guys, as far as I can tell.
posted by likeatoaster at 10:50 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm uncomfortable about the whole two wrongs making a lol thing.

But Lulu doesn't seem to have many tags at all that are about defects in physical appearance, which is basically what the guys-rating-girls thing ends up being about. The hashtags are mostly about the things they did when they went on the date. It's a review of their dating approach, not a judgment on their bodies or their faces.
posted by colie at 10:50 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!


Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.
posted by Now there are two. There are two _______. at 10:50 AM on November 21, 2013 [19 favorites]


Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!


Hard to photograph because other viewers keep getting in the way.
posted by cjelli at 10:50 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Fliberygibbet

#WillOTheWisp
#Clown
posted by elizardbits at 10:51 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Dear AskMe: I have a question that's been bothering me for some time, so I turn to you. How do you solve a problem like Maria?
posted by Lutoslawski at 10:52 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


#NoMoonbeamsInHand
posted by elizardbits at 10:53 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


#HasConfidenceInConfidenceAlone
posted by The Whelk at 10:54 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.


Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.
posted by The Whelk at 10:55 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


I've been trying to find something intelligent to say about this whole situation, but at the end of the day all I could do was latch onto the first musical theatre reference I came upon. Please rate accordingly.
posted by Lutoslawski at 10:55 AM on November 21, 2013


This reminds me of a more grownup version of those things the girls in grade school used to call "slam books", where they would rate people out of 10 and pass it around with comments about the boys in the class. Those were pretty shitty things. The girls in my class would also pass notes to the popular boys asking the boys to rate them out of 10, which I guess was a weird way of seeing if the boys liked them. I wouldn't want to be on this thing. But I'm old now so it probably isn't an issue.
posted by Hoopo at 10:56 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


OK, I've checked their math and I noticed a few issues with their scoring equation that deviate from how it was described in the FPP's linked artcle:

1) I'm tentatively* going to say that the "Best" and "Worst" traits hashtags appear to have nothing to do with the final score. (*I need to rate a few more male pets to test this theory.) So it's not based on the hashtags as the article says.

2) Instead, the final score appears to be a simple average of the numerical values of the scaled responses to the initial seven questions about sense of humor, first kiss, manners, ambition, sex, commitment, and appearances. IMO, a weighted average would be more useful because how many people place equal importance on the first kiss vs. their overall sexual experiences with a person?

3) The lowest numerical value for the scaled responses that go into the final score is 4.0. I know this because I rated my cat at the lowest possible appearance choice (he was shot in the face as a kitten and thus is missing most of his jaw) but he still got a 4.0 on appearance when calculating his final score.

So when you read their claim about most reviews being "positive," keep in mind that 4.0 is the floor (the article's statement that scores range from 1 to 10 is incorrect). To put that in perspective, if you changed the numerical values so that the lowest scaled response was worth 0% and the highest scaled response was worth 100%, the example of the 6.9 score in the article would actually only be worth 48.33%.

Basically, the scores are a) not nearly as refined as the article's description tries to make them seem and b) rigged to look better on a 10-point scale.
posted by Jacqueline at 10:57 AM on November 21, 2013 [26 favorites]


> This reminds me of a more grownup version of those things the girls in grade school used to call "slam books", where they would rate people out of 10 and pass it around with comments about the boys in the class.

Looks more like a dating and recommendation site for people who high but not too high socially, really. Might be why it's not really bothering me that much.
posted by postcommunism at 10:57 AM on November 21, 2013


I.. don't think this hashtag is related to penis size? I read it as "A in [female] anatomy".

yeah, i should have worded that better. i was cooking chinese black bean stir fry while trying to make my point. what i meant was, even if the tag was about dick size (which i agree that it's more about finding the clit, etc), it wouldn't be about what uninformed guys thought it was about. very few women or men who sleep with men have a preference of "bigger is always better, no matter the shape or composition, or ability to wield it."
posted by nadawi at 10:57 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.


Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.
posted by sandettie light vessel automatic at 10:58 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


> I wouldn't want to be on this thing. But I'm old now so it probably isn't an issue.

That's my usual reaction to pretty much any new internet-related development.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:58 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


Won't some #male lawyer sue for defamation?
posted by Cranberry at 11:00 AM on November 21, 2013


If guys could opt in there would be no issue

Men can opt-out, though, which I just did. Yes, it requires a Facebook login, but Lulu already has info about me from Facebook, which it gathered when whoever of my women friends joined the app.

I actually really don't care if my women friends discuss me, but as a general principle, I like to discourage apps/sites that harvest data about me without my consent, which is what Lulu does.

ALSO: these guys (http://www.lulu.com) were called "Lulu" first. Wonder why there hasn't been a cease-and-desist?
posted by eustacescrubb at 11:02 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


How? There won't be a case: these are private messages.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:02 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


The scoring system is definitely designed to come out high with the result that practically any guy will get a 7 or 8 and many of those, on finding out their score, then go on Twitter to share the good news with an invitation to 'get at me ladies'.

The app is actually a very clever dating game, not a tool or social media.
posted by colie at 11:02 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


...no matter the shape or composition, or ability to wield it.

Okay I'm going to need some clarification on that one.

Or at least someone come up with the Mohs scale of mineral hardness joke I can't seem to.
posted by griphus at 11:03 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


What the hell is with that stupid little quiz you get before you rate a dude? Fucking irritating. Get me to the hashtags, dickweed.

Amused by the bad ones though. And sort of depressed that VideoGamer and Trekkie are on that list but the only one that actually works well as a warning label is "CampusCreeper".

Wonder why there hasn't been a cease-and-desist?

Probably for the same reason that the self-publishing site hasn't been sued by the international market chain: there are lots of companies with the same name and there isn't a problem unless what they do actually overlaps. It's why Apple Computers only got in trouble with Apple Records once they started selling music.
posted by NoraReed at 11:05 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


"Any chance you/somebody would copy/paste all the possible tags? Do they still offer #BigFeet?"

They don't allow text selection or I would have done that already. I suppose I could type up the list if people really want?

Yes, IIRC there was a #BigFeet tag.
posted by Jacqueline at 11:06 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Opt-in and opt-out are very different principles.
posted by no regrets, coyote at 11:06 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I suppose I could type up the list if people really want?

Print Screen + Imgur.
posted by griphus at 11:07 AM on November 21, 2013


"Do they provide/sell info on women present on the site and review lists by user?"

Apparently not. When I submitted my reviews it claimed that they were anonymous and now looking at the profiles I reviewed I see no indication that it was me who reviewed them.
posted by Jacqueline at 11:07 AM on November 21, 2013


It would be just as crepy if it were about women. The commoditization of people is not a thing I enjoy.
posted by theora55 at 11:08 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]



Yes, IIRC there was a #BigFeet tag.

Man I can never find vintage shoes in size 12 1/5. #BigShoeProblems #Waitwhat?
posted by The Whelk at 11:08 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.


Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 11:12 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


well i just spent 10ish minutes reading a variety of subreddits responding to lulu. it took about 5 comments before i got to suggestions of rating exes "hotdog in a hallway" and "psychotic bitch."
posted by nadawi at 11:13 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Oh, hooray, just in time for my sudden and unexpected re-entry into the dating world. I think I'm going to go build a 10' x 12' shack in the woods and live out the rest of my days there growing a righteous beard and writing angry manifestos.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:15 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


What happens if you tell facebook you're the wrong gender?
posted by jeffburdges at 11:15 AM on November 21, 2013


You win.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 11:16 AM on November 21, 2013


"How much info does the app get from Facebook about the guys, rather then just the uploader?"

From what I can see, it displays each man's name, profile pic, age, marital/relationship status, and college network (if any). However, I think they are only using information the men have made publicly available on Facebook -- as I click around on the listings for people I am Facebook friends with, I am noticing that for some of them there is less information on Lulu than I can see for them on Facebook.

So it might not be copying any friends-only information, just presenting their own added information (if they have any) for the men on your friends list? Not sure.
posted by Jacqueline at 11:16 AM on November 21, 2013


What, Facebook didn't take a DNA sample and have you submit doctor's records when you signed up?
posted by muddgirl at 11:17 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


When I try to log into the app it says "Dude, you're a DUDE. You're about to get discovered by more than one million girls." and there's a button for me to click that says "Get me laid!" I'd like to see the app but I don't want to click that button.

Gentlemen, apps don't get you laid. You get you laid.
posted by carsonb at 11:18 AM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


If you logged in out of curiosity, and now would like to get rid of your friends names and pictures, go to "Settings" and at the very bottom in greyed-out type there's a link to deactivate your account. According to their privacy policy, this also deletes all information that was collected when you signed in (with the exception that the company may keep an archived copy). Just in case you're as weird about your privacy as I am and felt like an asshole for unknowingly uploading some of your friends' information.
posted by jennaratrix at 11:19 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


the guys at r/mensrights are patting themselves on the back for being oh so smart to foil the girls only plan by switching their facebook gender, but they warned you to make gender a private field on facebook first because you wouldn't want anyone to think you were an icky girl even for 2 minutes.
posted by nadawi at 11:20 AM on November 21, 2013 [20 favorites]


by the international market chain

#bestdragnameever
posted by octobersurprise at 11:20 AM on November 21, 2013


the guys at r/mensrights are patting themselves on the back for being oh so smart to foil the girls only plan by switching their facebook gender

That doesn't work. It seems to examine your FB connections and history to assess your femaleness.
posted by colie at 11:21 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


So would a guy who received uniformly bad reviews be a

{sunglasses}

LULULEMON
posted by en forme de poire at 11:24 AM on November 21, 2013 [34 favorites]


When I try to log into the app it says "Dude, you're a DUDE. You're about to get discovered by more than one million girls." and there's a button for me to click that says "Get me laid!"

Wait no it doesn't. Does it really? Ick.
posted by sweetkid at 11:26 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Yeah the whole thing is pretty Ick.
posted by carsonb at 11:29 AM on November 21, 2013


But I'm srsly this |-| close to making a post on FB asking all my cool friends to dickmeasure me.
posted by carsonb at 11:30 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Dude, you're a DUDE.

That does not sound very empowering to women, for me. Doesn't that just continue to hold up all the "high five menz!" crap we love to hate?

Granted I have not tried out this app.
posted by sweetkid at 11:30 AM on November 21, 2013


Someone on Twitter has pointed out that they should have called this app 'Guygle'.
posted by colie at 11:31 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Oh hey when I print to file I'm able to copy the questionnaire text.

