Bring in the clowns
After
the local breakfast television ends, Maury Show takes over. A common
theme in the show seems to be paternity tests that try to find out
which man is the father of some baby. And why not? This is inexpensive
and easy-to-produce drama, and every viewer can relate to the problems
and side effects of the human sexual selection and reproduction
processes. Perhaps some kind of a prime time reality show could be
developed from the same theme. Surely it couldn't be worse than "Who's
your daddy?"
The most comical cases are when it's nowhere near the first time in the show for the woman, but several men that she claimed, with absolute certainty I might add, to be the father turned out not to be. Or scratch that, actually: the most comical case was a guy that eight or so women simultaneously claimed was the father of their babies, and when the paternity tests one by one revealed him not to be, he triumphantly jumped around the stage like he had springs for legs. Based on what I have seen in these shows, I have started lean to the direction that there should be a compulsory paternity test for every single baby who is born. I find it astonishing that the crime of fraud is seldom even prosecuted in our modern legal systems if it is somehow related to sex and reproduction.
I don't know if the women in this show have some kind of a personality disorder or if they are just ordinary women living in denial, but you might think that after the third negative paternity test or so, these women would just sit down and write a goddamn list of all men that they had sex with around the time of conception, instead of naming just one more man that they would really like to be the father and then prancing around like he was the only one who they had sex with and therefore must be the one.
Another common topic of Maury Show is to bring in somebody who used to be a nerd, geek, uglo, fatty or some other type of person others deemed defective and was therefore socially very low-ranking, either male or female, but who has then become a pinnacle of attractiveness (operational definition: could lucratively work as a stripper) and gets to meet some other person who either tormented or just ignored him or her at school and effectively go "neener neener".
By the way, I find it pretty hilarious, the height of hypocrisy in fact, when the studio audience loudly boos the guy after he was revealed to be a tormentor. Unless the majority of the studio audience went to some magic school in some magic land, chances are pretty high that they behaved exactly the same way towards the people who were deemed deficient by their peers and therefore the socially lowest-ranking at their school. You know, the very definition of "socially low-ranking" is that almost everyone else ignores or torments you? I guess that's why the audience has to boo so enthusiastically.
The drama and irony and what else you have of this situation are of course undeniable, but I am not entirely sure what the point or the moral lesson is supposed to be. Is the point perhaps to prove that everybody is equal and should always be treated exactly the same way, regardless of their social skills and general attractiveness? Or that superficial features such as how you look do not really matter, but what is inside you is what counts?
If so, this is a very strange way to make this point. Surely it would be much better to bring in somebody who was and still is a geek/uglo/fatty etc. or at most a normo to meet his former tormentor. Otherwise, the very premise of the show establishes that beautiful and successful people deserve better treatment, no matter what the superficial words pasted on top try to claim. If not, then what the heck is with the neener neener? Are attractive people better than others and deserve better, or not?
My God, it's almost like that person him- or herself believes that he or she deserves better now that s/he is highly attractive, thereby clearly accepting and validating the social hierarchy that once placed him or her at the bottom. And you know, I bet that if you looked at the people that these ducks-turned-swans currently date, their revealed preferences would turn out to be just as "superficial" and "discriminating" as the rest of the mainstream. Or how many of my readers think that a woman who has a killer body and personality to go with it would settle for some ugly and socially inept fat guy, since she "doesn't care about the looks" but only cares of "what is inside"? Is that how you would bet real money?
The most comical cases are when it's nowhere near the first time in the show for the woman, but several men that she claimed, with absolute certainty I might add, to be the father turned out not to be. Or scratch that, actually: the most comical case was a guy that eight or so women simultaneously claimed was the father of their babies, and when the paternity tests one by one revealed him not to be, he triumphantly jumped around the stage like he had springs for legs. Based on what I have seen in these shows, I have started lean to the direction that there should be a compulsory paternity test for every single baby who is born. I find it astonishing that the crime of fraud is seldom even prosecuted in our modern legal systems if it is somehow related to sex and reproduction.
I don't know if the women in this show have some kind of a personality disorder or if they are just ordinary women living in denial, but you might think that after the third negative paternity test or so, these women would just sit down and write a goddamn list of all men that they had sex with around the time of conception, instead of naming just one more man that they would really like to be the father and then prancing around like he was the only one who they had sex with and therefore must be the one.
Another common topic of Maury Show is to bring in somebody who used to be a nerd, geek, uglo, fatty or some other type of person others deemed defective and was therefore socially very low-ranking, either male or female, but who has then become a pinnacle of attractiveness (operational definition: could lucratively work as a stripper) and gets to meet some other person who either tormented or just ignored him or her at school and effectively go "neener neener".
By the way, I find it pretty hilarious, the height of hypocrisy in fact, when the studio audience loudly boos the guy after he was revealed to be a tormentor. Unless the majority of the studio audience went to some magic school in some magic land, chances are pretty high that they behaved exactly the same way towards the people who were deemed deficient by their peers and therefore the socially lowest-ranking at their school. You know, the very definition of "socially low-ranking" is that almost everyone else ignores or torments you? I guess that's why the audience has to boo so enthusiastically.
The drama and irony and what else you have of this situation are of course undeniable, but I am not entirely sure what the point or the moral lesson is supposed to be. Is the point perhaps to prove that everybody is equal and should always be treated exactly the same way, regardless of their social skills and general attractiveness? Or that superficial features such as how you look do not really matter, but what is inside you is what counts?
If so, this is a very strange way to make this point. Surely it would be much better to bring in somebody who was and still is a geek/uglo/fatty etc. or at most a normo to meet his former tormentor. Otherwise, the very premise of the show establishes that beautiful and successful people deserve better treatment, no matter what the superficial words pasted on top try to claim. If not, then what the heck is with the neener neener? Are attractive people better than others and deserve better, or not?
My God, it's almost like that person him- or herself believes that he or she deserves better now that s/he is highly attractive, thereby clearly accepting and validating the social hierarchy that once placed him or her at the bottom. And you know, I bet that if you looked at the people that these ducks-turned-swans currently date, their revealed preferences would turn out to be just as "superficial" and "discriminating" as the rest of the mainstream. Or how many of my readers think that a woman who has a killer body and personality to go with it would settle for some ugly and socially inept fat guy, since she "doesn't care about the looks" but only cares of "what is inside"? Is that how you would bet real money?
"I find it astonishing that the crime of fraud is seldom even prosecuted in our modern legal systems if it is somehow related to sex and reproduction."
Recently, a 51-year old bankrupted Finnish guy claimed women that he was a wealthy boss of a medical institute.
He got three years of jail.
Posted by Anonymous | 11:22 PM
But did he get jailed for defrauding money, or just sex?
Posted by Ilkka | 8:14 AM