Skip

cutegirlsonly
September 16, 2003 9:38 AM   Subscribe

Cute Girls Only - The only dating web site where they actually reject the ugly chics. via [linkswarm.com]
posted by banished (49 comments total)

 
Also see [this thread] cause obviously I didn't.
posted by banished at 9:43 AM on September 16, 2003


CGO, because American women aren't alienated and objectified enough.
posted by squirrel at 9:52 AM on September 16, 2003


Who's making the call on who's cute or not?

"61 members"

Must have extremely rigorous standards whoever they are.

Do they filter out the ugly guys too?
posted by orange swan at 9:54 AM on September 16, 2003


still waiting for smartgirlsonly.com
posted by Space Coyote at 9:56 AM on September 16, 2003


The only dating web site where they actually reject the ugly chics ... except for that other one which was on mefi yesterday.
posted by carfilhiot at 9:56 AM on September 16, 2003


Smartgirlsonly.com would be a lesbian website, Space Coyote.
posted by orange swan at 9:59 AM on September 16, 2003


Even if we're only talking physical beauty here, these chicks are the wrong kinda cute anyway: the kind that's bult from diet soda, make up, press-on nails, belly rings, hair color, mall-doll clothes and bulimia. In short, cute that can be purchased. Which means they'll be cute to dirty old men, 12-year old boys, and not much else.
posted by jonmc at 10:01 AM on September 16, 2003


Great. As if feminists aren't already mad enough.
posted by bondcliff at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2003


Come the glorious islamic revolution, these sluts will be first against the wall.
posted by biffa at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2003


Does it also filter psychos and losers?
posted by ilsa at 10:02 AM on September 16, 2003


Jonmc speaketh truth.
posted by Holden at 10:10 AM on September 16, 2003


Smartgirlsonly.com would be a lesbian website, Space Coyote.

I'm going to go get drunk and cry now, if no one needs me for anything else today. I may be out of the office for a while.

On the topic of cute, however, I find it's one of the most abused words in the dating world.

Cute to me refers to any two of pretty, short and funny. Otherwise it's just a hollow compliment. (girls are especially notorious for simply labelling any good looking guy as cute, in my experience. But then again most guys wouldn't want to be thought of as the real kind of cute anyway)

On Spellcheck: the #1 suggested replacement for smartgirlsonly.com is martyrs. We report, you decide.
posted by Space Coyote at 10:16 AM on September 16, 2003


At least they don't make you pay to see contact info...
posted by woil at 10:21 AM on September 16, 2003


beauty is an ugly business, as you may see; but there are plenty of men willing to conduct it, and plenty of women willing to submit to it.

orange swan:

it already exists, just as you say.
posted by moz at 10:28 AM on September 16, 2003


Reminds me a lot of non_uglies over at livejournal. Which is now gone, thank crunk.
posted by jon_kill at 10:29 AM on September 16, 2003


Apparently there's a "cuteguysonly" link too (but doesn't warrent it's own domain name.) Only 10 guys are "enrolled." I think the standards for the guys is significantly lower than for the girls. And apparently the minimum age for them isn't 18!

This whole thing makes me sad. Who decides who's attractive? I see hideous people all the time with a significant other who finds them attractive and I think "WTF?" but then remember that there's someone for everyone. It's so lame to be the judge of who's hot or not, and limit a site to that. I think my husband is frigging HOT but I'm sure a lot of others don't. So perhaps he wouldn't be included in the site, even though he takes my breath away.

This stie is shallow and stupid. Were I single, I would bypass this site so quickly and move onto some other more equal site where looks are judged by the beholder, not ONE person.
posted by aacheson at 10:31 AM on September 16, 2003


Since somebody's bound to retort. This pic of Flying Neutrinos singer Ingrid Lucia is an example of the right kind of cute. It's honest for one, and her intelligence shows through. Plus, instead of saying "Desire me, you foolish mortal!" It says "Talk to me. Perform some act of dippy goofiness at my request."

YMMV.
posted by jonmc at 10:31 AM on September 16, 2003


still waiting for smartgirlsonly.com
You think they'd sign up?
posted by KnitWit at 10:43 AM on September 16, 2003


Smartgirlsonly.com would be a lesbian website, Space Coyote.