Here you go:
Relationship
How do you know him? Remember, you're 100% anonymous.
* Crush
* Ex
* Friend
* Hooked Up
* Together
* Relative

Humor
When he makes jokes, I...
* remember OKCupid is just a click away
* laugh to make him feel better
* congratulate myself on finding a funny guy
* congratulate myself on finding a funny & sweet guy
* feel proud to be his woman

First Kiss
The first kiss gave me...
* nightmares
* second thoughts
* goosebumps
* a lady boner
* a mouth-gasm

Manners
He thinks manners are...
* for tools
* for someone else
* for first dates
* for real men
* forever

Ambition
By 25, his resume will include...
* some made-up internships and a lemonade stand
* some actual internships
* a decent job
* a Vice President title
* selling his start-up for $1billion

Sex
All I can think is…
* I don't think about it; makes me too sad
* is today laundry day?
* this beats working out
* this beats everything
* do me again or I will hurt you

Commitment
At parties, he acts like we're...
* strangers
* friends
* dating
* together
* madly in love

Appearance
His look are...
* the reason we don't go out in public much
* not why I love him… obvi
* boy-next-door adorbs
* mine, all mine!
* so perfect I'll overlook anything

Best
Pick as many hashtags as you want!
#LooksHotAllTheTime
#BabyBlues
#PlaysHouse
#LoverNotAFighter
#SmellsAmazeballs
#CleanBathroom
#CuddlesAfter
#HasADog
#GrillMaster
#SweetThreads
#CleansUpGood
#CaptainFun
#Movember
#Boy'sGotGame
#SleepsInTheWetSpot
#SixPack
#DudeCanCook
#SilverFox
#KinkyInTheRightWays
#FinallySingle
#BedroomEyes
#MyFriendsAreJealous
#OneWomanMan
#LadiesFirst
#Dimples
#SelfMadeMan
#LocalCeleb
#LifeOfTheParty
#Trustworthy
#Giving...
#CharmedMyPantsOff
#WorkEthic
#LovesHisFamily
#WatchesSunsets
#DoesHisOwnLaundry
#4.0GPA
#GrowsHisOwnVegetables
#SweetToMom
#ChristianGrey
#Adventurous...
#WantsBebes
#GlobeTrotter
#GreatDriver
#UnchartedTerritory
#Rebel
#KingOfDowntown
#Man'sMan
#NerdyButILikeIt
#LovesBabies
#DoesDishes
#Mysterious
#OpensDoors
#ThreeDayStubble
#ManInUniform
#PleaseF**kMeILoveYou
#CalmAndCollected
#TallDarkAndHandsome
#StrongHands
#ForeignFox
#CanBuildFires
#BelievesInLove
#GreatHair
#FlowersJustBecause
#Experienced...
#SkinLikeButta
#HotCar
#HopelessRomantic
#CanTalkToMyDad
#AInAnatomy
#HoldsHisLiquor
#AmazingCuddles
#Big.Feet.
#MakesTheBed
#HeInventedSex
#TeddyBear
#EnergizerBunny
#MothersLoveHim
#Manscaped
#PerfectionSquared
#PantyDropper
#DirtyTalkPro
#MakesMeLaugh
#WritesLoveSongs
#DancesLikeMJ
#HotFriends
#EpicSmile
#KissableLips
#GlassHalfFull
#GreatListener
#RemembersBirthdays
#WillActSilly
#WillSeeRomComs
#SnuggleMachine
#WillHelpYouMove
#CallsOnTime
#SexMoves
#AlwaysHappy
#SexualPanther
#AlwaysPays
#PerfectGrammar
#MrDarcy
#Unicorn
#NotADick
#WillCarryYourLuggage
#StrongJaw
#OneOfTheGoodOnes
#TrueFriend
#HandyMan
#RespectsWomen
#NoComment

Worst
Pick as many hashtags as you want!
#Stage5Clinger
#Doesn'tPlayNiceWithMyFriends
#WaitingTillMarriage
#LongNails
#HygenicallyChallenged
#LivesInAPigpen
#SketchyCallLog
#PerfectForMySister
#ThatGuy
#World'sWorstMassages
#LiarLiarPantsOnFire
#OnlyWearsFratTanks
#420
#NoGoals
#GlassHalfEmpty
#Can'tBuildIkeaFurniture
#LoserFriends
#ObsessedWithHisMom
#JekyllAndHyde
#AlmostTooPerfect
#AirGuitarist
#MeanToMyDog
#ManChild
#BlockHisNumber
#StillLovesHisEx
#ForgotHisWallet
#HitItAndQuitIt
#WorkInProgress
#PornEducated
#FastFoodDiet
#Boring
#CrayCray
#TribalTat
#AddictedToMirrors
#NeverSleepsOver
#StripClubVIP
#WearsEdHardy
#SwearsLikeASailor
#NoStyle
#50ShadesOfF**kedUp
#SelfAbsorbed
#Meh
#GetsInFights
#EDMGroupie
#OwnsCrocs
#OneTrackMind
#NothingBadAboutHim
#BitchyExes
#GoneByMorning
#Doesn'tKnowIExist
#RudeToWaiters
#TotalF**kingDickhead
#HeLovesMeNot
#ADD
#NotTheSharpestKnife
#FartMachine
#FriendZone
#NoChemistry
#TrustFundBaby
#Trekkie
#TemperTantrums
#NeverAsksQuestions
#CantTakeAHint
#DeathBreath
#NoEdge
#BurnsCornflakes
#TooCoolForSchool
#CampusCreeper
#SmokesLikeAChimney
#Mama'sBoy
#VideoGamer
#QuestionableSearchHistory
#DrinksTheHaterade
#JustFriends
#BestFriendsWithMyEx
#NeverRemembersMe
#WanderingEye
#PlaysDidgeridoo
#CheaperThanABigMac
#ProcreatedThenEvaporated
#Germaphobic
#HotNCold
#ShouldComeWithAWarning
#F**kedMeAndChuckedMe
#NoComment
posted by Jacqueline at 11:31 AM on November 21, 2013 [24 favorites]


Huh, when I logged in it didn't say anything about "Get me laid!" It just put me through to my own profile on luludude.com, where I could rate myself and tag things that were "turn-ons" and "turn-offs" in women. Didn't seem to notice I was gay, but maybe in 2.0 there'll be a "sassy gay friend" option where all of the hashtags are #GURRRLLLLL #NOGURL
posted by en forme de poire at 11:33 AM on November 21, 2013 [17 favorites]


wait why is #420 a BAD tag?
posted by The Whelk at 11:34 AM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


Someone on Twitter has pointed out that they should have called this app 'Guygle'.

My understanding is that it can be difficult to secure funding for a dating app that sounds like a death-rattle.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 11:34 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


#LongNails should be complemented by #DirtyNailsAtADeskJob
posted by elizardbits at 11:34 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


en forme, let us snap our fingers in a z-formation and know things that are helpful to straights.
posted by The Whelk at 11:35 AM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


I must agree that there's some serious double standards at work here. The "do me again or I will hurt you" response under "Sex" is supposed to be that category's highest rating but the phrasing would be disturbingly rapey if used by a man. :(
posted by Jacqueline at 11:35 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


man my own sense of self is so fragile that I'm already somehow convinced I have all the worst tag qualities. (SAD CHARLIE BROWN MUSIC)
posted by The Whelk at 11:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Your hair looks amazing! I can't believe you were going to get it wet.
posted by en forme de poire at 11:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


> That does not sound very empowering to women, for me. Doesn't that just continue to hold up all the "high five menz!" crap we love to hate?

Kind of fits what you'd expect from the Times profile though:
Ms. Schwartz, 35, is Lulu’s editorial director. She said she drew from Cosmopolitan and Glamour magazines to come up with the app’s supportive voice.

“There’s nothing I can do about it except be the best person I can be,” he said, adding: “It inspires guys to be good and treat girls the way they should be treated. Like angels.”

Ms. Chong has the grand hope that Lulu will accomplish what generations of women have not been able to do: change the opposite sex.
Not exactly #LesbianSepratists or even boring mainstream progressives.
posted by postcommunism at 11:36 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Anyways, apparently the ladies rated the men nicely, mostly. So now folks will accept this. We'll therefore soon have one for med to rate women too, well obviously nothing like this could remain unidirectional. Any thought on hashtags for men rating women?
posted by jeffburdges at 11:37 AM on November 21, 2013


Diary of the Gender Wars
Day 1,232

During third watch, our camp was discovered. We had gone through training, physical and psychological, but nothing can prepare you for it. I heard Pete, the farm kid from Arkansas on watch that night shout to another boy out in the distance: "Dude, you're a DUDE. You're about to get discovered by more than one million girls."

I don't know what led them here. Perhaps we let the campfire linger too long. Perhaps their mystic association with the moon told them where to find us. All we have is speculation; no one has actually spoken to a girl in generations now. Some suspect we may not share a language anymore and I wouldn't be surprised.

The girls came. Girls with their teeth bared and claws sharpened. Their thoraxes covered in tribal scars. First the harbinger came, then the infantry and finally we were outnumbered. Many men died that day, many more were taken prisoner to the breeding farms or to build their hive-colonies under the orders of the Queen Girl. I was able to escape and take a few dudes with me.

Today we rest. Our numbers are scattered and we are without food or water. The girls took our posessions, but they will never take our spirit.

The war rages on.
posted by griphus at 11:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [53 favorites]


wait, I'm married I don't have to think about this shit anymore.

This people is why you get married at 25.

This exactly.
posted by The Whelk at 11:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


#LongDirtyNails is also applicable to ladies rating ladies.
posted by elizardbits at 11:38 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


#lulusbackintown.
posted by octobersurprise at 11:39 AM on November 21, 2013


I'd love to see a version of this app for men who want to rate women, or better yet for anyone to rate anyone.

I also don't understand why they block men from seeing ratings. What harm could come of letting that happen? I do understand the anonymous ratings, though. Total chilling effect.

I think if I could rate my exes I'd rate most of them quite well. And I'm on the site, I've been rated 3 times, and having cheated by getting one of my exes to show me my page, I'm not upset with how I've been rated.

Also, if you have a horrendous break-up with someone who's emotionally abusive, or otherwise horrendous, don't you usually end up unfriending or blocking them on Facebook anyway? You can't rate someone you aren't friends with, and that probably cuts back on revenge-ratings anyway.

My understanding is that initially, men could not request to be removed from the database. That seems to have been fixed, as well it should've been.

I'd love it if OKcupid bought this app, incorporated it into their site, and gender-equalized it. I'd love it even more if we say OKcupid and Lulu and Match acknowledge that there are people outside of the gender binary, and that trans and cis status should be able to be declared.

Fundamentally, nothing wrong with this other than the fact that it's only available for one gender, one sexual orientation, and one cis/trans status.

I realize there may be some women out there who thing that women who date men need this more than any other gender does, and I'm sure there are some RadFems who might think men don't need something like this. They're wrong, and I don't really care about why they think I'm wrong about them being wrong.

There's a market and a desire for this app to be expanded to include all humans, and I hope someone cashes in on this soon.
posted by MeanwhileBackAtTheRanch at 11:39 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


> There's a market and a desire for this app to be expanded to include all humans, and I hope someone cashes in on this soon.

I'm sure someone will invent a gender-neutral network where you earn karma by linking in to rate your neighbor's social clout. It's a small world, after all.

It'll be dystopialicious.
posted by postcommunism at 11:43 AM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Yeah, that's the basic premise of Down and Out In The Magic Kingdom, a book which has some really interesting conceptual stuff a ton of fun Disney-related crap and absolutely no likable and interesting characters. So you got the good part.
posted by NoraReed at 11:44 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Darn it, bongo_x, you stole mine!
posted by eviemath at 11:46 AM on November 21, 2013


I actually think this is horrible, but super enlightening in terms of the kind of power most men must feel over women when they do evil slanderous shit to them online.

Like when I broke up with my first boyfriend and he decided to call me "slutty" on the internet (I know, a real pioneer), this is why he felt it was OK. Because other people like him would listen. So I do kind of feel a sick power now. Even though women are being so nice on it. (Because what do you know, slandering someone gratuitously on the internet is actually kind of sociopathic!)
posted by stoneandstar at 11:47 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


"It inspires guys to be good and treat girls the way they should be treated. Like angels.”

ugh no. no, do not want.
posted by sweetkid at 11:48 AM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.


A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation.
posted by Think_Long at 11:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [14 favorites]


There's a market and a desire for this app to be expanded to include all humans, and I hope someone cashes in on this soon.

I'm sure there are some RadFems who might think men don't need something like this



It's not that they don't need it, it's just that they would instantly make it a force for vicious internet harassment, as they have done with the rest of the internet, most likely.
posted by stoneandstar at 11:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [19 favorites]


I think I'm going to go build a 10' x 12' shack in the woods and live out the rest of my days there growing a righteous beard and writing angry manifestos.

this is my plan except

no beard and my shack is an apartment but

I have a barn owl that lives in the tree near my building so it counts
posted by winna at 11:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


It'll be dystopialicious.

I dunno, I hear all sorts of complaints about OKcupid being a dystopian shitshow, but it's been great for me, particularly as a busy, non-monogamous person.

The dystopia isn't in the tech that brings people together or gives us more information about each other. The dystopia is in the people themselves. I'm a lot more interested, for instance, in figuring out how to educate boys to not be horrendous when they grow up and get on OKcupid than I am in trying to stunt or regulate or delegitimize a format like OKcupid.

