Woman’s profile pic not fooling anyone

A woman was declared “obviously not attractive” today, after the internet came to a general consensus that her profile picture isn’t fooling anyone.

The black-and-white airbrushed image, which was carefully framed, lit and chosen out of four dozen other photos taken at around the same time, was uploaded yesterday evening to 26-year-old Megan Jenners’s Facebook profile – and all her friends agree that “this shit isn’t fooling anyone”.

“Yes, it’s a pretty photo. Yes, to the untrained eye that hasn’t seen her in real life, you might be fooled into thinking she’s attractive and then swiping right,” said the guy who follows her every update but hasn’t spoken to her in four years, Vuyo Rystic. “But let’s just admit the facts here: it’s a top-down, filter-heavy selfie that has clearly been put through the Instagram-photoshop wringer.”

Friends and followers of Jenners– even those on Twitter – have agreed.

“For me, my suspicions were raised when I saw the angle. I mean, it’s top-down and is filled with her face,” said one friend Jake Henderson shortly before liking it and commenting ‘omg so pretty u stuning babe’. “Why else would you want a full picture of your face as your profile picture unless you had a disgusting, corpulent and revoltingly grosteque mass underneath it that you wanted to hide no matter what?”

Others agree.

“No amount of BW correction and careful balancing of exposure and saturation can hide how much of a soulless, blackhearted skank Megan is,” said another friend, Erin Blakey, before hitting ‘like’. “I’ve read her statuses. She’s vapid and completely irritating and full of herself. Maybe I should post a passive-aggressive status about her?”

She followed this by adding “no, on second thoughts I shouldn’t” and “the two-faced bitch might realise who I was talking about.”

According to online researchers, much of the anger stems from its inherent insincere dishonesty.

“When it comes to Social Media, I think we can all agree that the most important, central tenet is honesty and truth,” said media analyst Eric Henderson. “So when she posted these quasi-blurry, pseudo-artistic selfies of herself and tried to pretend she was someone she wasn’t, she broke the cardinal rule of the internet: never lie to people.”

“In their eyes, this publication of a falsehood is a deep and hurtful mockery of the thought-provoking articles, provocative philosophical debates, and cat pictures they share,” he explained. “To the untrained eye, it might seem like all these people commenting on the picture think she is, quote, ‘gorjuz’ and ‘totes hawt girl’, but we all tacitly know what they’re really saying.”

However, not everyone agrees.

“Oh, I dunno, bro,” said one man. “I mean, I would still definitely bang her.”

UCT to change attractiveness policy

Following the recent controversy surrounding an article published by the University of Capetown’s Varsity newspaper (which was totally ignored by everyone because it's terrible journalism and stupid as all hell reposted in everyone's twitter feeds and all over facebook), UCT has announced their decision to change their current policy on attractiveness.

According to a press release from the University’s Department of Enrollments, there is a dire need for students to be equally good looking, or at least equally fugly, no matter what 'race' they are.

The incredibly scientific, trustworthy, based-on-hard-evidence, not-at-all-utterly-absurd-or-stupid-as-fuck study has made waves in the community

“Recent studies that we hand picked to support our argument show that being attractive is key to getting a degree. How are our students going to pass their exams and graduate when they are so worried about what other people think about them?” said the release. “Efforts need to be made to make everyone the same.”

Students, including 4th-year medicine student Paleso Mthethwa, have agreed.

"Everyone, especially doctors, know that how you look is so important in the working world. How can I perform triple-bypass surgery if I know that the man I'm operating on thinks my anesthesiologist is better looking than me?" she said.

So far, the University has adopted several short-term remedial policies aimed at enacting the much-needed change.

“We tried things like making all our students drink three litres of wine before lectures, so that they’d tap ANYTHING, but that didn’t work," said new head of Aesthetic Social Equality May Khover. "Then, we started offering bursaries to students who never went to the gym, and changed our cater department to be only KFC chicken nuggets, bacon sandwiched and oil milkshakes. These all failed. Soon, we realised that we have to implement a ground-up policy, starting from new first-years.”

The university has said it will implement a base-ten scale of attractiveness into its already convoluted thorough applications process. According to University statistics, they have already reached their newly-established Hot White People quota for the year. "As such, when it comes to the next round of applications, we will also look into enrolling a lot more students who are a 6.3 or under," said the Department of Enrollments.

It’s a move that excites the University greatly.

"It really is fantastic,” said Dean of Students Ahryu Uhglee. “Currently, we don’t have any systems in place that judge and limit applicants based purely on what they look like. Wait… hang on a minute…"

It is hoped that the changes will result in shallow, judgmental but also racially-sensitive students.

The new system, Uhglee says, is flawless.

“We’ve hired master specialists in this field from esteemed, tried-and-tested foreign institutes such as Friar Tuck’s Dancefloor and the V&A Waterfront’s Fashion Wing to ensure that we’re getting the same amount of pant-stirring no matter what race you look at. They’re the experts at these kinds of life-changing, important judgements,” she said.

The decision has not, however, pleased everyone, with some students in uproar, saying there is now an added pressure for white students to look less attractive.

"We know the whole survey was utter laughable garbage, but now we feel awkward if we go out looking semi-decent. I mean, I don't want to reinforce racial prejudice," said psychology major Jenna Harson. She and other students have gone so far as to not visit the hair salon every two weeks, and to ditch their cute indie clothes items in favour of more homely, unattractive items of clothing, such as res hoodies, torn Ugg boots, pajama pants, and mismatching socks.

“It’s awful,” said third-year law student Creeh Pinghard. “I feel like everyday I’m getting ready to study for a Humanities degree at Rhodes University during winter.”

In reaction to this news, expensive private schools across the country have been quick to advise their learners to avoid eyeshadow, mascara, lipstick, GHT hair irons, cute dresses and LBDs.

The new university policy states that, after being meticulously rated out of ten, applicants above a 6.3  will be given mandatory lessons in  Mussing Up Your Hair In A Way That Isn’t Bed-Sexy 101, Introduction to Mismatching Or Clashing Colours 102,  Granny pants 203, and Advanced courses in How to Get Bat. Those below 7 will get free makeovers. This, the University hopes, will ensure a comfortable, non-racial middle ground.

“I’m really excited by the move,” said art student and equity shareholder in a make-up company Luke Hinghud. “Now everyone will be able to equally bend to Western gloss-magazine ideas of what is 'beauty', who is good looking and who is not.”

Students excelling in these aforementioned classes can even receive bursaries. “These two students will fall into our new categories of ‘Previously gorgeous’ and ‘previously disadvantaged but not in a racial sense’,” said Hinghud.

However, the new changes have hotness analysts up in arms.

“UCT is known for its great fashion-sense and eclectic mix of hipsters and fashionistas," said the guy who stares at you from across the dancefloor. "Right now, on average, we’re sitting at about an 8.2. If the university has its way, we’ll all be 5.3s. SIES.”