Portrait of A College Male
I have taken the liberty of succinctly organizing four of the various “types” of males you may encounter on any given college campus – for your convenience, of course. And although this list is obviously intentionally riddled with generalizations (for humor’s sake) and should by no means be misconstrued as all-inclusive, I do feel it has a certain experiential truth to it, and I hope you all enjoy.
TAYLORSCHLADES/MORGUEFILE.COM
1. Mr. Frat-tastic
Party party party.
Drink drink drink.
These are the mating calls of the wild Fratus FanTasticus. He’s super fun in the beginning and life is like one endless party – or a Cohen Brothers film. You’re loving all the themed socials, off-location formals, and insider privileges that come with dating a brother.
But after a little time passes the glam starts to wear off. After the initial Honeymoon Phase you’ll start to notice that he’s not actually boyfriend material. There are no nice dates or dinners out with this frat-focused bro.
“Why can’t we just stay at the frat house, rage with the guys, then hit up a kegger?”
“What’s the big deal about valentines day?…let’s just get some Raspberry flavored Four Lokos and eat some chocolate or something…”
He’s a boy with no plan, no class, and no clue. If you’re cool with on-campus-only activities until graduation then by all means, hit it up. But if you’ve a taste for higher society, I’d suggest you stay far away from this one.
HANNAHJENSENPHOTO/MORGUEFILE.COM
2. Sir Sleaze-a-lot
Not actually a “Sir” at all, but more like a consummate liar and womanizer. Sleaze-a-lot talks a big talk and never follows through on the things he promises. He’s a bed-post notcher for life, and will eventually find himself washed up on the shores of middle age without a significant other by his side or any concept of how to actually “date” someone without trying to coerce them into sleeping with him.
These are the adolescent versions of those cheesy old men who troll skaggy night clubs trying to sleep with women half their age – making a career out of getting turned down in the process. Think “Night at the Roxbury” and you’ve got a pretty accurate picture.
TALIESIN/MORGUEFILE.COM
3. Clarence McClingstien
McClingstien really lives up to his name. He falls in love faster than a mail-order bride and clings to your leg like an orphan with polio. He’s willing to do anything and everything to keep you by his side, and there’s virtually nothing you can do to make him go away.
Initially, his constant doting is flattering – it may even make you feel kind of nice. Then it keeps on coming, getting more and more intense as time wears on. He seems to think that 15 + unanswered text messages = true love.
He’ll continue to slip notes under your door, keep track of your daily whereabouts and off-campus movements, and basically semi-stalk you until he finds some other poor soul to whom he can attach himself.
McClingstien has got multiple “mommy issues” and he definitely can’t take the hint. The best advice I can give you on this one is to cut the cord and RUN.
IMELENCHON/MORGUEFILE.COM
4. John “The Right Choice” Doe
“Wow” – that’s all you can manage to say after meeting him. His calm confidence, considerate nature, social charisma and gentlemanly ways had you in the first five minutes.
He differentiates himself from the douchey masses with his natural tendency to encompass every quality you’ve ever looked for in a man; and he’s down-to-Earth to boot.
He’s intelligent, charming, respectful and interesting. It’s like meeting a male version of yourself – or a perfect compliment to your own opposing nature – with whom you want to both hang out and hook-up. His company feels like a breath of fresh air in a jungle of tool-baggery; and you’re both excited to see where this might go.
It’s a win-win for everyone involved. And this kind of guy, ladies and gents, is exactly what we deserve.
*
*
To read Suzette’s latest post, “Friend-icites: Your Clique Demystified”, jump to her personal blog: FavoriteBirdSpeaks.
Posted in Dating in the District
January 9th, 2011 at 10:53 pm
Haha, good stuff. What about Mr. Emo, or the dude who tries to be friends with chicks clinging to the hope he can score her down the road?
January 12th, 2011 at 2:00 pm
I would like to propose that your last man, a Mr. John “The Right Choice” Doe, does not, in fact, exist in the sense that you feel he did nor is necessarily what anyone is worth “receiving”, if we were to further objectify him.
You know how media creates “perfect” women in men’s minds? And you know how media tells men that girls who don’t look like the “perfect” woman nor act like the “perfect” woman aren’t worth their devotion? Well, this Mr. John Doe is such a farce, I fear.
Just as women are asked by men, once fueled by the media, to live up to impossible standards, so are men asked to live as such when we read this description. A man who’s always calm and confident? That is unnatural; such a man is either doped or loopy in the brain.
Does a man have to be gentlemanly? What if some women like to express their independence more or participate equally in things rather than being pampered?
Also, you have assumed her that “you”, both the audience and your personal self, are LIKE this imaginary man and SHOULD BE WITH this imaginary man. Is it innately good to be paired with someone like you? And do you have all these qualities in the first place? Are you gentlemanly? Are you down to earth? Are you charming? Intelligent? Interesting?
I must admit here that I am biased; I am currently in a long-distance relationship and I feel that this relationship is marvelous; this is for many reasons, but one of them is that I feel weak with her. I don’t cry in front of anyone but her; I don’t admit my mistakes and shortcomings as readily as in front of anyone else; because I am so taken by her, I am all the more clumsy and stupid in her presence. The beautiful thing her is that she ACCEPTS me for who I am rather then expects me to fulfill some other role. We both love each other BECAUSE of our short comings as well as our other qualities. We never call each other perfect; we know, but need not say, that we are lovable.
Is this wrong? Media tells me yes, media tells me know, but regardless of all that, I choose to think of this is as right, as a good situation, as a good relationship.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:28 pm
Mr. Fodeman,
Firstly, congratulations on your obviously well-oiled relationship. It’s hard to find someone you can trust and be yourself around – especially in a long distance relationship – so high-five on that one.
1. In this article Mr. John “The Right Choice” Doe is a representation of your* personal ideal man. This means that whatever you* feel is your ideal mate, then that is what this #4 character is supposed to represent. When I say he is “perfect” I do not mean literally infallible. I didn’t think I needed to specify that but I suppose I will be aware of that in future posts. When I say that he is like me, I mean that literally because my* ideal mate is someone who encompasses the positive qualities that I identify within myself – plus hopefully many more.
2. As far as whether I, myself, am charming, confident, etc., I absolutely believe myself to be these things. Whether others would agree or not is not really important to me.
3. I feel that your definition of “gentlemanly” greatly differs from my own. I do not view “pampering” and “gentlemanly” to be synonyms. When I say a man is gentlemanly I mean that he has good character, treats women (and men) with respect, and is well mannered. That’s it.
4. As far as the media thing… I am of the opinion that “the media” cannot make* you do anything or feel any particular way without your first giving “the media” permission to do so. We are all affected by the media, but we can choose how we react to that affect. I choose to define my own standards for dating and relationships; and from what you’ve written, it sounds like you’re beginning to as well.
As always, thanks for reading.
P.S. If you ever have any relationship questions in the future, check out my upcoming “Dear Suzy” posts. I’d love to hear from you.