When tech shows us the darker parts of humanity, it's an opportunity to fix those parts of us.
posted by MeanwhileBackAtTheRanch at 11:49 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Fundamentally, nothing wrong with this other than the fact that it's only available for one gender, one sexual orientation, and one cis/trans status.

except lulu is hardly the only people to have ever done this. this isn't a new concept - but acting like it is gets page views and generates conversations, i guess. i will say that the parallels to facemash are pretty interesting, especially since lulu uses facebook.
posted by nadawi at 11:50 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Like angels

Like genderless all-powerful beings with a command of both space and time who may at any moment smite you and/or abandon you for Dean Winchester?

yes

good
posted by elizardbits at 11:51 AM on November 21, 2013 [34 favorites]


"You can't rate someone you aren't friends with, and that probably cuts back on revenge-ratings anyway."

Actually, it appears that you can rate anyone in your college network(s) in addition to people on your Facebook friends list.

That plus the Ambition question referencing where he'll be when he's 25 strongly suggests to me that this is mostly meant to be a college hookups reference checker sort of thing.
posted by Jacqueline at 11:51 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


"It inspires guys to be good and treat girls the way they should be treated. Like angels.”

treated like a floating orb of many eyes and faces announcing the will of the Lord?
posted by The Whelk at 11:51 AM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


wait why is #420 a BAD tag?

yeah that is total bullshit, when we met my wife and her girlfriends were much, much heavier into that than I was and it was kind of a thing we did together when we were dating. I mean its not inconceivable some people look at this as a plus, why's it gotta be in BEST or WORST categories?
posted by Hoopo at 11:52 AM on November 21, 2013


"It inspires guys to be good and treat girls the way they should be treated. Like angels.”

Slaying firstborn children unless appeased by blood splashed on the door?
posted by winna at 11:53 AM on November 21, 2013 [17 favorites]


I couldn't resist, so I logged in. A few of my male friends have been rated, and all are glowing reviews by platonic female friends. Reminds me why I associate with these people :)
posted by AbbyNormal at 11:54 AM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


"It inspires guys to be good and treat girls the way they should be treated. Like angels.”

Believed to exist by nearly 8 in 10 Americans.
posted by griphus at 11:55 AM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


"It inspires guys to be good and treat girls the way they should be treated. Like angels.”

Hanging out with Old Woman Josie?
posted by NoraReed at 11:55 AM on November 21, 2013 [17 favorites]


smite you and/or abandon you for Dean Winchester?

tbh I'm always like one bad day from this at all times anyway.
posted by The Whelk at 11:56 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation.
"

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 11:59 AM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


Women: We're more like architecture than organism, like huge structures composed of intelligence and feeling.

Treat us as such by, I don't know, teaching us how to repair all those fucking holes you ripped in the universe with that damnable knife.
posted by NoraReed at 11:59 AM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Man it's hell making women ADA and OSHA compliant.
posted by The Whelk at 12:00 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Metafilter: we're more like architecture than organism, like huge structures composed of intelligence and feeling.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 12:01 PM on November 21, 2013


It's not that they don't need it, it's just that they would instantly make it a force for vicious internet harassment, as they have done with the rest of the internet, most likely.

That's something women are completely capable of too. I have a female ex who used social media against me in totally reprehensible ways. (And I went out of my way to ask a lot of women about her behavior to make sure I was right that it was out of line.)

But fundamentally, that's why a fair version of this app would do the following:

1. Let anybody opt out (already implemented)
2. Let anybody see their reviews.
3. Let anybody participating know when they've got a new review.
4. Automatically delete reviews written about you by someone if and when you unfriend them on Facebook.

The only problem this would leave would be if a person wanted to stay on Lulu, and they got a harassing review from someone who was still their Facebook friend, but they didn't know which facebook friend would do that too them. That seems like a very rare circumstance, and even rarer if you are the sort of person who is smart enough to only be Facebook friends with people who fit between your Dunbar's number, rather than the sort of person who "friends" every acquaintance you ever make.
posted by MeanwhileBackAtTheRanch at 12:03 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Me: Metafilter: where generalizing negative images about other people is UNACCEPTABLE (unless they're engineers, Republicans, middle-class white people, or ever visit Reddit).

zombieflanders: Dunno where you get engineers or middle-class white people are, considering that probably describes a non-insignificant minority of MeFites, and I don't recall any posts generalizing them at all, let alone negatively.

Past Metafilter history you've missed. Doesn't really matter.

As for Republicans and Redditors? When it comes to the former, sane Republicans really have been enabling the crazy ones for the last several years. And as to the latter, well, the evidence is right there on the front page and popular subreddits.

OK, I'll give you the Republicans one; I'm guilty of stereotyping them en masse as well. But... let me get this straight: because there "is evidence right there on the front page and popular subreddits" (NONE of which ever appear on any Redditor's page unless they intentionally choose to have them) is as irrelevant as "there's evidence on the front page of the paper that blacks commit crimes". Some blacks. Some redditors.

Blaming Reddit.com Incorporated for allowing things you don't like is one thing. Blaming people who use Reddit.com for perfectly benign purposes, even though there exists asshats on some portion of it they never see, is bigoted and wrong.
posted by IAmBroom at 12:05 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.


Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration
posted by AbbyNormal at 12:06 PM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


eye rolling at the popular idea of a website (that some of us,while eye rolling, have even said we frequent) is not bigotry.
posted by nadawi at 12:12 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


As with gender, sexuality, etc., your race is not a choice. Bringing up racial prejudice in a conversation about "a person on the internets said a bad thing about reddit so therefore this is bigotry" is bad and wrong. No one has ever been murdered for having been born a reddit user.
posted by elizardbits at 12:13 PM on November 21, 2013 [27 favorites]


As with gender, sexuality, etc., your race is not a choice. Bringing up racial prejudice in a conversation about "a person on the internets said a bad thing about reddit so therefore this is bigotry" is bad and wrong. No one has ever been murdered for having been born a reddit user.

Seriously.
posted by jessamyn at 12:14 PM on November 21, 2013 [16 favorites]


That's something women are completely capable of too.

Yeah, but their doing so doesn't harness a culture of victim-blaming and apologizing for abusers. Men have done this all over the internet, from the MRA site that lists feminists for attacking to revenge porn. It's possible for women to do this-- and they do-- but they have less resources and less cultural encouragement to do so because female-on-male abuse isn't an institutionalized part of our society.
posted by NoraReed at 12:16 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


But... let me get this straight: because there "is evidence right there on the front page and popular subreddits" (NONE of which ever appear on any Redditor's page unless they intentionally choose to have them) is as irrelevant as "there's evidence on the front page of the paper that blacks commit crimes". Some blacks. Some redditors.

Nope. First of all, this pops up all the time in the default subreddits. Take for instance the /r/adviceanimals post that Rory Marinich linked to upthread. Or the extreme popularity of the College Liberal [Girl] meme that has basically come to mean "let me generalize all feminists with this crazy thing I maybe heard but probably made up for upvotes." This shit goes on all the time, with no distaff counterpart that has become popular on Reddit.

Blaming Reddit.com Incorporated for allowing things you don't like is one thing. Blaming people who use Reddit.com for perfectly benign purposes, even though there exists asshats on some portion of it they never see, is bigoted and wrong.

Speaking as someone who does in fact use Reddit for perfectly benign purposes--I love me some /r/AskHistorians--this is complete horseshit. I'm not blaming Redditors as a whole, I'm blaming Reddit the organization and Reddit the community. The popular memes on the popular subreddits, most of which are default (and therefore seen by everyone at first) and which are well-populated by asshats, strongly tend towards some form of sexism or anti-feminism when either women or feminists are the subject of a post. The fact that there is relatively little pushback from either other users, the moderators, or the Reddit staff only serves to bolster that point. To say that looking down on Reddit as a whole is "bigoted " requires a redefinition of the words that would make it worthless.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:22 PM on November 21, 2013 [15 favorites]


Best: #GrowsHisOwnVegetables
Worst: #PlaysDidgeridoo


Ook: suddenly consumed by the suspicion that sex in the dating world has gotten a lot weirder since he got married
posted by ook at 12:23 PM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


So, bigotry is OK as long as no one gets murdered? That's stupid, too.

It's really very simple, people, and I don't know why apparently intelligent people like you don't get it:

Hating a philosophy for its harmfulness: OK.
Ex: Misogyny is bad.

Hating a group that supports a harmful philosophy: OK.
Ex: Reddit Inc. allowing /r/beatingwomen to exist is bad.

Hating a group because they happen to include a subgroup that is harmful: Not OK.
Ex: Redditors are bad.
posted by IAmBroom at 12:23 PM on November 21, 2013


Since I just got a creepy private message from a male user saying he "flagged my hateful shit" in this thread, just came back to say that there is really officially no place on the internet where women can say anything (even that I don't like the idea of this website, but understand in a new way the kind of power men have over the public image of women) without being insulted or harassed. Merely addressing the reality of the sexual harassment machine that is websites like reddit (yyyyup) gets you weird threatening MeMail. Kind of gross.
posted by stoneandstar at 12:23 PM on November 21, 2013 [64 favorites]


yeah, i should have worded that better. i was cooking chinese black bean stir fry while trying to make my point. what i meant was, even if the tag was about dick size (which i agree that it's more about finding the clit, etc), it wouldn't be about what uninformed guys thought it was about. very few women or men who sleep with men have a preference of "bigger is always better, no matter the shape or composition, or ability to wield it."

Yeah, this is absolutely right. I think I've come a long way, but I'm certain there's a long way to go yet: I'm still reflexively, if not intellectually, one of those uninformed dudes, so my mind jumped to the uninformed position when I read Potomac's link. Without a negative counterpart (#FInFallacy or #IHaveNoIdeaWhatImDoing or whatever), it can mean a lot more than it appears to, whatever it appears to mean.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 12:24 PM on November 21, 2013


I just got a creepy private message from a male user

Let's be really clear, if someone is harassing users by MeMail

1. Stop it.
2. Harassment by MeMail is potentially a bannable offense

We'd prefer if people got ahold of us via the contact form if they need to talk more about this and not discuss that specifically in this thread.
posted by jessamyn at 12:27 PM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


Yeah, but their doing so doesn't harness a culture of victim-blaming and apologizing for abusers. Men have done this all over the internet, from the MRA site that lists feminists for attacking to revenge porn. It's possible for women to do this-- and they do-- but they have less resources and less cultural encouragement to do so because female-on-male abuse isn't an institutionalized part of our society.

How many men do any of us know who engage in this sort of horrendous behavior online? Intuitively, anecdotally, I think the abuse is a bad-apple problem, a minority of total psychos. And scientifically, while physical abuse in relationships is absolutely more likely to be committed by men, there are multiple credible psychological/sociological studies of relationships that indicate that emotional abuse is committed equally by men and women, and that a large portion of it is mutual.

The apologizing is definitely more common, I acknowledge that. Seemingly decent men are apologists for abuse far too often.

But frankly, I don't see why I should be excluded from opportunities for online engagement with women because PUAs and MRAs exist. Deal with them effectively, don't shut us all out.
posted by MeanwhileBackAtTheRanch at 12:27 PM on November 21, 2013


Having reviewed the entire tag list, I'm pretty sure that #AInAnatomy refers to knowledge of female anatomy whereas #Big.Feet. refers to dick size.
posted by Jacqueline at 12:29 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


anecdotally, I think the abuse is a bad-apple problem, a minority of total psychos

Remember the rest of the adage about the bad apple?
posted by KathrynT at 12:29 PM on November 21, 2013 [14 favorites]


there is really officially no place on the internet where women can say anything

I think the absolute anonymity (but only for women!) and the women-only sign-up premise of Lulu is where it is actually quite challenging and different...

