Apparently Mr. Darcy would be ass-ugly in real life, according to researchers

We have word that real-life Mr. Darcy would actually be fugly, and we are pissed.

New York Mag reported yesterday that based on Jane Austen’s descriptions of “Pride and Prejudice” character Mr. Darcy, there is no way he would look even remotely similar to Colin Firth’s swarthy, broad-shouldered portrayal.

John Sutherland, an English professor at University College London and Amanda Vickery, a history professor at Queen Mary University of London, collaborated on an analysis of Darcy’s character traits and put together a historically accurate portrait.

They considered her description of Darcy and the social norms at the time: “malnourished and pale, due to lack of sunlight. He would likely have had ‘loose powdered mid length hair’ tied in a ponytail, with a slim oval face and pointy jaw.” Yikes.

This is what they came up with:

 

Is it us or does he look Lucius Malfoy AF?

 

Squirrel-ass Trump-ass looking dude.

The study did mention that because noble men did a lot of horseback riding, Darcy’s thigh and calf muscles would be powerful, but he would have basically no abs and no defined chest and shoulders.

So, he could give a good death thigh grip but otherwise would just look like a whiny privileged dad-bod aristocrat.

We are not fans. Though this is a huge blow to our perception of possibly the best literary dreamboat of the 1790s, we’ll just decidedly keep Colin Firth as the default.