I haven’t been a paying member of Match.com since January, but I’ve left my profile up because it links to my blog (always trying to find ways to get new readers in on the conversation).
Pretty much every day Match will send me an e-mail saying something like, “She’s interested in you, and you have so much in common. You’re both the eldest sibling, you like to eat food, and you both have blue eyes!” Thank you, Match. You really get me.
Match also tells me every time a woman e-mails me through Match. I don’t get to read the e-mail–no, I have to pay for that privilege. But I know there are e-mails sitting out there, all of them presumably written by supermodels who love to play board games, can quote Arrested Development, and wear yoga pants as regular pants.
So it’s to my delight that once a month, Match tells me that it’s about to delete all of my received e-mails from that month unless I subscribe right away. In that notification e-mail it includes a little gem, a short e-mail received over the last month.
So, to get to the point of this blog entry, here’s the e-mail I received the other day as part of that notification (no photo was included, but based on her name and the winks I’ve received this past month, I’m pretty sure this is her):
So, for someone who finds women that judge unattractive, you sure have a lot of opinions. Never any mindless tv? I do agree with no Jersey Shores or Hills, but Bethenny and some of the Real Housewives??? One of my favorite ways to try to get my mind to stop for just an hour. –Tracy
She’s referring to a paragraph in my Match profile:
What do I find unattractive? Women who… Assume. Judge. Pout. Wear much makeup. Don’t have their own friends. Give ultimatums. Enter serious discussions about relationships when it’s really late at night. Watch trashy reality TV (we all have ways to turn off our brains and relax, but really, Jersey Shore and The Hills? There’s a difference between relaxing and wasting time).
So I got Tracy’s e-mail, and at first I was all like, “I’m going to resubscribe to Match to respond to Tracy and convince her that I’m not judgmental and tell her how cute she is.”
Then I stopped to think about it. She might be right. But I’m not sure.
The first question is: Am I being judgmental (and thus hypocritical) by looking down on people who watch trashy reality TV (yes, I’d lump Bethenny and Real Housewives into that category, Tracy)? I would say yes. It seems that’s the textbook definition of judging.
The second question is: Is judging allowed in dating? Especially online dating? Isn’t this what dating is–you figure out what you want and don’t want, and you only date people who have the characteristics you want. Of course, that means that I should remove “judge” from the list of things I find unattractive in a woman. I’m okay with that.
The last question is: Is reality TV a waste of time? I thought about this quite a bit after getting Tracy’s e-mail. Essentially, the reason I look down on reality TV is that it requires you to sit on your couch and watch another real human being get followed around by a camera. Instead of living your life, you’re watching other people live theirs. To me, that’s a waste.
But then I started wondering if it’s all that different from any other TV show. All TV shows, scripted or unscripted, involve us sitting on the couch watching other people live their lives. It doesn’t matter if those lives are real or not. It’s all just entertainment to us.
Now, I think that I get a lot more value out of watching a scripted show–or even an unscripted competition show like Survivor or Top Chef–than watching rich, tan, fake-boobed ladies parade themselves around New York as if they’re important. But who am I to judge? If Tracy likes to come home and relax by watching the Real Housewives, as long as she can turn her brain back on when she talks to me, that’s all that matters.
So Tracy, thank you for pointing out my hypocracy. I appreciate when people challenge me in constructive ways.
I 100% agree with your revelation and with removing the word “judge” from your profile (if you can do that as a non-subscriber). That word alone grates on my nerves every time I hear it because, as humans, it’s what we innately do in every single scenario to move our lives forward toward continued living.
However, in the last couple of years in American society, judging has come to mean being judgemental, which is defined as “too willing to criticize other people’s actions and behavior and say that they are wrong”. A judgement alone, by the way, is defined as “an opinion that you have after thinking carefully about something”. I can see how the American public has gotten to this point, but it drives me bananas that we’ve misconstrued the entire concept of judging to portray a negative connotation.
Those of you who’ve followed this blog for quite some time may recall that there’s a short list of people I’d realistically kill for the betterment of humanity. In addition to the person who first put lettuce on a taco and the entire cast of Gossip Girl (who, in fairness, I’d only maim beyond further acting ability), I’ll add the person who first bastardized the term “judge” beyond repair. If you’re out there reading this and you are said culprit, fear me.
