Your Rodent Boyfriend is Making You Hate Yourself

‘Rodent Boyfriend’ this, ‘Ugly Hot’ that. Online, men are given these labels to describe their perfectly imperfect physical or personality-based attractiveness. Think Timothee Chalamet’s endearing angular features or Matty Healy’s ambient flask-cigarette-microphone combination when he’s performing. 

For women however, it’s ‘Girl Pretty’ or ‘Boy Pretty’ - a comparative dichotomy on whether a woman is appeasing the male gaze, or not. This places women into a box that gives little to no room for issuing flexibility in beauty, as the myriads of body types, facial features, stylistic choices, and ways of representation are structurally set up for the typical feminine measure of attractiveness to be idolised. This has been more rampant than ever in the past few weeks with masses of social media users attacking women competing in the Olympics who do not fit the mould of the typical standard of beauty in society, and calling into question their biological sex; it is worth noting that women in the queer community and women of colour face the brunt of this digital barrage. Women are not granted positive connotations from a quirky measure of attractiveness; it's a yes and no, black and white answer. You’re hot or you’re not. 

These online descriptions of attractiveness have more severe consequences than one may ordinarily deduce. It leads to the perpetuation of standards in which women are at the mercy and judgement of themselves and society, as to whether they are visually pleasing enough to men. 

The impacts of the beauty standards pushed by society onto women and girls are undeniable. It leads to an increased risk of developing an eating disorder, depression, anxiety, and anti-social behaviours. Scroll through any TikTok of a conventionally attractive girl doing anything and the comments will be flooded with young women saying “I wish I looked like you” or men grossly saying “Just looked at my girl and sighed”. 

When social media trends justify unconventional male attractiveness and do not offer an equaliser for women it reinforces unequal beauty standards. Why is it that men’s perceived unattractiveness can be justified as hot in a weird way, but an unattractive woman is just that - unattractive. 

This isn’t new though. Beauty standards have been around for thousands of years, with the ‘Venus Figurines’ of Europe (Circa 25 000 BCE) being cited by some historians as the first depictions of the ideal beauty for women. This progressed into the 17th century, with the term ‘Rubenesque’ being coined by a Flemish painter to describe how ideal women were most commonly depicted in art through curvy and rounded features. 

The 1970s to 90s saw the rise of the slender woman being praised, with stylised phrases like ‘Heroin Chic’ connoting extreme thinness, and the rise of super-thin supermodels depicting idealism, which bled into the early 2000s. The 2010s saw beauty standards being set by a social culture that emphasises a fuller, curvier figure, with more than 20 000 women every year getting breast implants, and compared to 2016, 2021 saw 19.3% more women undergo a Brazilian Butt Lift. 

But don't worry girls! We’ve got our own strange animalistic trend of beauty! 

‘Deer/Fox/Bunny Pretty’ is the feminine version of ‘Rodent Boyfriend’. This trend is accompanied by collages of famous women who have facial features that lend them into one of these categories.For example, Angelina Jolie’s high cheekbones land her in the ‘Fox Pretty’ category. However it is integral to understand that where conventionally attractive women are categorised into a pre established bracket of beauty, ‘Rodent Boyfriend’ is applied to the man’s individual features; he doesn’t fit a mould, the mould fits him.

However, this trend is drastically different to ‘Rodent Boyfriend’. For one, it prioritises Euro-centric features and does not leave much room for beauty ideals and standards apart from that of the Anglo viewpoint. It is no question that contemporary beauty standards are set up to favour white people. This all goes back to the Elizabethan and Victorian era where royalty the pinnacle of beauty and the monarchs would use skin and hair lighteners, thus affecting the masses. This carried through into the 20th century where celebrities of the Golden Age were almost exclusively white and in positions of influence and power. In this time, hair relaxants, skin bleaching, and makeup trends attempted to societally make women of colour aligned with white ideals. Only in 2020 did healthcare brand Johnson and Johnson stop selling skin-whitening creams, a true testament to the extent at which anglo beauty standards are still omnipresent in contemporary society. Secondly, this trend only shows typically attractive women, usually celebrities. So for one to argue that this is the feminine equivalent of ‘Rodent Boyfriend’ is simply incorrect, as women with perceived unattractive features of beauty are simply not included. 

I think this trend is a good time to suggest that we get off our phones and start appreciating people for who they are without having to label their attractiveness with a weird animal comparison. Have big brown eyes without them being deer-esque, just have eyes! Have curly hair and a skinny build without it being compared to a rodent! This culture of labelling every minute feature of a person is so damaging for individuals and societies as a whole, so as we move into a more and more connected culture, let’s try our best to make it inclusive and kind to everyone.