Setting up a 'women-only safe to say what you like social network' would be impossible, or would have to go along the lines of Pinterest, where women often seem to conform to what they're expected to be in their desires etc. So Lulu has come along under the initial cover of 'dating and guy rating' but has actually implemented something existing online that is openly women-led.
posted by colie at 12:29 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Women have always done this, to some extent. Used to be, they would just write graffitti in the women's restroom stalls, and men didn't get upset, because they never saw it...
posted by littlejohnnyjewel at 12:29 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Available on postcards and t-shirts that are for sale as you leave?

Modernist masterpieces, barely recognizable among a jumble of jagged, blue shapes?

Two dimensional?

Solemnly observed by busloads of tourists?

Commonly seen as PC desktop wallpaper for office receptionists everywhere?

Cheaply framed and hanging in dorm rooms across America?

Rendered in oils?

Available for viewing to anyone willing ot pay the price of admission?

(I could do this all day, folks.)
posted by wenestvedt at 12:30 PM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


So, bigotry is OK as long as no one gets murdered? That's stupid, too.

Way to miss the point. But since you're feigning ignorance here, it doesn't just apply to murder, it applies to institutional hatred, rape, assault, governmental ignorance, and all of the other stuff that, y'know, normally applies to the term bigotry as opposed to pointing out that there's definitely a lot of sexist shit that goes down there.

Hating a philosophy for its harmfulness: OK.
Ex: Misogyny is bad.

Hating a group that supports a harmful philosophy: OK.
Ex: Reddit Inc. allowing /r/beatingwomen to exist is bad.

Hating a group because they happen to include a subgroup that is harmful: Not OK.
Ex: Redditors are bad.


Hating the amount of sexism on Reddit =/= hating all Redditors. I'm also intrigued as to how it's "bad" that Reddit Inc. allows /r/beatingwomen, but "not OK" that I say Reddit as a community skews heavily towards allowing misogyny and sexism.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:30 PM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


Are we seriously getting back to arguing a global indictment of the Reddit userbase no one in this thread actually made?
posted by griphus at 12:34 PM on November 21, 2013 [21 favorites]


for someone who is insisting we make sure to use qualifiers like "some", you seem to be really eager to rewrite comments in the most inflammatory way possible, IAmBroom. a quick scan doesn't show me anyone who said " Redditors are bad."

skimming the thread for reddit mentions before your first mefi is being mean to reddit comment :

statement about reddit's reaction
some direct quotes from redditors
some laughing at those quotes
talking about usernames of outraged guys on reddit (so a specific group, the some you were insisting we use)
people again talking specificly about the reddit response (so not generalizing the whole site)

and then your first comment about metafilter loving to look down on reddit.

on preview - yes, exactly, as griphus said - the thing you're saying isn't actually happening.
posted by nadawi at 12:36 PM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


Remember the rest of the adage about the bad apple?

Yeah and it's wrong.

Also, I'd appreciate feedback on the rest of that point. I'll add that men need to be part of the solution, we need to call out bad behaviour by our peers, and we need to call out apologists for bad behaviour too.

I don't think exclusion isn't actually a solution. It's just exclusion. There are moments when safe spaces make sense, but this app is geared toward facilitating interaction between people of different genders, so exclusion isn't actually possible in the endgame.
posted by MeanwhileBackAtTheRanch at 12:38 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration


Scan the QR code to learn more from this exhibit's curator, Professor Will Hung.
posted by Think_Long at 12:38 PM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


colie: "It seems to examine your FB connections and history to assess your femaleness."
colie: "Yes. It has a proprietary system for determining if you are female from examining your Facebook account when you give it permission"

I want to know how this works!
posted by Corinth at 12:38 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Are we seriously getting back to arguing a global indictment of the Reddit userbase no one in this thread actually made?

I know, especially when we're having these totally delightful paintings/angels subthreads, it's a real, genuine, I-am-not-joking shame
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 12:39 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


It is impossible to describe Lulu as 'sexist'.

Is it?

Women, their gender verified by their Facebook logins, add pink hashtags...

Men can add hashtags, which appear in blue, but these are not factored into their overall score.

So we have the pink/blue thing, the assumption that everyone is straight, "verification" of gender, filtering contributions based on gender, and assumption of binary gender identity. Where is the part of this that isn't sexist and/or heteronormative?

What would it do with my Facebook profile, which no gender on it?
posted by Foosnark at 12:45 PM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


FYI, you can't easily hack into Lulu by creating a fake female Facebook profile, at least not using an iPhone.

Maybe Android will fall for it, but my guess is that on an iPhone, it's either checking your App Store username when you download it, or using the email address associated with your App Store account and cross-referencing it on Facebook.

So the easy way is to get a female friend to show you your profile. Or, if you're really really committed, maybe you could create a fake App Store account and a fake Facebook account. I couldn't be bothered, and I have an ex who's a great friend and who I know rated me, so I just asked her. She's such a great friend, she betrayed all of womanity for me!
posted by MeanwhileBackAtTheRanch at 12:46 PM on November 21, 2013


From the list of "negative" hashtags as revealed by Jacqueline:

#Trekkie
#VideoGamer
#PlaysDidgeridoo


Any lady who thinks those are negatives would not be right for me, anyway...
posted by dhens at 12:46 PM on November 21, 2013


More like Digeridont amiright?
posted by The Whelk at 12:48 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


1. Let anybody opt out (already implemented)

Not in a meaningful way though, since you have to know this thing exists and know you are being rated on it.

If they sent a FB message to guys who got rated or something with a "take me off your DB" link, that would be a reasonable opt out.
posted by wildcrdj at 12:51 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Didn't we all have a guy who lived in our college dorm that played the digeridoo in the elevator while wearing a bathrobe?
posted by Think_Long at 12:51 PM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


That's one of those "if you don't know anyone matching that description, it's you" things?
posted by griphus at 12:52 PM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Didn't we all have a guy who lived in our college dorm that played the digeridoo in the elevator while wearing a bathrobe?

The RA?
posted by dhens at 12:53 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


If only there had been a bathrobe.
posted by elizardbits at 12:53 PM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


and not a beaded chamois loincloth
posted by elizardbits at 12:54 PM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


What would it do with my Facebook profile, which no gender on it?

In addition to the theories I posted above about how the app in fact assess your gender (it apparently does more than check Facebook's gender field.) I've heard people theorize that it can also check your first name for 'maleness'. I forget where.

Very curious about this, hopefully, some techie reading this will figure out exactly how the app makes it's assessment, and let us all know how to get around it easily. I do have a problem with the fact that men can't check to see if they're being flamed. That isn't OK.
posted by MeanwhileBackAtTheRanch at 12:54 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


That wasn't a digeridoo.
posted by carsonb at 12:54 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


I believe they designed the application to prevent most harassment, stoneandstar, hence the hashtags, not long form essays. As Lulu worked, there will be attempts at men-rate-women variations, even if men aren't as likely to use it as women.

If male versions copy this model closely, you'd expect tags like #LoudInBed, #Anal, #Clingy, #Stalker, #NoSex, #YellsInArguments, #GoldDigger, #PrettySansMakeup, #Vindictive, etc., but again hopefully no long form text to invite harassment.

A priori, your worst case scenario is tags like #NEGingWorked that might encourage harassment by others. I doubt anyone would take "Ms. Schwartz .. drew from Cosmopolitan and Glamour magazines" to mean the guy's version should take from PUAs though, not if they're actually reading her words.
posted by jeffburdges at 12:56 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


That wasn't a digeridoo.

bringing us back to:

Hung like a museum's prize painting

THREAD COMPLETE
posted by Think_Long at 12:56 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


<eponysterical/>
posted by jeffburdges at 12:57 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


dammit jeff
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 12:58 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Also, if any such people rating site did invite harassment, like say by allowing free form assessment, then they'd quickly find themselves dealing with legal issues, if only indirectly by being forced to give evidence.
posted by jeffburdges at 1:02 PM on November 21, 2013


some techie reading this will figure out exactly how the app makes it's assessment, and let us all know how to get around it easily.

I would like to know too. The Reddit crowd don't seem to have an answer despite Lulu being out there for around 6 months. I think the women-only gateway FB tech behind it may be one of the reasons the app has got significant investment.
posted by colie at 1:06 PM on November 21, 2013


[I don't know why this is the most mod-intensive thread in recent memory but we need people to ease off if they can't civilly discuss this topic with people here. Contact us if you have questions, this is going off the rails.]
posted by jessamyn at 1:09 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


That scene from Amazon Women on the Moon.

That movie is not what I was imagining from the title.

Total Frat Move concluded


That website is somehow exactly what I was imagining from the title and simultaneously shockingly worse.
posted by straight at 1:09 PM on November 21, 2013


postcommunism: "I'm sure someone will invent a gender-neutral network where you earn karma by linking in to rate your neighbor's social clout. It's a small world, after all."

This is called voting.

You get a sticker.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 1:09 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I don't know why this is the most mod-intensive thread in recent memory

I can't understand it either since we did this thread, about this app, in February.
posted by colie at 1:15 PM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Whoa this is a total double!
posted by agregoli at 1:19 PM on November 21, 2013


Still don't completely understand how it works -- can guys only be rated if they're on facebook?
posted by inigo2 at 1:21 PM on November 21, 2013


inigo2: I tried searching for people not on Facebook or not linked to me via my friends list or college network and I couldn't find profiles for them. So yes, it seems like they have to be on Facebook and linked (in some way) to the person reviewing them.
posted by Jacqueline at 1:23 PM on November 21, 2013


This business is genius. Pure genius.

Not because of the whole dating / rating thing. The content of the site is almost completely unimportant. It could be cookie clicker for all the ratings and tags matter. And if she was at all honest about the purpose of the site I am sure the founder would agree.

I have done some work in related fields (thankfully no longer) and many of my peers and coworkers have been part of startups that use these kind of technologies (esp. the facebook API). Just the sheer value of the database they are sitting on.... After reading this thread I had a real "my god, it's full of stars" moment.

Regardless of what their privacy policy says or if you manage to find the link to "deactivate" your account, if you have logged into this site or app they have a profile on you that is worth serious money. Especially since they have it so highly organized and segmented (for college age women no less! that is basically printing money).

Just glance over the thread. A single post like this, 2nd or 3rd generation astroturfing of the best kind, prompted just how many people to log into that site with their facebook account? This is a silicon valley skeezy startups dream come true. Do you people realize just how much data you give away when you log in with that facebook login? Even if it's because you are "just curious" about the site or even to opt-out of it? That is the best part of all. Ye gawds, even using the opt-out process for data mining? Again, genius. In all seriousness, these two (Alexandra Chong and Alison Schwartz) are definitely people to keep an eye on. They have some serious success in their future IMHO.


TL;DR: What is the female equivalent of brogrammer?
posted by Riemann at 1:23 PM on November 21, 2013 [27 favorites]


Someone had a website like this at my alma mater back in the mid-200s



M. FABIVS PICTOR NESCIT VTI LINGVA EIVS
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:25 PM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


I think it's location-based, at least in part. It wanted me to turn location services on and I'm all "no no no"
posted by NoraReed at 1:25 PM on November 21, 2013


Do they have a protection racket where you can pay to get your bad review removed going yet? How about little badges the men can display? Check-ins?
posted by entropicamericana at 1:26 PM on November 21, 2013


Riemann this is like 1 of 2000 apps/sites that you log into with Facebook, many of which have already gone out of business, not sure why this is so much more guaranteed success than those.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 1:27 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Yeah, I didn't hesitate to log in with my Facebook because I've already used my Facebook to log into like a hundred other things. It's pretty much become the standard login for at least 50-75% of the sites I use regularly.
posted by Jacqueline at 1:28 PM on November 21, 2013


Potomac Avenue - because it is so highly targeted in it's user base. A database of the full facebook profile and social network connections of N mostly-20s-affluent-women is worth exponentially more than N random profiles. The whole gender-based gating makes each profile they harvest even that much more valuable to sell to anyone and everyone.