Thanks, Trev, for differentiating between judgmental and judging. I was struggling to put my finger on the difference, but it’s clear now that judging is coming to an opinion after thought/research, while being judgmental is, as you say, “too willing to criticize other people’s actions and behavior and say that they are wrong.” I condone judging but not being judgmental.
I’ll break that down a little more, because all of your life is spent judging. You receive stimuli with your sense organs, process them in your brain box, and decide on and execute an reaction (including the choice not to react). “Judgmental” is pretty subjective to define, because some entity has to determine the TOO part of “TOO willing to criticize.” Obviously you can’t determine it yourself. So other people’s perspective assign whether you are being judgmental. Trev, I’m not sure where your definition for judgmental came from (though I don’t question it’s authenticity or validity), but I have assigned a different personal meaning for it. My meaning is something like, “Assigning a negative overall moral value to a person based on information about them you believe to be true.” I don’t mind the FACT that someone does drugs. It’s a fact, or even a perceived fact. But if I think that doing drugs makes them a bad person, I am being judgmental. If, instead, I think that the fact that they do drugs, which I know (or perceive) leads them to steal from people, and I don’t want to be stolen from, I can choose to avoid the person, and still not be judgmental, so long as I don’t believe that they are a “BAD” person. I am choosing to avoid the situation where the person may steal from me. I don’t believe that the action of stealing for drugs is a moral action, but I don’t believe the person to be amoral.
Does that make sense?
Red–I like that definition of being judgmental. It’s very close to stereotyping people before you really know them.
Goodness, I think it’s absolutely necessary to judge someone else when you are considering dating them. How else will you decide if you want to continue the relationship? (And I’m using T-Mac’s definition of “judge.” Not irrationally criticizing someone else, but making an informed decision based on what they show you about their personality.)
Reality TV grates on my nerves, but it is very entertaining to some people, just like books are very entertaining to me. I think what annoys me so much about it is that it tends to be strictly drama. Girls fighting about who said what, guys trying to act more macho than everyone else. It’s not clever, like Arrested Development. There’s no real value in what’s happening unless you are entertained by people trying to one-up each other, and I’m not.
That’s a good point about the overabundance of drama in reality shows. I’d actually lump some scripted dramas into that category as well–that’s one of the reasons why I can’t stand to watch a show like Gossip Girl. Too much bickering and puffed chests.
There is some drama on Survivor, but I can overlook a few scenes where they act like little kids for all the other aspects of the show I enjoy.
Agreed. I’ll admit that I enjoyed a few seasons of MTV reality drama back in college, but those days are over. I’m 30. Am I entertained by one girl dating 15 guys at once? No. Am I entertained by people getting ridiculously drunk and glorifying a materialistic lifestyle that does nothing for the betterment of society? No. I have better things to do with my time and I prefer the company of people who feel the same way.
Yes! Thank you, Ansley!
I’m going to wade in here because I think Anne’s quote: “It’s not clever, like Arrested Development.” is a good starting point.
So you are looking for a companion/lover/friend/spouse and you are pre-screening based on their (gross generalization) tastes/preferences. You and Anne both like/appreciate AD because it is “clever” and dislike reality TV because it isn’t clever (“low-brow”). This leads me to a list of questions/observations.
1a. Are you looking for someone who is clever (in addition to looking good in yoga pants) and using entertainment preferences as a screen for “cleverness”?
1b. Are you looking for someone to affirm your cleverness because they like the same (intellectually stimulating) entertainment that you do?
2. Does it make a difference if the taste/preferences are public or private? (i.e. you can watch RTV in the privacy of your living room, but you drink peach martinis in public)
3. From your past Match.com experiences do you think that RTV watching is one of the best taste/personality screening tools?
Imposter Josh–Great questions. I’ll answer below.
1a. Hmm…it’s not so much cleverness I’m looking for here; it’s respect for how she spends her time and respect for how she thinks.
1b. No…a good question, but I don’t think that way.
2. Not really. Although I do think if someone has a secret, guilty pleasure show, it says something about whether or not they should be watching it.
3. Hmmm…that’s really interesting. I can’t say exactly, because that info has been in my profile the entire time, so it probably eliminated plenty of women right away, but I have found that those women that I have dated despite their love of certain RTV shows share a certain personality “type” with which I don’t click well.