Sad but true.
posted by arto at 10:53 AM on September 16, 2003


Holy cats, Ingrid Lucia is my new deity. Jonmc, I'm afraid that I must challenge you to mortal combat for the right to woo Ms. Lucia.
posted by aramaic at 11:07 AM on September 16, 2003


"Cute? Baby ducks are cute! I want to be exotic and mysterious!"

--Annie Savoy
posted by mr_crash_davis at 11:09 AM on September 16, 2003


Hey, I'm taken, aramaic. Woo yer ass off.
posted by jonmc at 11:12 AM on September 16, 2003



Reminds me a lot of non_uglies over at livejournal. Which is now gone, thank crunk.


Nope, it's not gone by a long shot. Instead, the accounts are cancelled and the former members start up new communities with much more clever names, such as Exalted My Ass, and New Nonuglies.
posted by keli at 11:13 AM on September 16, 2003


I remember reading an article somewhere about online/phone sex companies placing ads at sites like match.com in the hopes of luring in new customers.

Vanitydate and cutegirlsonly would seem to be ideal sites for these companies, if they aren't owned by them entirely.
posted by Salmonberry at 11:31 AM on September 16, 2003


Aw, man, Ingrid Lucia isn't just pretty, she's an amazing singer. I caught her two years ago down in New Orleans, singing at a burlesque show (no, she did not participate in the burlesque, just sang). Seriously great.

Thanks for reminding me, jonmc, I need to pick up her CD.
posted by me3dia at 11:41 AM on September 16, 2003


Which means they'll be cute to dirty old men, 12-year old boys, and not much else.

Interested in modeling for CGO and are at least 18 years old? Send pictures like the one above to cgo@reyvan.com
So this site harvests models, feel most dating services are a jumping off point to this. "The Dating Game" was used for an outlet to find future potential "talent/stars" also the shows that have copied it too.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:46 AM on September 16, 2003


aramaic - have you found the link to their video for cry (Real) yet? If you like the picture, the video may well make your head explode.
posted by willnot at 11:51 AM on September 16, 2003



still waiting for smartgirlsonly.com
You think they'd sign up?


I've been attempting to do something like that at my site, but it's definitely been an uphill battle. You'd be suprised how many people answer each profile question with the word "poo".
posted by 4easypayments at 11:54 AM on September 16, 2003


I can see niche web personal sites working quite well, or one big and well-known web site like Match.com having different categories (gay, lesbian, casual, serious, S&M, etc.) but not this particular one. It's just too subjective. Like jonmc said, it's a certain kind of look the site operators want and plenty of people won't find that attractive. It's too much of a niche.

And I hate being called cute too. When applied to a woman it has connotations of petite, girlish, and perky and possibly involves a fondness for pink, scrapbooking and doll collecting. I'm leggy, difficult, given to earth tones, and the only things I collect are books.

Although I sometimes find myself classifying men as cute - for me it's a certain boyish type. I do say it less as I get older.
posted by orange swan at 12:00 PM on September 16, 2003


I agree that "cute" is a fairly useless word. It always connoted "pleasingly unusual" or "attractive, but not sexy," to me somehow. If a girl called me "cute," I'd feel like I should be wearing overalls and playing with a yo-yo.

I think this system, I devised way back when works better.
posted by jonmc at 12:25 PM on September 16, 2003


Where I come from, "cute" is often a euphemism for "not that attractive." Sort of like "nice."

"What do you think of her?"

"She's... cute."
posted by callmejay at 12:42 PM on September 16, 2003


AOL IM: evilpoopgirl
Yahoo!: masturbates_with_guns"


Sweet. I think I found my next wife!

Dirty Ol' Bastard out.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 12:44 PM on September 16, 2003


It's a natural idea to base your dating choices on looks, but from the two pictures on the first page alone I could see right away that it's more of a case of "narcissistic and Clueless (as in the movie) girls only". Besides, truly beautiful women don't have to advertise anything.
posted by 111 at 12:46 PM on September 16, 2003


And I hate being called cute too. When applied to a woman it has connotations of petite, girlish, and perky and possibly involves a fondness for pink, scrapbooking and doll collecting.