And kind of big data processing they do to generate the connections between these people (hint: that survey that is required before entering tags is the most important part) makes it even better.
posted by Riemann at 1:31 PM on November 21, 2013


It blows my mind that the consensus here seems to be that a site that allows women to (basically publicly) rate a man's genitals, physical fitness, income, possessions, appearance, hygiene, skills, life goals, style, friends, musical tastes, intelligence and porn preference while linking to his actual name and without his notification or consent is OK. Really Metafilter? Really???
posted by nathancaswell at 1:31 PM on November 21, 2013 [18 favorites]


"I can't understand it either since we did this thread, about this app, in February."

Great, now I can't get the song "Given Us Scrotum Cologne" (sung to the tune of "Follow the Yellow Brick Road") out of my head.
posted by Jacqueline at 1:32 PM on November 21, 2013


Do they have a protection racket where you can pay to get your bad review removed going yet?

It has a secondary market: I've been following this app for months and have seen college women on Twitter offering to screenshot guys' profiles for them, or give them high ratings, for a fee.
posted by colie at 1:32 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


And all this time I thought I was being too cynical.
posted by entropicamericana at 1:34 PM on November 21, 2013


I've almost never used my Facebook login outside Facebook. In fact, all my primary browsers employ these Adblock+ custom rules :
||facebook.*$domain=~facebook.com|~127.0.0.1
||fbcdn.*$domain=~fbcdn.com|~facebook.com|~127.0.0.1
No tracking Like buttons. No accidentally launched Facebook apps. etc.
posted by jeffburdges at 1:35 PM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


It blows my mind that the consensus here seems to be that a site that allows women to (basically publicly) rate a man's genitals...and porn preference...

They allow women to tell each other in a joking fashion if a dude is well-endowed. There's no "not well endowed" option. It's either #BigFeet or omitted.

And #EducatedByPorn has nothing to do with the kind of porn he likes. It means he thinks sex with a woman is to be carried out as if they are shooting porn, which, if you have seen porn, is misguided at the most generous.
posted by griphus at 1:37 PM on November 21, 2013 [14 favorites]


I downloaded the app for science and it judged me to be a "real" (their language, not mine) girl, despite the fact that the (ever-hidden) university email address attached to my Facebook still contains my old first name. So they might not be parsing those. I shouldn't really have done this because if they'd judged me to be a "fake" girl it probably would have ruined the streak of Good Weeks I've been enjoying, but curiosity often gets the better of me. There seems to be an email address you can write to if it judges incorrectly, but I can't imagine that being much fun for anyone like me or just in general.
posted by Corinth at 1:37 PM on November 21, 2013


My first name on my Facebook profile and in its associated email address is just my initials, not my actual first name, and I got in just fine with that and my gender being female in my profile.
posted by Jacqueline at 1:40 PM on November 21, 2013


I've already used my Facebook to log into like a hundred other things. It's pretty much become the standard login for at least 50-75% of the sites I use regularly.

This is not in your best interests. Telling Facebook things about you is like talking to the police.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 1:40 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


I'd imagine they've culled any hashtags that caused too much nastiness, nathancaswell, well Ms Schwartz hints thusly. It's not surprising the conversation stays nice if you control the language so tightly.

Amusing interview question for Ms Chong or Ms Schwartz : Have you ever consulted your database when considering a prospective hiring decision?
posted by jeffburdges at 1:43 PM on November 21, 2013


The solution to this is simple. If you're a dude, unfriend all your exes. In fact, it boggles the mind why someone would want to be FB friends with their exes, anyhow.
posted by evil otto at 1:45 PM on November 21, 2013


i'm friends with some of my exes - most i was friends with before we dated, and a lot of that dating happened 10+ years ago. i personally love to see their kids and houses and projects. there are a few exes where no friendliness remains and social media statuses reflect that.
posted by nadawi at 1:47 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Because you are IRL friends with your exes?
posted by en forme de poire at 1:47 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


the #MrDarcy tag I assume means "gentleman" but I prefer to think it means "Is actually from the 18th century, does not understand germ theory or cars, constantly screaming at women wearing pants."
posted by The Whelk at 1:48 PM on November 21, 2013 [36 favorites]


The solution to this is simple. If you're a dude, unfriend all your exes.

Or, and I know this one might be a tad more difficult: don't presume to live in constant fear that the women in your life are ganging up on you behind your back to make fun of you.

I feel like there are a lot of people who read this and see a harrowing vision of their future.
posted by griphus at 1:48 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


If you're a dude, unfriend all your exes. In fact, it boggles the mind why someone would want to be FB friends with their exes, anyhow.

Brb
posted by Potomac Avenue at 1:48 PM on November 21, 2013


yeah I don't facebook but I am still good friends with all my exes, even the ones who turned around and married each other
posted by The Whelk at 1:49 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


"This is not in your best interests. Telling Facebook things about you is like talking to the police."

But I actually like it when the ads I see online are relevant to my interests.

For example, a couple years ago Drudge Report was covered with ads for whackadoo right-wing politicians and buying gold -- presumably because they were serving the same ads to everyone -- whereas now for me it's all kitty treats and bird feeders and stuff I've recently looked at on Amazon. The latter is particularly helpful given my ADD tendencies to wander off in the middle of a necessary purchase.

The more Facebook, Google, and the rest of the panopticon learns about me, the better the internet gets for me.
posted by Jacqueline at 1:50 PM on November 21, 2013


Just above eye level and you really want to touch it? Oh, I thought we were still playing...
posted by bongo_x at 1:51 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


And #EducatedByPorn has nothing to do with the kind of porn he likes.

#QuestionableSearchHistory. And once again, the fact that these are "positive" is irrelevant. #TightVagina, #GoodAtBlowjobs, and #GreatBoobs are "positive" too, that doesn't mean they're not offensive (hint: they are).
posted by nathancaswell at 1:51 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Facebook or not, the only exes I am no longer friends with are the ones I was never friends with in the first place.
posted by elizardbits at 1:51 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


I just don't see how cutesy hashtags makes this OK.
posted by nathancaswell at 1:52 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration



Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 1:53 PM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


Ratings are not "basically public." If I had the app (which I don't) I couldn't see your ratings, or cortex's ratings, or my second cousin Lou's ratings, because we're not friends. It's no more "public" than the friends-locked things you post on your facebook page.
posted by muddgirl at 1:54 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Come on, #QuestionableSearchHistory is a cheeky-wink of a comment that could practically be said about anyone.... but #TightVagina, #GoodAtBlowjobs...? This is exactly why Apple turns down all the male-reversal versions of this app.
posted by colie at 1:54 PM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


the #MrDarcy tag I assume means "gentleman" but I prefer to think it means "Is actually from the 18th century, does not understand germ theory or cars, constantly screaming at women wearing pants."

I smell Sleepy Hollow spinoff
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 1:55 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?


Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?
posted by cjelli at 1:55 PM on November 21, 2013


My questionable search history would be literary cannibalism references throughout history and that google thing where it shows you a timeline of when various search terms became popular, looking for "55 gallon drum of lube".
posted by elizardbits at 1:57 PM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


This is exactly why Apple turns down all the male-reversal versions of this app.

So if it was #ExcellentFlutePlayer and #KegelMaster or something that would be fine? The power of copywriting.
posted by nathancaswell at 1:58 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Oh, man, is this the future, or what? Welcome to big school, bitches.
posted by turbid dahlia at 1:58 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I guess #ExcellentFlautist would be better.
posted by nathancaswell at 1:59 PM on November 21, 2013


Anyway, from reading the FAQ, it looks like deactivating your profile makes it so that others can't rate you.

From their FAQ : "If you don't want to be reviewed by your friends on Lulu, you can deactivate your account in Settings."

So I don't really see what the big deal is about. You choose who you're FB friends with. You choose whether or not to exempt yourself from the service. If you're a guy and you've got people slandering you on Lulu, it's your own dumb fault.
posted by evil otto at 1:59 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I tell you what, I'd rather my exes cheekily imply that I give good head to other members of my social circle, vs. posting naked pictures of me along with my name, address, and place of business.

If I had to choose.
posted by muddgirl at 2:00 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Just saw the double entendre; I'll let it stand.
posted by muddgirl at 2:00 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?


Thought to be deviant by Nazis.
posted by perhapses at 2:01 PM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]



Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.


Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.
posted by The Whelk at 2:03 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]



Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.


You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?
posted by Elementary Penguin at 2:04 PM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


So if it was #ExcellentFlutePlayer and #KegelMaster or something that would be fine? The power of copywriting.

I think it would need a bit of edge and to be less focused on physical attributes...
maybe
#ParentsNotRacist
#GenuinelyLikesWatchingSport

etc
posted by colie at 2:05 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?


Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.
posted by perhapses at 2:07 PM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


#CombustsInSunlight
#DisembodiedHowlingPhantom
posted by griphus at 2:08 PM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

With a large plaque?
posted by Gygesringtone at 2:09 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.


My kid could do that.
posted by Metroid Baby at 2:12 PM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


#GhostHitchhiker
posted by Elementary Penguin at 2:13 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.


If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.
posted by perhapses at 2:13 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.


I appreciate the use of negative space.
posted by Think_Long at 2:16 PM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


W-...what's happening here?
posted by turbid dahlia at 2:17 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.


When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.
posted by The Whelk at 2:18 PM on November 21, 2013 [10 favorites]


I guess the lesson of Lulu is that the public will accept just about anything if marketed as female empowerment. Add it to war, corporate hierarchy, smoking, etc.

The Internet has come full circle, hasn't it? First we rated businesses (Yelp), then social network reputation (Klout), and now we're onto people. So now we can assign numerical values to people and treat them the same way as stocks. Whoop de do.

Lulu is obviously awful as a dataset for the same reason that Yelp is terrible as a dataset: collusion. In fact, in Lulu's case, they even encourage collusion by advising men to ask friendly women to rate them! The anonymous aspect probably doesn't help either.

It's also clearly not some kind of early warning system for predators. There is no #ThisDudeIsARapist tag. So I hope we can dispense with talk of this app having some redeeming social benefit. As Riemann said, it's simply a flavor of every other ad-driven business on the net: harvesting your information (and others') to sell to some other corporations by luring you in with some kitchy game. Discerning something about a guy's behavior from this site would be just about as accurate as consulting Tarot cards.

I (man) am not happy about (potentially) being on this site. Of course, I've long ago accepted that people may be saying awful things about me, online and off, true or not, and there's just no way that I can affect that in any meaningful way. I can't understand the mindset of anyone who likes being rated quasi-publicly about personal aspects of their lives, via trendy hashtag, no less.

Yes, there's an opt-out function. On a related note, I am starting a face-smashing service. Memail me to opt out. Otherwise I will dispense beatdowns at my convenience. The very principle of this kind of arrangement is insulting. I'm not even going to give them the pleasure of a pageview and (potentially) harvesting my FB information by opting out. Creating a service like this compels legions of Facebook users to spend a bit more time curating their online appearance -- to the benefit of Lulu, of course.

And if someone is starting a rating app for all people (which I would oppose), and it could actually function as a meaningful predictor or record of behavior (which I would doubt), my hashtag suggestion would be #DidntShowUpForDate which seems to be the biggest problem with online dating these days, in my estimation.
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 2:20 PM on November 21, 2013 [14 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.


An exemplar of Hogarth's satirical masterpieces.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 2:21 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.
"

X-ray analysis detects presence of earlier versions hidden under the surface.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 2:22 PM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.

X-ray analysis detects presence of earlier versions hidden under the surface.


The restrained frame makes it look the more impressive.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 2:23 PM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.

X-ray analysis detects presence of earlier versions hidden under the surface.

The restrained frame makes it look the more impressive.


By examining it more closely, one can almost feel the strokes.
posted by perhapses at 2:24 PM on November 21, 2013 [11 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.

X-ray analysis detects presence of earlier versions hidden under the surface.

The restrained frame makes it look the more impressive.