Hypocrisy.
Once a beta, always a beta
I was wondering about that…it didn’t look right, but spell check didn’t give me any alternatives. Always a beta.
So…you’ll be going out with this woman, right? I think we need a followup.
On a related note, I read about a site (OKCupid, I believe) that gives you a % for how good a match you are, as well as one for how much of an enemy you are. I’m totally signing up for this. I’ve always wanted to know who my greatest enemy is. The first thing I’m going to do is ask out the person with my greatest enemy %. This just seems like something that needs to be done.
Has anyone tried this?
No, I won’t be seeing her. The e-mail came from Match as a promotion to get me to rejoin Match, not as an e-mail directly from that woman. I have no way of contacting her without signing back up, which I’m not doing.
Be cheap like me and have your email in your profile in code. If a woman is smart enough, she’ll crack the code and contact you. It’s a great way to cheat the system and to weed out the incompetent.
Well, I do have my blog address in the profile, so people can click through from there. Match didn’t catch it when I originally put it in there, but they see it whenever I try to update my profile. So I’ve just stopped trying to update it and just let the outdated version sit there with my blog URL in the body.
My God. It’s the Jamey Code. BRILLIANT!
I agree with Anne on this one, about it being necessary to judge people based on how they represent themselves when you are considering dating them. Having tried (and quit) the online dating game myself, I know I was guilty of immediately saying “no” to several men based on only a few things that I would see in their profiles. Was it wrong of me not to give them a fair chance and see where things could have gone? I’d say no, because those first impressions do count quite a bit, and if I immediately see potential red flags in a profile, or just instinctively know that we would have no shared interests or potential, why waste a bunch of time, and possibly be miserable?
Sure, the judging someone based on their liking reality tv is a little petty, but if they are only using it as a filler, then what’s really the difference between having trashy reality tv on (like Real Housewives or the Hills) versus having a sitcom on in the background?
I’ve gotten to the point myself where I really don’t watch tv anymore, as I realized I was spending too much time trying to keep up with all of the different shows I used to watch. Instead of living someone else’s life through watching tv, I started living my own, by finding activities to do both by myself and with friends. There are only a few shows I make a point to watch anymore, and even then I watch most online only (with the exception of The Bachelor/Bachelorette since that’s something I watch with friends) so I’m not planning my life around tv. I realize that my one reality show is one of the worst out there, but the reason I watch it is because it’s with a group and it gives my friends and I a time and place to be judgmental about the ridiculous antics on the show, and spend time together during the commercial breaks, so it’s more about quality female bonding time than the show itself.
Katy–Hmm…I guess I definitely see a difference between trashy reality TV and a sitcom. A sitcom (at least, the ones I choose to watch) is a a tightly written bundle of comedy focused on getting me to laugh. Trashy reality TV is all about voyeurism–you get to peek at someone else’s life for 22 minutes. There might be some comedy, but as Anne said, it’s mostly drama.
I’d actually place The Bachelor/Bachelorette in a slightly different category than trashy reality TV, because it’s a competition. The Jersey Shore isn’t a competition, nor is Real Housewives. You’re just watching someone live their life. I think competition makes things interest–it adds an element of stakes to the show.
I definitely see a difference between sitcoms and reality tv, and I guess the point I was trying to make is that either one can be seen as mindless entertainment depending on how you are using the show. I have nothing against sitcoms, as there are still a few out there worth watching, but for some people the tv becomes their whole life- either with the reality shows or the sitcoms and of course the drama/soap operas.
Having never given reality shows like Jersey Shore, The Hills and the rest a chance, I don’t really know how the Bachelor/Bachelorette are more real or less filled with drama, but it seems like a lot of the show is still staged. Maybe it’s just human nature to try to be someone else when in front of the camera, but the way I see the men and women behave on those shows just seems more like acting and less like real life. The competition does make things more interesting, but it seems more like the contestants are just trying to get the prize at the end and become famous instead of trying to make a connection with the bachelor/bachelorette- which is what I thought the show was supposed to be about.
[...] few days ago, one of the topics on the blog was trashy reality TV. By coincidence, on the day before that, it was announced that a company is planning the first [...]