Vanity Fair Tinder Dating Article

I was repulsed by the article "Tinder and the Dawn of the 'Dating Apolocypse'" in Vanity Fair's September Issue.  The author, Nancy Jo Sales, discusses how the internet has changed dating, particularly amongst the 'hook-up' culture, by which I think she means 20 somethings just looking for sex.  Sales chiefly covers double standards in the dating realm (can men be promiscuous and get away with it, while women with the same behavior are whores?), whether romance and chivalry can exists if men's sexual opportunities abound, and whether these hook-ups turn into long term relationships.

One immediate reaction I had to the article is that the people interviewed must be highly exaggerated examples.  They all speak of numerous sexual experiences; one man for example has had sex with five different women over the past eight days.  By contrast, a friend of mine met a guy online who's never had sex and hasn't kissed a woman in 7 years.  Clearly, not everyone dating online is so wildly promiscuous.

Additionally, this article never even addresses the lasting effects of having sex with 40+ partners.  Condoms really aren't safe, but only 'less risky' sex, and STDs last, well, forever.  What about these 20 somethings who decide they want a serious relationship in their late 30s, but can't find one due in part to an STD they contracted from one of their 40+ partners 10 years prior?  Sales is so concerned with double standards in the hook-up culture she seems to gloss over the fact that it's just downright stupid to have sex with someone with whom you've only exchanged a few text messages.  And another point she misses--can these men, so accostomed to using numerous women as sexual experiences for his enjoyment, effectively settle down with one woman when he decides that he's ready?

So yeah, it's a pretty bullshit article.  What stuck with me, however, are these repulsive men........their sexual encounters are so numerous, and their motivations so explicitly entirely selfish--they don't even feign to be out for anything more than sexual gratification.  Here's a few excerpts of men she interviewed;

"he is able to entice young women into his bed on the basis of a few text exchanges, while letting them know up front he is not interested in having a relationship" // "he has a list of more than 40 girls he has had relations with, rated by [one to five] stars.....it's a mix of how good they are in bed and how attractive they are" // "He says he’s slept with 30 to 40 women in the last year: 'I sort of play that I could be a boyfriend kind of guy,' in order to win them over, 'but then they start wanting me to care more … and I just don’t.'"

Can't help but recall Jim Garrison's article, "Martial Law by Executive Order", in conjunction with these vacuous, selfish people.  In this article Garrison deplores the passing of the National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order in March 2012, which would enable Obama, or whoever follows him as president, to declare Martial Law whenever he sees fit.  If such a scenario were to come to pass, who would be able to revolt against our government and their oppressive control over our daily lives?  Men bent over their smart phones looking for a good fuck?  I think not.

No comments

Post a Comment