New York Post Dating: Who wants to be a Comare?
Link to this week's (highly recommended) dating mainpage...
Sequence of events leading up to this week's date:
I'm not one to pull any punches when someone visually disturbs me, so allow me to speak my mind: I feel like Youri is going to kill me in my sleep. Like an evil clown would. It's harsh, I know, and I admit that I can't put my finger on it. What is it about her? Is it her cheeks, her nose, her jawline, her smile, her makeup, her hair, her eyes? I cannot tell. Some combination of those traits leads to a result that resembles a caricature. I'm restraining myself, avoiding harsher adjectives and comparisons. Besides, why suggest that Youri needs a makeover when I've already established her personality flaws? That's more important, I think.
Quickly reviewing the date: it didn't work! *gasp!* The streak is broken! So sad... yet, a welcome relief from the cocky talk that preceded the last few dating columns. Highlights: Youri made a big deal about the fact that Lev went casual, because she apparently doesn't like being the only one wearing uncomfortable clothing on a date (dumbass); Youri did most of the talking (no surprise); and, most fun, the Post sent these two to The Mermaid Inn, a seafood restaurant, when Lev is allergic to shellfish! D'oh! (That would be quite a low mark for this column: someone dies)
Officially announced this week, but obvious to anyone who pays attention: the cost of the meals are comped by the hosting restaurant. This hurts the integrity of the dates in several ways: the rave reviews by the daters are indeed contrived and insincere (given the circumstances, I'm sure no one will say "geez, that meal was crap"); worse, the daters see this as the free meal sweepstakes, which means both daters can, and often do, treat the occasion as a no-pressure joke. Even as there are some advantages to all involved for this setup (low pressure is a great thing for a first date), the integrity of both the date and the column are out the window.
I'll add that paying the costs on a date is a major issue for daters - and I'm not sure it's a good thing to put that issue off until future dates. For example, a lot of guys will offer to split the bill for casual dates, and some girls don't like that - boorish of the ladies, and unfortunate for romance. On the other hand, some men will insist on paying the entire bill, but will also steer clear of anything too pricey - and cheap dates can be a turnoff. Some women in NYC know to hold out for investment bankers who can afford to whisk them away on a weekly culinary tour of the trendy Manhattan dining scene. There are broke men who can't pay, exceedingly cheap men who won't pay, broke women who are greedy and ask for extras, and other generally undesirable people who will be revealed upon the opening of the register. This is a complicated and prominent romantic problem, and I'm not sure if it's wise to factor it out of a blind date scenario. It's certainly nice of the Post to grab the check now, but what happens on date number two? If the arrival of the check is a serious issue for a real date, can we call it a real date if there's no check?
Moving along to next week's date, Carmine is 19 and...
Carmine Gotti Agnello? Carmine fucking Gotti?
I don't even know where to start. Pretty boy. Looks like a greasy punk chump. Reality TV star. Grandson of a notorious murdering mobster, yet not even worthy of the family name. If we're going to make this column a farce and bring in a celebrity, could we choose someone other than a basic cable reject, spoiled brat and heir to blood money? I don't need to tell you this guy has no redeeming qualities, right?
I've gone on too long already, so why even review his choices? Okay, I'll do it: three college-age groupies, review done. I chose Cheryl, who's making a serious run to get her picture under the definion of "vapid" in the dictionary (more so than the other two). She leads the voting; for the rest of us, no one wins.
Sequence of events leading up to this week's date:
- Lev gets the choice of Youri, Jen, and Jamie.
- I write my column, bashing Youri and Jen (I'm sorry, I can't leave innocent people alone) and recommend Jamie.
- The public votes, leading to the following tossup in the polls: Jen, 37%; Jamie, 32%; Youri, 31%. That's the closest vote among 3 daters I've seen.
- Weirdly, on Saturday night, Jamie was removed from the page and not on the voting list. This suggested that Jamie didn't go on the date. I experience disappointment, knowing one of other two inferior girls would be picked.
- Sunday, I find out I'm correct: Youri was chosen.
I'm not one to pull any punches when someone visually disturbs me, so allow me to speak my mind: I feel like Youri is going to kill me in my sleep. Like an evil clown would. It's harsh, I know, and I admit that I can't put my finger on it. What is it about her? Is it her cheeks, her nose, her jawline, her smile, her makeup, her hair, her eyes? I cannot tell. Some combination of those traits leads to a result that resembles a caricature. I'm restraining myself, avoiding harsher adjectives and comparisons. Besides, why suggest that Youri needs a makeover when I've already established her personality flaws? That's more important, I think.
Quickly reviewing the date: it didn't work! *gasp!* The streak is broken! So sad... yet, a welcome relief from the cocky talk that preceded the last few dating columns. Highlights: Youri made a big deal about the fact that Lev went casual, because she apparently doesn't like being the only one wearing uncomfortable clothing on a date (dumbass); Youri did most of the talking (no surprise); and, most fun, the Post sent these two to The Mermaid Inn, a seafood restaurant, when Lev is allergic to shellfish! D'oh! (That would be quite a low mark for this column: someone dies)
Officially announced this week, but obvious to anyone who pays attention: the cost of the meals are comped by the hosting restaurant. This hurts the integrity of the dates in several ways: the rave reviews by the daters are indeed contrived and insincere (given the circumstances, I'm sure no one will say "geez, that meal was crap"); worse, the daters see this as the free meal sweepstakes, which means both daters can, and often do, treat the occasion as a no-pressure joke. Even as there are some advantages to all involved for this setup (low pressure is a great thing for a first date), the integrity of both the date and the column are out the window.
I'll add that paying the costs on a date is a major issue for daters - and I'm not sure it's a good thing to put that issue off until future dates. For example, a lot of guys will offer to split the bill for casual dates, and some girls don't like that - boorish of the ladies, and unfortunate for romance. On the other hand, some men will insist on paying the entire bill, but will also steer clear of anything too pricey - and cheap dates can be a turnoff. Some women in NYC know to hold out for investment bankers who can afford to whisk them away on a weekly culinary tour of the trendy Manhattan dining scene. There are broke men who can't pay, exceedingly cheap men who won't pay, broke women who are greedy and ask for extras, and other generally undesirable people who will be revealed upon the opening of the register. This is a complicated and prominent romantic problem, and I'm not sure if it's wise to factor it out of a blind date scenario. It's certainly nice of the Post to grab the check now, but what happens on date number two? If the arrival of the check is a serious issue for a real date, can we call it a real date if there's no check?
Moving along to next week's date, Carmine is 19 and...
Carmine Gotti Agnello? Carmine fucking Gotti?
I don't even know where to start. Pretty boy. Looks like a greasy punk chump. Reality TV star. Grandson of a notorious murdering mobster, yet not even worthy of the family name. If we're going to make this column a farce and bring in a celebrity, could we choose someone other than a basic cable reject, spoiled brat and heir to blood money? I don't need to tell you this guy has no redeeming qualities, right?
I've gone on too long already, so why even review his choices? Okay, I'll do it: three college-age groupies, review done. I chose Cheryl, who's making a serious run to get her picture under the definion of "vapid" in the dictionary (more so than the other two). She leads the voting; for the rest of us, no one wins.
posted by Brian Van at
5:41 PM
1 Comments:
Yeah I watched the Growing up Gotti once and all the boys are rotten, spoiled and prissy. Any girl that wants to date him has to be after money, because, as you said quite correctly, he has no redeeming qualities.
By
oyveyheyhey, at 1:27 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home