What it lacks in technical prowess it makes up for with sheer force of will.
posted by Think_Long at 2:25 PM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


the internet (and ranking shit) started way before yelp, and rating exes is an idea that's been all around the internet and back. no circles are being completed, the sky is not falling.
posted by nadawi at 2:25 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.

X-ray analysis detects presence of earlier versions hidden under the surface.

The restrained frame makes it look the more impressive.


Composed primarily of toxic elements.
posted by 256 at 2:25 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]



Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.

X-ray analysis detects presence of earlier versions hidden under the surface.

The restrained frame makes it look the more impressive.

Composed primarily of toxic elements.


Featured as a prop on the season premiere of White Collar
posted by griphus at 2:27 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Protected by guards and wired up to alarms?

Smaller than you expected and behind bulletproof glass?

Actually a skilled reproduction, the original is in storage.

Cleverly forged and passed off as authentic.

Not an accurate representation of Jesus.

With accompanying audio guides and postcard-sized reproductions available in the gift shop.

Best viewed under soft, indirect lighting.

Surreptitiously captured in an out-of-focus smartphone pic!

Subject to a scathing critique in Johnson's Art: A New History.

Kinda nice, but surrounded by crowds of horrible crabby tourists all the time so don't bother.

Peter Schjeldahl didn't get the all hype.

Closely monitored by multiple guards trying to prevent you from touching it.

A gift from the Annie E Casey Foundation."

Currently on loan to an exhibition in Switzerland.

Recently underwent a $500,000 restoration

Discolored due to earlier preservation attempts?

Later attributed to a lesser-skilled apprentice from the same workshop?

Temporarily on loan to a traveling exhibition?

Thought to be deviant by Nazis.

Must be kept in a dimmed room for limited viewing as UV light causes it to fade.

You can buy a reproduction of your favorite from the gift shop?

Recognizable by its use of drips and splatters.

My kid could do that.

If you stare at it long enough, it kinda grows on you.

I appreciate the use of negative space.

When cleaned, reveals brighter, more intense colors than previously seen.

X-ray analysis detects presence of earlier versions hidden under the surface.

The restrained frame makes it look the more impressive.

Composed primarily of toxic elements.


Admired mainly for its historical significance.
posted by cjelli at 2:27 PM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


[It may be time to dial-back the copypasta aspect of this particular joke, friends. Note to flaggers: once you've flagged 3-4 things, we're actively looking at the thread. Flagging 10 things is unhelpful to us, maybe it's helpful to you?]
posted by jessamyn at 2:28 PM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


Can everyone please do that long joke thing in memail? It's really annoying here.
posted by agregoli at 2:31 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

A bit of an embarrassment to real connoisseurs.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 2:31 PM on November 21, 2013


How about if we collapse it?

Hung like a museum's prize painting.

[...]

Admired mainly for its historical significance.


Appears in Dan Brown's latest novel where it is claimed to feature hidden masonic symbols.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 2:32 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Sorry, Jessamyn, not trying to be annoying. I don't know how you see flags.
posted by agregoli at 2:32 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

May seem a bit silly if you don't properly contextualize it.
posted by tychotesla at 2:38 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Even though it’s obviously ridiculous, some people are going to defend it out of stubbornness, ideology, and trying to save face...
posted by bongo_x at 2:38 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I'm starting to think that the dark truth at the core of true sexual liberation is that some men will not be chosen at all; many men will be chosen very seldom; the vast majority of men will be chosen much less than they'd like; and an elect few will be chosen more often than they could ever deal with (but they'll do their best).

And that when men as a whole finally twig to this, a substantial plurality band together and pull the entire thing down on everyone's heads, abolishing women's rights to choose at any level.

The more I go over it, the more I feel a version of this is what the Iliad, for example, is about at its most basic level: a beautiful woman our head guy owned has gone off somewhere else with someone else-- though renowned for his beauty and intelligence and chosen by the gods themselves as judge of the beauty of godesses, he must have stolen her because women have no agency-- and she must be retrieved and her refuge destroyed at all costs. We start by sacrificing the head guy's daughter to the gods; in the midst of the campaign, totally jeopardizing the whole campaign, our old, repellant head guy just grabs for himself the woman of our most beautiful and capable warrior (showing that power trumps all qualities a woman might prefer instead); and when we win we kill all the men and take all the women back home as slaves (I don't remember hearing what befell any children those women might have had already).

We have some advantages in avoiding the counter-revolution because we can pacify the unchosen with fictions like novels, movies, pornography, and surrogates such as prostitution, but I wonder whether it will be enough.
posted by jamjam at 2:39 PM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Scourge of Carpathia, sorrow of Moldavia.
posted by griphus at 2:40 PM on November 21, 2013 [8 favorites]


I don't know how you see flags.

I like to imagine them as a gif of Hermione raising her hand enthusiastically combined with an mp3 file of the wilhelm scream.
posted by elizardbits at 2:40 PM on November 21, 2013 [30 favorites]


It blows my mind that the consensus here seems to be that a site that allows women to (basically publicly) rate a man's [various attributes] while linking to his actual name and without his notification or consent is OK.

huh, I'm seeing a lot of declarations in-thread that this is actually NOT okay. Are we reading the same thread?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 2:41 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Download our free app for more information.
posted by moonmilk at 2:42 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

So as to be best viewed from a distance.
posted by cjelli at 2:52 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Matches the sofa
posted by ook at 3:03 PM on November 21, 2013


For what it's worth, I tried to check this out, but for some reason it thinks I'm a man. So, the gender policing may be hilariously awful.
posted by corb at 3:10 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

With funding from the National Endowment.
posted by moonmilk at 3:12 PM on November 21, 2013 [12 favorites]


I'm starting to think that the dark truth at the core of true sexual liberation is that some men will not be chosen at all; many men will be chosen very seldom; the vast majority of men will be chosen much less than they'd like; and an elect few will be chosen more often than they could ever deal with (but they'll do their best).

And that when men as a whole finally twig to this, a substantial plurality band together and pull the entire thing down on everyone's heads, abolishing women's rights to choose at any level.


This already exists, MRA/PUA/Scientism mashup calling itself Red Pill.
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 3:15 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Secretly touched when nobody is looking.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:17 PM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Notice the piece's bold foreshortening, a nod to the artist's tradition.
posted by Think_Long at 3:19 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Better than Thomas Kindade's but sadly not as popular
posted by MCMikeNamara at 3:20 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


Better than Thomas Kindade's but sadly not as popular

talk about yr faint praise
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 3:25 PM on November 21, 2013


This already exists, MRA/PUA/Scientism mashup calling itself Red Pill.

I've stumbled into the subreddit once with a hearty amount of "what the fuck is this?"

I don't know how the people they describe find each other but if I was a betting man I'd go with bars and copious amounts of alcohol.
posted by Talez at 3:26 PM on November 21, 2013


PUAHATE is a pretty good collection of these charming gentlemen, I imagine that's where they meet. In my heart of hearts I hope they're all secretly the same 15 year old but , yeah these guys have views that go past reactionary and into straight up despotic slavery supporting.
posted by The Whelk at 3:29 PM on November 21, 2013


to save you the trouble of visiting PUAHATE, here's the greatest hits
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 3:34 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


"Can everyone please do that long joke thing in memail? It's really annoying here."

Personally, I like the "hung like a museum's prize painting" riffing and think it's the best thing to spring out of this thread.

I hope they don't take it to memail -- it's easy enough to quickly spot and scroll past those comments if you don't want to read them.
posted by Jacqueline at 3:34 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


It's good for pointing and laughing until you realize that yes, there are literally people who actually want to make "friendzoning" an actual crime to be punished by law.
posted by elizardbits at 3:35 PM on November 21, 2013 [9 favorites]


I created a MetaTalk post about this thread, but don't worry, it's not for the reason you think.
posted by Space Coyote at 3:38 PM on November 21, 2013


The dick/painting jokes are the most workout my art history schooling has gotten in forever.
posted by The Whelk at 3:53 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Get there early or your chance to experience it will shrink.
posted by perhapses at 3:58 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.


Used as a form of currency by Russian oligarchs.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 4:02 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Maybe it should have been placed a bit higher.
posted by perhapses at 4:05 PM on November 21, 2013


I was in my early 20s, and would have docked myself points for:
[...]
-- Fliberygibbet


Always with the dissin', you people.
posted by flibbertigibbet at 4:11 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Once held by an elderly German in his Munich apartment.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:16 PM on November 21, 2013 [21 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

No flash photography
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 4:19 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Yeah, this is pure and simple libel and the next snarktastic step is for some /r/redpill or "Men Going Their Own Way," idiot to copycat this idea against women.

Members of the public have protections for privacy that celebs and politicians do not and we're already way too obsessed with those folks' sex lives for our own good.

And even if the reviews are good, it's still bad news. Consider this: Coworkers, your mom, your overly obsessive ex. Yeah, no.

"... a Reddit user called JizzCreek complained." Goodness I hate reddit. Even when the dudeosphere there is right, they're wrong.

It sounds like they could easily fix this idea by being 100% opt-in for men, but it's still gross.
posted by Skwirl at 4:24 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


So I just tried the app to see how good/bad it actually is. Here is a list of tags that I saw:

#420
#InACult
#NoCar
#GlassHalfEmpty
#DrinksTheHaterade
#HygenicallyChallenged
#SketchyCallLog
#TotalF***ingDickhead

The majority of tags seemed to be negative with very few positives. This is entirely anecdotal, of course, but still a little too harsh for me.
posted by Shouraku at 4:25 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

So surrounded by endless chains of commentary upon commentary that it's hard to figure out, when you finally get there, what you actually even want from it?

IT WORKS FOR THE THREAD TOO
posted by RogerB at 4:26 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


The majority of tags seemed to be negative with very few positives. This is entirely anecdotal, of course, but still a little too harsh for me.

Or you could have read the list upthread, which shows they have the same number of both positive and negative tags
posted by zombieflanders at 4:33 PM on November 21, 2013 [7 favorites]


Far too much over eager explaining about why you should like it, to the point that you’re not really interested any more...
posted by bongo_x at 4:34 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


> "Hung like a museum's prize painting."

Should never be exposed to direct sunlight.
posted by kyrademon at 4:42 PM on November 21, 2013


It just hit me why a lot of dudes find this so utterly objectionable.

It is because when the only decent advice you get for avoiding a terrible situation where, at the very least, your reputation as a decent human being is put in peril is "be smart about who you spend your time with, trust your instincts about bad situations, be on your very best behavior, keep your wits about you" and even then if you do all that as best you can, you still run the risk of something bad happening to you and you having no control over it, it turns out that is fucking terrifying.

I somehow doubt lulu exists as a giant object lesson in empathy but it seems like it could very well turn out to be just that.
posted by griphus at 4:57 PM on November 21, 2013 [28 favorites]



Or you could have read the list upthread, which shows they have the same number of both positive and negative tags


I meant, the tags I saw being used made the app too harsh for me. Not the overall amount of possible tags
posted by Shouraku at 5:00 PM on November 21, 2013


She was like, ‘He’s so crazy, you should rate him on Lulu,

Let's just go ahead and coin "Histerical."
posted by phaedon at 5:04 PM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


As requested by clavicle in the MeTa there is now a compilation of all "Hung Like a Museum's Prize Painting" riffs on Google Docs.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 5:06 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


It means he thinks sex with a woman is to be carried out as if they are shooting porn, which, if you have seen porn, is misguided at the most generous.

Yeah but what if I mostly use xtube these days


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

This one time in the eighties a crazy pinko went at it with a knife
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 5:07 PM on November 21, 2013 [4 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Maybe it's helpful to you?
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:09 PM on November 21, 2013


It just hit me why a lot of dudes find this so utterly objectionable. It is because when the only decent advice you get for avoiding a terrible situation...

