Ask DB1
dogboy writes in:
——
DB1,
Mr. bones’ call for a mistrial of dolphinbag yesterday makes me wonder whether douchebag identification, and hopefully eradiation, is science or politico-social art. Is it a democratic process of consensus building and judgment in a somewhat less than congenial forum by spiky peers in hopes of making a better society? And by making a better society I mean ridding us of these stinking turds.
Or is it a cold, hard, but growing, science of tagging, identification and classification of disgusting nutsacks and the symbiotic, hot, sweet honeys in their environs in hope discovering a cure? And by cure I mean ridding us of these stinking turds.
Either way, this site is still gd funny.
Help me understand, great one. And by great one I mean . . .
dogboy
——
Solid question, dogboy. As we seek to parse and classify the various stages, levels and permutations of ‘Bag in the increasingly fetid swampland that is the modern hottie/douchey plague, we must understand that our endeavor is not majoritarian but scientific in nature. The democratic process aids and abets the boundries of the discourse through a Millsian framework of competitive argument, but the proofs require a more detailed and objective list of criteria. In other words, once the parameters of the douche manifest have been established in each subcategory, those systems of ranking become fixed as defining tropes.
This is not to say that there isn’t an aesthetic component to the analysis. Some ‘Bags feature an unclassifiable quality, an essence du baggage if you will that rises above any specific signifiers, like Bling, facial pubes, popped collar, etc. In this way, ‘bag hunting becomes a form of artistic expression of equal importance to any scientific classification.
So in this sense, tagging the perfect Hottie/Douchey combo is both scientific classifiable but also artistic and aesthetically driven. But not necessarily majoritarian or democracy based as a driving trope of the study.
