a bird and a bottle

Ugh. Or, Why I Don’t Read the NY Post (except sometimes Page Six).
January 28, 2007, 12:58 pm
Filed under: feminism/s & gender, frivolity

Because they report on trash like this: As a promotion for a “high-end lifestyle newspaper,” one NYC man has put together “Natural Selection Speed Date: Rich Guys & Hot Girls,” which “will boil the matchmaking process down to its bare essentials: sex and money.”

Lovely. And it gets even better. According to the Post:

Men must submit a detailed financial statement (which will be checked) including salary, investment capital and trust-fund money.

“There is no attractiveness standard at all for the men,” he said.

The women, meanwhile, need to send in five photos of themselves. The pics will be judged by matchmaking guru Janis Spindel.

The guys will each have to pay a $500 entry fee, the women $50 – though Abelson said the cover may be waived for particularly hot women.

Abelson [ed. note – the organizer] said it’s natural for men to choose a women on looks alone.

Sigh. Why is it that we rehash the same things over and over again? Here’s what I find particularly icky about this event:

1) how much more men must pay than women (it’s like ladies nights at bars, which I also find icky), and that “particularly hot women” may have to pay nothing. Just, ick.

2) that the event relies on the oldest most misogynist stereotypes about women being nothing of not attractive and men having to support them. It’s just…SO twentieth century.

3) That New York Magazine, a publication I like a lot, is “cosponsoring” though it’s not clear if that means actual sponsorship or just that it will be running an ad for the event in the classifieds.

4) How the event grounds itself in Natural Selection. As far as I remember from high school and college science, today’s “hotness” standards in no way reflect the traits that evolution naturally selected to continue in women (such as big hips, which make carrying a child easier both during and after pregnancy). This is part of why such a small percentage of the population is actually built like Gisele Bundchen.

Ok, I’m going to stop now. I have already spent too much space and time dignifying this ridiculous event in this post. While part of me thinks the event is just funny, another part of me is appalled that this is how we still operate.

And yet…I still go back for more Page Six.

Via Gothamist.


13 Comments so far
Leave a comment

ew! how llllame!!

Comment by milbydaniel

Isn’t this merely outsourcing what many of the Page Six notables have been doing for ages? Dinner and drinks can easily run $500 when money is no object and the woman is nothing but one.
I find something sickeningly refreshing in the crassness of the endeavor. At least it doesn’t pretend to the respectability of a “marriage of convenience” that good ol’ Karl Marx already identified as socially condoned prostitution. And should “Natural Selection Speed Date” miraculously lead to marriage, the inevitable divorce settlement will make that $500 upfront look like a steal.

Comment by professorplum

fair enough. I think you’re right that the crassness of it all is somehow refreshing, if only because it’s honest. Maybe I need to have more of a sense of humor about such things 🙂

Comment by bean

On second thought, I don’t think it’s nearly crass enough. Not after the reality TV success of “Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?” Now *that’s* crass.
What’s amazing is that such a program is all but taken for granted but “Who Wants to Marry a Member of the Same Sex in Order to Live a Committed Life Together?” would have the country up in arms.
Mmmm. Nothing like the sanctity of hypocrisy.

Comment by professorplum

Great Blog, and thanks for the kind comments last week. I hope you will add my blog to your blog roll — Sexuality and Religion: What’s the Connection? (http://debrahaffner.blogspot.com

Comment by Rev. Debra

Whats on page six, precious? No Post deliveries down here in the wetlands … am I missing something?

Comment by Jeff Berger

My humble little postscript (Ref: the Gothamist link): There is no profit in taking on the tabloids or the Toupee or the Counter-Coulter. They are skilled at dealing themselves the Royal Flush of publicity. Whether one loves them or hates them, admires them or detests them, they thrive on attention. It may be déclassé, but there is profit in being a bad-ass, belligerent mouth these days. Ignoring them profits them least of all.

Comment by Jeff Berger

Page Six is the gossip page. It’s tawdry but entertaining. And it doesn’t take itself as seriously as many other gossip rags which somehow assuages my feminist guilt at reading it.

Comment by bean

When I was living in London, page 2 was known as the bikini page. Is there a page 2 in NYC? All we have down here is cooters and scooters and swamps. Oh, my !! No need to assuage a guilt, Precious. The Inquirer is a must-read on Valentine’s Day and for keeping up with the latest Elvis sightings.

Comment by Jeff Berger

I don’t know of any page 2. And what’s up with the “precious”? As an inveterate reader/commenter, you gotta know it doesn’t quite fit the whole feminist blog thing….

Comment by bean

Please accept my apologies. Since I am always in the swamps, I was referring to the Smeagle character from the “Ring” trilogy. Different context, self-effacing personna, no harm intended. And I won’t say that word again … Okay?

Comment by Jeff Berger

Totally fair (and makes perfect sense). No apology necessary. Thanks for elaborating (also: I haven’t seen any of the “Ring” trilogy!).

Comment by bean


Comment by Yzcjr

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: