Originally Posted by Piobaire
Not every part of the country builds in brownstone.
I think McMansions are known for being of modest build quality, cookie cutter, nothing but a rectangular box (often with non-matching features tagged on the exterior), and crammed onto tiny lots. In all modesty it pleases me that we were able to land a house in a development that is none of this list. Our house is not up to SF baller standards but we really enjoy it and it fits us well.
I am in agreement, Although I think that people (probably people who live in mcmansions and are in denial) have tried to stretch the term.
Nowadays when I google mcmansions, I see a lot of photos of actual mansions. They may be fairly generic looking /cookie cutter, but they lack the other tenants of mcmansionship. They aren't just a rectangular box, they have space between houses/don't overpower the lot size, and they tend to be much larger than what I would start to call a mcmansion.
I have a bunch of friends who grew up in things that I would 100% call a mcmansion without question, who are in denial. Maybe it is kind of like the "I'm not rich, THAT guy is rich" trope--except mcmansions don't require you to be rich. They evolved as the non-rich looked to cheap land, further from the city centers, and built oversized houses with fancy-looking facades powered by cheap mortgages...but even though the land was cheap, they didn't pay for quality or design, and they didn't actually pay for enough land to fit the houses they were building.