Interesting theory... Or perhaps it's because it reduces highly intimate, often emotionally-charged human relationships, interactions and memories to a series of Xbox achievements, wraps them up into stinky little bundles of Yelp and broadcasts them to your friends/family/business associates with a bunch of cutsey hashtags without your consent or knowledge.
posted by nathancaswell at 5:19 PM on November 21, 2013 [16 favorites]


I think griphus and nathancaswell might both be right.
posted by sweetkid at 5:40 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Isn't there less potential for libel here than any unmoderated form, Skwirl? I donno if Lulu's design saddles them with more responsibility for user's libel than moderated or unmoderated internet forums. And truth is usually a defense against libel in the U.S., although some exceptions exist. I'd suppose Lulu or their users might not fare so well under say England's insane libel laws.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:44 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

It's weird how it seems to follow you around the room.
posted by perhapses at 5:52 PM on November 21, 2013 [26 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Actually commissioned by its subject and so cannot be taken as an accurate representation of the subject's appearance.
posted by NoraReed at 6:44 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Popularized by Dan Brown, but for all the wrong reasons.
posted by griphus at 6:48 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


:D Hairy Lobster may the deity of your choice bless you and keep you.
posted by clavicle at 6:50 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hairy Lobster may the deity of your choice bless you and keep you.

I see you have the same daily devotional book I do.
posted by bongo_x at 6:56 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Careful, you might get Stendhal syndrome.
posted by clavicle at 7:03 PM on November 21, 2013


It's really not easy for me to quickly scroll past pages of that long jokey thing on mobile, no. Thanks for keeping it shorter, at least.
posted by agregoli at 7:04 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting

Sagging due to age?

In storage awaiting restoration?
posted by louche mustachio at 7:14 PM on November 21, 2013


I guess I was a bit hyperbolic, and IANAL, but I did set the curve in my media law class 10 years ago and I used to sleep with the AP Stylebook and Libel Manual under my pillow... so I have that going for me. Invasion of privacy may be the more important principle at play here.

In any event, the service is begging for lawsuits. It's difficult and expensive to defend against libel claims, even more difficult when it's libel regarding a private person and even more difficult when it's "libel per se," libel of such an egregious and personal nature that any reasonable person wouldn't publish it. I'm a huge supporter of First Amendment reasoning and the First Amendment is always going to be fought on the fringe of the fringe, but for crying out loud, this kind of privacy invasion is outrageous. How in the world Facebook thinks it's a good idea to authorize their API for this is beyond me.

I know that I'm rooting for the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuits against revenge porn sites. This is basically the same thing in text format. Maybe a tad less evil, but it hits all of the same ethical principles.

I'm also reminded of another evil fringe, the doppelbangher subreddit where dudes post pics of their high school, college and work crushes and ask other dudes who watch way too much porn for a look alike porn star. Hooray for the Internet!
posted by Skwirl at 7:20 PM on November 21, 2013 [5 favorites]


It's a bit crass, but considering that most of the reviews are saying nice things I'd hardly say it's on the level of revenge porn.

It'd be way better as an OKCupid plugin, though-- you don't usually friend folks before you go on a casual date with them.

I want this as an augmented reality app with less silly hashtags and not just for dating. #PublicGroper. #DrivesLikeAnAsshole. #RapistInTraining. #Gaslighter. #Misogynist. #PuppyKicker. #UnwantedEyeContact. #Harasser. #MRA. #Mansplainer.

Positive ones would be a bonus. #GoodTipper. #Smart. #Respectful. #LetMeInInTraffic. #StoppedAndHelpedWhenMyCarWrecked.

It could be like credit ratings but for people!
posted by NoraReed at 8:14 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hmm. Well, it looks like the sort of warning system thing I talked about up thread exists, but the creator might be a predator themself. Balls.
posted by NoraReed at 8:55 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

On loan to an institution with more foot traffic.
posted by graftole at 8:57 PM on November 21, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Actually less valuable than the climate control system it requires.
posted by 256 at 9:28 PM on November 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


#doesnothashtagwell

Doe snot has HTAG?!? Well. That is certainly news to me. Still, I don't think we'll be seeing the end of synthetic HTAG anytime soon -- cervine mucus is NOTORIOUSLY difficult to collect.
posted by DLWM at 9:32 PM on November 21, 2013 [2 favorites]


I want this as an augmented reality app with less silly hashtags and not just for dating. #PublicGroper. #DrivesLikeAnAsshole. #RapistInTraining. #Gaslighter. #Misogynist. #PuppyKicker. #UnwantedEyeContact. #Harasser. #MRA. #Mansplainer.

It could be like credit ratings but for people!

Credit rating are weapons used by large institutions to enforce economic classes and cause no small amount of grief to the disenfranchised in the USA. You want to give that weapon to everyone you come in contact with?

What would you do when the devil turned round on you? Where would you hide?

Or said more shortly put from your link:
Her point that tools, technologies, and policies designed to prevent abuse can and often are co-opted by abusers is an important one.
posted by zabuni at 9:37 PM on November 21, 2013 [6 favorites]


I'm torn. Part of me thinks it's great women have something like this as an early warning system. I do think it can be a good thing, especially when so much of the dating culture these days is based online. On the other hand, I see how shitty this would feel if you're one of the ratees, not rater. On a third hand, this happens to women all the time, everywhere. On the forth hand (why yes I am part octopus, why do you ask?), 2 wrongs don't make a right.

I grabbed the app in part because I was curious to see for myself, and on part because I was hoping to see some sort of interesting or even scandalous hash tags, I realized most of my friends are married, technophobic, and just pain old, so almost all of it was empty. The two profiles that had entries were guys that added likes and dislikes for themselves. While neither profile revealed anything I hadn't already figured out, it amazed me how easy it was to tell a story of what sleeze bags they are. And that was them presumably trying to make themselves look good.

Not that it was insightful of the whole experience, but rather interesting how much a limited set of phrases can actually convey. I was surprised.

I do despise the cosmo-esque language and at the same time think at least some form of it is necessary. If it was more direct, I think it would elicite the response "nuke from orbit" from the male contingency, because it couldn't be allowed to exist if it cut to the quick. Even if the original Facebook was for looking at chicks.

Mostly, I find the responses to it fascinating. Do I like it's an invasion of privacy? No, of course not. Do I think it's fascinating that some men get upset over a relatively harmless app, when women deal with this kind of judging (and worse) every day? Yes. I feel a bit like we (though I'm not sure who we is, really) are standing on the edge of some sort of precipice in gender equality. Like there is this anger and frustration from women in a way that people are just now expressing en masse rather than feminism fringes. Like something big is about to happen, but I don't know what. But the pressure is building everyday, and I'm not sure what's going to erupt forth. But I think 2014 is going to be a very interesting year.
posted by [insert clever name here] at 10:31 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


So now we can assign numerical values to people and treat them the same way as stocks.

This.
Credit rating are weapons used by large institutions to enforce economic classes and cause no small amount of grief to the disenfranchised in the USA. You want to give that weapon to everyone you come in contact with?

An armed society is a polite society except if it's guns then that's bad
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 11:27 PM on November 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Featured in a movie in which it is stolen by Pierce Brosnan
posted by Hairy Lobster at 12:13 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


There isn't anything wrong with an individual showing another individual photos they've taken, most online posting should work similarly. An organization that encourages revenge porn might've acted unethically however.

I'd want little virtual signs above cops and ex-cops that said how many people they'd killed, beaten, etc., possibly broken down by race and/or compared with other cops, that's easily worth all the doppelbangher or revenge porn. I'd want virtual signs above prosecutors that said how many innocent, non-violent, etc. offenders they'd brow beat into plea deals.
posted by jeffburdges at 1:45 AM on November 22, 2013


You want to give that weapon to everyone you come in contact with?

Shit yes. I trust the masses way more than I trust the people who already have these tools-- corporations, cops and Homeland Security, all drunk on their own power.

Throw in a decent statistical weighing system and you could get the unusual activity of bigots, decrease their weight, shit like that. Do score balancing and curve evening to make sure the average score is the same between marginalized groups and non and you could actually use it as an internalized prejudice double-check.
posted by NoraReed at 3:19 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


We were supposed to have gender-segregated rooms at the debate tournaments, but inevitably there would be some hooking up among teammates so instead of the boys room(s) and the girls room(s) we would end up resorting ourselves into the sex room(s) and the sleep room(s).

I think I was on the wrong debate team :(
posted by Jpfed at 6:05 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


the sex room/sleep rooms is also how all my high school bands operated. one band was so rowdy when out of town that we were required to have 6 chaperones for a single bus of teenagers.
posted by nadawi at 6:11 AM on November 22, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

A trompe l'oeil curiosity that recedes when approached.
posted by psoas at 8:34 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting

New and fascinating details arise after intense scrutiny and repeated exposure
posted by namewithoutwords at 8:59 AM on November 22, 2013


I wonder how long it will take before someone kills themselves over their rating on this website? I give it a year.
posted by koolkat at 9:16 AM on November 22, 2013


Hung like a museum's prize painting

A smaller, less impressive work hung on either side.
posted by billiebee at 9:16 AM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


well since none of the other sites like this that have been going for years have ever been linked to a suicide it seems weird to assume this latest iteration will go there...
posted by nadawi at 10:46 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


So much more appealing in person than it looks in pictures.
posted by bongo_x at 10:53 AM on November 22, 2013


Furthermore, the ratings are in fact way way nicer than you'd imagine.

Videogames and Lulu ratings: The only places where a 7.5 out of 10 rating means average and a 5.0 rating means horrible.
posted by ymgve at 10:57 AM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


Wait what about high school?
posted by griphus at 11:00 AM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


"Hung like a museum's prize painting"

Impressive in its time, now regarded a minor work

Impossible to level

Recovered from Nazi stash

Overwrought frame makes it look smaller

Auctioned in Detroit bankruptcy

Makes sense once you read the placard

Presented with fatuous artist statement

Inexplicably vaginal

Best seen at biennial

Not Koons' best work

From Johns' flat period

Supreme like Malevich

Combine gives it depth

Almost justifies your liberal arts degree
posted by klangklangston at 12:16 PM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hung like a museum's prize painting

Horizontally level and capable of holding up to 300 lbs.

Best viewed with at least 6 inches of white space on all sides.

Written about by so many undergrads that it loses appeal.
posted by rmless at 12:32 PM on November 22, 2013 [4 favorites]


"Hung like a museum's prize painting"

Ceci n'est pas un pénis
posted by googly at 12:33 PM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


My profile was viewed 11 times in the past 24 hours, but nobody has given me any hashtags. So I went to add some blue ones of my own, but the pre-set hashtags are monstrous. Here's the list of hashtags that I am allowed to add to my own profile as "Turn-offs":
#CrazyJealous
#LittleGirlVoice
#CriesALot
#PlaysDumb
#Insecure
#HoBag
#SocialClimber
#FutureDropout
#PlaysGames
#ArmpitHair
#GrannyPanties
#NoFemaleFriends
#GoldDigger
#HasAChihuahua
#TalksDuringSex
#NeverShutsUp
#SloppyDrunk
#SelfAbsorbed
#OnlyEatsSalad
#Stage5Clinger
#NeedsApproval
#OrangeTan
#ForgetsMyNameDuringSex
#StripperPerfume
#FartMachine
#DaddyIssues
#PinkAndSparkly
#PillPopper

If the goal of an App like this is to make guys more aware of how they treat women and hold them more accountable for their reprehensible tendencies and attitudes, then I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that this list does nothing to forward that agenda. FFS
posted by carsonb at 12:56 PM on November 22, 2013 [6 favorites]


#FartMachine is pretty funny though not available on the 'Turn-Ons' list dammit.
posted by carsonb at 12:57 PM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting

Displayed at black-tie events for maximum fund-raising appeal.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:08 PM on November 22, 2013 [2 favorites]


If the goal of an App like this is to make guys more aware of how they treat women

My understanding is the goals of this app are about women, not men.

Hung like a museum's prize painting
Gets all the attention even though there are more interesting paintings the next room over.
posted by Nelson at 1:20 PM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


My understanding is the goals of this app are about women, not men.