Where you live... find "cute" can be demographical in nature. Some examples; near an ocean; slightly weathered look, blondish hair styled as a surfer, tan & freckled & slight/moderate muscle tone or Paris France; cropped brunette hair, eloquently/distinguishably dressed yet comes across as simple.

But today's advertising has made cute more "defined" in our societies, a model's looks. On preview, go with Jon's system and really a good as I find myself viewing folks the same way... HMM...
posted by thomcatspike at 12:51 PM on September 16, 2003


good one
posted by thomcatspike at 12:51 PM on September 16, 2003


I think I've sword off being attracted to cute girls after a string of bad experiences with them. Attractive at first, grating and infuriatingly girls (for lack of a better word) later on.

Now I'm after someone who is smart, genuine and who can beat me in an argument as often as not.
posted by Space Coyote at 12:59 PM on September 16, 2003


good one

are you complimenting your own posts? :)
posted by Space Coyote at 1:00 PM on September 16, 2003


(_sworn_ off cute girls. As much as 'sword off' might be a freudian slip...)
posted by Space Coyote at 1:01 PM on September 16, 2003


I think he was correcting himself: "...and really a good [one] as I find myself viewing..."
posted by me3dia at 1:04 PM on September 16, 2003


So I clicked on it and got a dialogue - "document containes no data"

*smile*

How cute. There's nothing there!
posted by rough ashlar at 1:06 PM on September 16, 2003


I think he was correcting himself

Wow, this is a banner day. TCS, are you going to start going through the backlog now? Honey, wake the kids!
posted by soyjoy at 2:07 PM on September 16, 2003


Not impressed. My wife is cuteness enough. And she feeds me too.
posted by Samizdata at 2:23 PM on September 16, 2003


Close, but not quite there. They need some kind of attraction index. Everyone (men and women) submit a headshot, body shot in underwear, calculate their BMI, examine facial symmetry, etc. These judges rate them as objectively as possible and give them a number. People can then search by number.

"Hi I'm a lowly 3.5 male looking for a 4.4 female. I have money!"

As long as its two consenting adults, who cares. Put the morality books away and let the casual sex begin.
posted by skallas at 3:05 PM on September 16, 2003


As for niche sites, there is PolyMatchMaker for polyamorous folk. They've got 4700 members, so they're certainly doing something right. I'm sure there are other sites for other specialized interests, but I'm not aware of them.

I guess my attitude towards sites like this (as well as VanityDate) is that if the shallow people want to go play in that pool, it makes it easier to avoid relationships with them. I know I wouldn't want a relationship with with someone who had a profile up on cutegirlsonly or cuteboysonly. I think it says a lot more about the people running the site and participating on it than it does about me.
posted by eilatan at 4:21 PM on September 16, 2003


So uhh... {ehem} BudLtDarlin has a homepage. In her gallery she features this photo. Can anyone tell me what's going on there?
posted by Witty at 6:22 PM on September 16, 2003


Now they're up to 66 members!
posted by SisterHavana at 8:58 PM on September 16, 2003


>good one

>are you complimenting your own posts? :)
>posted by Space Coyote at 1:00 PM PST on September 16
(That was damn funny, Space Coyote.)
posted by philfromhavelock at 9:18 PM on September 16, 2003


I like cute. Them girls ain't.
posted by Guy Smiley at 12:25 AM on September 17, 2003


>I guess my attitude towards sites like this (as well as VanityDate) is that if the shallow people want to go play in that pool

Well put. Well, some people may not want to avoid them but look for them. I think a personals site that focuses on looks and casual sex would definitely have a market niche. There are people out there with liberal sexual attitudes who spend time at the gym. I don't see whats so wrong about these sites, unless people are assuming that the online personals are the same as the traditional courtship process. Which they can be, but don't have to be. I think the call-outs in this thread are the real-world equivalant of yelling out "slut" which is a bit off-putting.
posted by skallas at 12:53 AM on September 17, 2003


« Older Junglewalk   |   From the Duhpartment of Research Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post