(1) Westley ("The Princess Bride")

Westley may have been our first PiP candidate. (We both have some sort of vague memory of a pretty boy being whipped, but the source or this early impression cannot, at this time, be documented. It may be a shared memory, but the early onset and advanced progress of sisterbrain* makes objective experience harder to pin down). Westley is delightful because he is very capable, but repeatedly incapacitated. Strong, but rendered weak. We love this transformation. Don't get us wrong, we also love frail-needing-care, but strong-made-weak is its own heady cocktail of masculine misery.**

Subject(s): Seester & Morpho
Object(s): Westley
Prettiness: general loveliness, eyes like the sea after a storm, submissive tendencies ("as you wish")
Pain: gnawed on by ROUS's, ditched by his woman - twice!, bondage/torture, crying/humiliation, physical weakness brought on by being mostly dead, accompanying bout of despair.
Stats: 9/10 for prettiness, 7/10 for pain (speed and ease of recovery affected angst quotient, pencil moustache jeopardizes prettiness quotient, but still clearly a strong candidate)
Overall PiP score = 8

*Sisterbrain = a merging of consciousness that may be the product of a common genetic heritage, prolonged shared experience, or spooky psychic powers. Manifests with mind-reading, simultaneity of observations (Jinx syndrome), and finding the same people hot. Other side effects include telekinesis and exponential increase of sexiness. We can make you want us. Or kill you with our minds.

**Gender will probably become an exploration within the context of this larger body of research. Why is the combination of pretty & pain particularly appealing in the masculine - though not the exclusively male? Female masculinity and trans-masculinity are both appealing sites for angst - some might argue they come with the territory, at least in fiction, where the well-adjusted transman or butch is not exactly a stock character - but femininity and pain are not particularly erotic to either member of the research team. Is this because real world vicimization of feminine women is so very visible (which is absolutely not to say that victimization of non-feminine, non-female identified persons is less prevalent) or because it's too personal, as we are both femme- and female-identified? Is it that product of sexism which conflates feminine with weak and masculine with strong, that creates an erotic contrast in the latter which is absent in the former? Is it relevant that the research team skews hard queer? ("90/10" bisexuals, heavily lesbian-leaning with a smaller but significant penchant for male masculinity. Well, very significant, as Seester recently married a cis-boy. Himself cannot help that his dick is attached, and rightly considers Himself a straight man married to a lesbian. For this we love him and cherish him's queerness).

Whatever the implications, the determination is that we like boys, bois, butches, trans- and cis-men best when their eyeliner is running. Is that so wrong?

Addendum: Then why does it feel so right?