Ah yes, of course, naturally. Then again, here I am, a man (ostensibly) using the app. There are others. As much as something like this is geared towards women only, it cannot exist in a vacuum and by its nature serves both men and women. But, in this particular instance, yes, I'm in agreement that the way it's built is in service to women.

This particular feature of the blue hashtags however, meant for men to use, remains fairly unredeemable from my perspective though.
posted by carsonb at 1:33 PM on November 22, 2013


This site (Lulu) makes me angry. I find it offensive and invasive.
posted by Conrad Cornelius o'Donald o'Dell at 6:43 PM on November 22, 2013


Here's the list of hashtags that I am allowed to add to my own profile as "Turn-offs

Seriously? I'm like one of the most vocal people in feminist threads on this site (well, maybe second tier) and I don't understand WTF this site is supposed to be doing to further the cause.

#LittleGirlVoice


Oh yeah, it's that "little girls are a bad thing to be" thing again.
posted by sweetkid at 7:12 PM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


The joys of Facebook. "Your name, profile picture, cover photo, gender, networks, username, and user id are always publicly available, including to apps. Apps also have access to your friends list and any information you choose to make public." If you want to prevent your friends from allowing apps to scrape your info, the current way to do so (until the next time FB changes it and defaults us all back to opt out) is to go under Account Settings >App Settings > Apps Others Use and uncheck all those boxes.
FB privacy actions are much in the spirit of putting plans on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.
posted by gingerest at 7:22 PM on November 22, 2013 [5 favorites]


Hung like a museum's prize painting.

Caused Mayor Giuliani to cut off all city subsidies to the Brooklyn Museum of Art
posted by The corpse in the library at 7:38 PM on November 22, 2013 [3 favorites]


> it requires a Facebook login, but Lulu already has info about me from Facebook, which it gathered when whoever of my women friends joined the app

You can control that under the Facebook "App settings," by the way.
posted by The corpse in the library at 7:40 PM on November 22, 2013


Using this app doesn't say much good about the women who use it.
posted by jayder at 10:34 PM on November 22, 2013 [1 favorite]


>Do I think it's fascinating that some men get upset over a relatively harmless app, when women deal with this kind of judging (and worse) every day?

For what it's worth, I don't see any contradiction between my speaking out for my own privacy rights while also supporting and speaking out for women who experience street harassment, prejudice, hostile environments, sex shaming etc... I see those views and actions as complementary. On the micro level, turn around isn't fair play for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is intersectionality.

There is certainly some overlap between men who harass and who are angry about this app, too, so I also do see what you mean.

Also for what it's worth, I just realized that my sardonic tone when talking about revenge porn earlier in the thread was probably not clear. I meant that revenge porn is quantitatively very much more evil, despicable and cowardly. But qualitatively, these two types of privacy invasion and libel share a lot of similar traits: turning out the extremely private pieces of normal people's lives and profiting from it without their permission, for instance. One is way, way worse and potentially significantly life affecting, but they both are acting in the same private sphere without consent.

If we don't have our sex lives as the last bastion of what is private and uniquely our's to choose to share or keep, then we've pretty much given up the ghost on almost anything staying that way. Nothing is sacred. Certainly almost every woman experiences this kind of violation of the private taken public with problems like street harassment. Lulu is small beans compared to that, but it's also a low-hanging thing to work to shutdown this new model of invasion to prevent the same model being turned against more vulnerable groups. [http://www.consumerprivacy.us/privacy/reclaim-your-privacy-from-lulu]
posted by Skwirl at 4:18 AM on November 23, 2013 [2 favorites]


What's the one where men rate women going to be called?

Life.


No offence, but I think that rhetorical response obscures the real point. There isn't going to be one where men rate women in this way because men don't need to. By tradition men can afford to hit on anything they like the look of and then walk away the moment they don't like it. They're not in danger or under effective pressure at any point, so they can afford to fuck it and see.

Women do not have the same freedom, and that's why they might need something like this, or is it me that's missing the point?
posted by Segundus at 5:35 AM on November 23, 2013 [1 favorite]


10. Facebook's Terms Of Service are completely one-sided.
9. Facebook's CEO has a documented history of unethical behavior.
8. Facebook has flat out declared war on privacy.
7. Facebook is pulling a classic bait-and-switch.
6. Facebook is a bully.
5. Even your private data is shared with applications.
4. Facebook is not technically competent enough to be trusted.
3. Facebook makes it incredibly difficult to truly delete your account.
2. Facebook doesn't (really) support the Open Web.
1. The Facebook application itself sucks.


(From deoxy)
posted by bukvich at 6:51 AM on November 23, 2013


One of the reasons my wife hooked up with me, she told me yaets after we were married, is that my latest long term ex-girlfriend, who was in the same social group (which was mostly bonded over epic all-weekend bar crawls), would talk so much horrible shit about my sexual abilities when I was not in the room that my now wife just had to check it out. She could not believe someone could be that bad, and if I was she would at least have a laugh. She had so many laughs she married me.

I am so happy the web was young and innocent then, because I had no car and but had angry ex girlfriends.
posted by Doroteo Arango II at 10:37 AM on November 23, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm pretty sure women adopted the "fuck it and see" approach decades ago, Segundus.
posted by jeffburdges at 6:48 PM on November 23, 2013


Lulu's silly and sexist. Treating people like commodities to be graded and traded is objectifying, and the rationalizations in this thread arguing in favor of Lulu (but the women are nice! You can opt out! Women can warn each other about rapists and murderers!) don't really pass muster.

The women rating the men aren't particularly nice. As Jacqueline points out, the site founders have weighted everything to skew the ratings up and appear more positive than they are. Women have to be Facebook acquaintances in some way with the men the rate, so you would think the scores would be basically positive, yet the average rating is not a 9 or a 10 you but much lower.

IF a man knows he has been put on the site, he may be able to opt out, but there is no notification system letting anyone know when they've been added to Lulu for rating.

The warning function is basically useless, since men are already gaming the system by asking women friends to inflate their ratings for them. That, in addition to letting guys with the lowest ratings opt out, makes the ratings even more useless.

Now, you could decide to use Lulu as the joke it is, and have fun tagging each other, tongue-in-cheek, as Jacqueline did with her spouse, but other than that, I can't see much use for Lulu at all.
posted by misha at 8:35 PM on November 23, 2013 [2 favorites]


I can't see much use for Lulu at all.

From the user standpoint.
posted by carsonb at 9:17 PM on November 23, 2013 [3 favorites]


I (man) am not happy about (potentially) being on this site. Of course, I've long ago accepted that people may be saying awful things about me, online and off, true or not, and there's just no way that I can affect that in any meaningful way. I can't understand the mindset of anyone who likes being rated quasi-publicly about personal aspects of their lives, via trendy hashtag, no less.

Yes, there's an opt-out function. On a related note, I am starting a face-smashing service. Memail me to opt out. Otherwise I will dispense beatdowns at my convenience.



If someday I find myself wondering why women might want/need a site like this, I'll remember the time a man was driven to violent fantasy at the mere idea of it.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 8:11 AM on November 25, 2013 [9 favorites]


That totally seems like a charitable reading of Noisy Pink Bubbles's comment.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:19 AM on November 25, 2013 [1 favorite]


The level of charity required not to read it that way is pretty high. Noisy Pink Bubbles says "On a related note" right there.
posted by Etrigan at 9:31 AM on November 25, 2013


That's why I included it.

In my opinion, seeing someone equate a service where women can rate men they've dated to him going around smashing people's face in, and agreeing that it's a totally valid comparison is what's charitable.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 9:34 AM on November 25, 2013


Do you not see the comparison between a (real) internet service that harms a person's reputation that one must opt out of and a (hypothetical) internet service that harms one's physical person that one must opt out of? Seems like a pretty common rhetorical device to me, but I'm trying not to mischaracterize people and their positions for easy favorites.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:38 AM on November 25, 2013 [3 favorites]


Do you not see the comparison between a (real) internet service that harms a person's reputation that one must opt out of and a (hypothetical) internet service that harms one's physical person that one must opt out of?

I can compare a goldfish and a sperm whale. It matters which one my kid brings home from the school carnival.
posted by Etrigan at 9:39 AM on November 25, 2013 [3 favorites]


Thanks, Dr. Phil.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:43 AM on November 25, 2013


Do you not see the comparison between a (real) internet service that harms a person's reputation that one must opt out of and a (hypothetical) internet service that harms one's physical person that one must opt out of?

Sticks and stones will break your bones/but words will never harm you. It is a difference of kind, not degree.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 9:46 AM on November 25, 2013


Words will never harm you? That's really the argument you're going to go with?
posted by entropicamericana at 9:49 AM on November 25, 2013


Sorry, I'll try to be harder to mischaracterize for easy favorites.

Yes, there is a comparison between the two. However, that is different from whether the two are comparable in the usual use of the word. It is not uncharitable to point out that "On a related note, I am starting a face-smashing service" is an overreaction.
posted by Etrigan at 9:52 AM on November 25, 2013 [1 favorite]


Do you not see the comparison between a (real) internet service that harms a person's reputation that one must opt out of and a (hypothetical) internet service that harms one's physical person that one must opt out of?

I see it, and I see that it's grossly inappropriate; The 'threat' of a woman saying something untoward about a man being countered with a man threatening violence is a rather well-known societal chilling effect on women saying anything at all.

No really, some girl on facebook saying your dick is small isn't even in the same league as a man threatening bodily harm in response, what in the world is wrong with you?
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 10:07 AM on November 25, 2013 [6 favorites]


I'm trying not to mischaracterize people and their positions for easy favorites.

Thanks, Dr. Phil.

That's really the argument you're going to go with?


If you believe language is like physical injury, then maybe it would be worth looking at some of the rhetorical lobs and backhands you have been throwing.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 10:40 AM on November 25, 2013 [1 favorite]


Can we get a show of hands re: which of you folks is rubber and which glue? It's getting hard to keep score over here
posted by ook at 2:06 PM on November 25, 2013 [4 favorites]


In a day and age where you can buy an app to simulate a coin flip, you can bet your bottom pancake that there will be a men's version of this app and it will be ugly. There are a lot of undersexed men who have nothing better to do than make stuff up about women that they are too afraid to talk to.

My world doesn't work in such a way that there is no opportunity cost/risk to sex and I can "fuck it and see," but I understand that the virgin-whore dichotomy, birth control and the threat of physical violence are costs that I do not incur. This app isn't going to fix that imbalance, tho the Hollaback app might help http://www.ihollaback.org/resources/iphone-and-droid-apps/. If some women are using Lulu as some kind of background check, that seems particularly unwise. The dang thing sounds gamed to high heaven.
posted by Skwirl at 3:58 PM on November 25, 2013


In a day and age where you can buy an app to simulate a coin flip, you can bet your bottom pancake that there will be a men's version of this app and it will be ugly. There are a lot of undersexed men who have nothing better to do than make stuff up about women that they are too afraid to talk to.

Why do you feel the need to resort to sexist stereotypes to make your case? Men do not hold the patent on "ugliness". Women can and do make ugly, sexist generalizations, just as men can and do combat them. Your contention that 'undersexed men' make things up about intimidating women is no less sexist than a misogynist asserting that 'scorned women' lie about men who have rejected them.

I find that especially disappointing given that the Hollaback project you link to is made up of women and men working to make positive changes.
posted by misha at 3:12 PM on November 27, 2013 [1 favorite]


"Your contention that 'undersexed men' make things up about intimidating women is no less sexist than a misogynist asserting that 'scorned women' lie about men who have rejected them. "

What?

I understand your desire to white knight for the menz, but this is a pretty bizarre assertion.
posted by klangklangston at 3:18 PM on November 27, 2013 [3 favorites]


[Hi! Let's not play that "If the genders were reversed...!" thing here. Everyone hates that game.]
posted by jessamyn at 3:21 PM on November 27, 2013 [3 favorites]


« Older I can't rightly vouch for this story but a fellah ...   |   Today is World Philosophy Day.... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments