At first, the photo of a worn pair of shorts seems insignificant — just frayed fabric and obvious tears. But when it’s paired with a caption like “How many holes do you see?” it suddenly becomes more than an image: it becomes a challenge that practically begs people to judge themselves and others.
That’s why it spreads so fast.
The appeal isn’t just curiosity. The prompt suggests your answer reveals something about who you are. People don’t just want to solve it — they want to prove something about themselves, then defend it. That combination drives high engagement: comments, debates, and strong reactions.
In reality, the image doesn’t diagnose personality traits or narcissism. What it actually highlights is how differently people interpret visual information. Most viewers instantly see the two obvious tears and answer “two” without thinking much. That’s quick, intuitive perception — useful in everyday life. Then others point out basic design features like the leg openings and waist, adding up to more holes. Still others count holes based on light passing through or fabric layers. Before long, the discussion isn’t about the shorts at all — it’s about reasoning styles.
The wording in the caption nudges people to take sides. Quick responders may feel defensive when challenged. More analytical responders feel validated for noticing extra details. But none of these reactions prove anything about personality — they just reflect different ways of thinking.
Social platforms reward exactly this kind of content: something simple enough to answer fast but ambiguous enough to spark ongoing debate. Each comment and counter‑comment keeps it circulating.
What the trend really reveals isn’t narcissism — it shows how easily people are drawn into defending split‑second judgments, how quickly curiosity becomes certainty, and how much social media thrives on our need to signal competence or perspective. The shorts aren’t the point — the debate about them is.