Monday, October 22, 2007

Why I Hate Sex:

Sex and the City has ruined young women everywhere. And I actually like the show. It's funny, witty, well-written, honest, well-produced, well-acted, and (let's face it) the fashion has changed my attitude toward getting dressed almost entirely. For those of you who thought the program was too taboo to broach, the show itself is less about sex than it is about relationships, and less about relationships than it is about friendship. Specifically, about girlfriends.

And therein lies the problem. Sex and the City has conditioned young women to believe that lunching together, "girls night out," $500 footwear and couture in a McDonald's are part of a normal lifestyle. If you disagree with me, as your girlfriends with jobs how much they spent on their favourite pair of heels. I promise you, you WILL get responses in the $300 range for 20-somethings. More than that, "Sex" has conditioned women to value putting our girlfriendships above our dating relationships. You see, the men will come and go, but the dishing about it afterward with the girls comes every Saturday at brunch. Men have become bit players in our world of high-fashion, high-living, and high-powered careers; we don't need one man when several here and there can fill our social calendar, and we won't bother to invest ourselves in a relationship or get emotionally attached the way we'll invest in paying off the credit card that has 40 pairs of Manolo Blahniks. After all, quality shoes will outlast most of those relationships anyway, right?

While that attitude of "girls rule, boys drool," served me well in the high-school cafeteria, it seems a bit different as an adult. No offense, Manolo, giant floral accessories, or Vogue (I worship your pages, too), but I don't WANT to have a life where the thing I look forward to most is "girls night out." I don't WANT to discuss the intimate details of my relationship with my sassy smart girlfriends. I don't WANT my relationship to serve as the fodder for cocktail hour. It's PERSONAL. And even if we're all women, there is no reason why my girlfriends need to serve as a soundboard for every little shift in my personal life. Where did all that self-sufficient, independence go, girls? O, that's right. When we said we wanted our independence, we only meant "from men."

Now, I'm really not the sort to go blaming the media for our societal degradation, however, I do think it's worth examining when our 20-somethings are behaving like 40-somethings and our 40-somethings are behaving like teens with an American Express. With all this investing in appearances and investing in status, is it any wonder that investing in one another has fallen by the wayside? How many times do we hear people complain of their unhappiness as they attempt to fill the void with more's, more clothes, more shoes, more social events? At some point, we've all done it. Immersion in a capitalistic culture will train you to believe that the upgrade equals success and success equals fulfillment. And for women, when we're finally at a point where we don't need to be dependant upon a man for economic support, stability or prosperity (women of the world, raise your right hand?) It's a brilliant campaign, really; why wait for a man when you can do everything for yourself? Buy your own ring! As for the man, let him be a side-effect, a bonus- if you will- of YOUR successful living! The sad commentary in all of this is that we've fallen for it; brilliant marketing schemes that compliment our strengths by trivializing our partners. Another example of poor form on the playground.

Marriage isn't a solution, it isn't an answer to all of life's problems, and you will be sorely disappointed if you expect a spouse to fulfill all of your needs (so help me if I actually find myself attracted to a man who enjoys musicals and dressing up as much as I do- then I really WILL be Sara Jessica Parker!) Marriage IS however, one of the greatest acts of faith performed in this
life. It is the one opportunity for us to put our faith and our future and the lives of our children into the hands of another human being. An Eternal Relationship isn't a side-effect; it is a goal. A goal that cannot be reached alone, no matter how pretty the shoes we're walking toward it may be.

*For the record, I'll be running a full-on sprint for the man who pops out THIS bad boy:

9 comments:

Salt H2O said...

Nothing good came from Sex in the City- everything that show teaches and preaches is contrary to what we know brings true and lasting happiness.

Just as much as that show used product placement to inspire women to spend money they don't have on on Jimmy Choos, it used product placement to sell us on extramarital affairs, casual sex, homosexuality, and materialism- all of which are a bottomless pit of desire which is never fufilled.

f*bomb. said...

Except for the flouncy dresses, giant flower-pins, and embracing my giant, curly hair.
O, Sarah Jessica- how you've INSPIRED me!

But I swear, if I have to listen to one more woman whine about a perfectly good man, I will DECK HER OVER THE HEAD with my fabulous vintage purse. Mark my words.

Tannerama said...

Sarah Jessica Parker looks like a foot.

Sex in the City is terrible for one reason and one reason only. For marginalizing Kyle MacLachlan. It's like, who was the best most well rounded masculine character in all of television history? Special Agent Dale Cooper from Twin Peaks? Great! Let's get Kyle MacLachlan on the show so we can emasculate him.

brent said...

I happen to hate sex (icky and cooties!) for an entirely different set of reasons, but yours seem pretty valid.

Yeah, I shun, on principle, any woman who thinks a committed relationship with a man is just an afterthought or a way to "fill the social calendar" as you put it.

Seymour Glass said...

i find Sex & the City deeply disturbing for all the reasons you mentioned.

corporations have very astutely convinced the modern woman that the proper expression of her selfhood and independence comes through material consumption. freedom of choice doesn't mean freedom to choose which brand of something to buy.

and of course men do it too. it's just not packaged and sold to us in the guise of feminism (or its male equivalent).

f*bomb. said...

No- sadly, men are manipulated to believe that it takes a fancy car or expensive clothes and nights out on the town to impress a woman.
When really, the most impressive thing is when you can simply impress us by being the man you have become.

k8 said...

oddly, the series finale ended with all the girls either married or on the way to being married. because in the end, even the sassies Manolo wearing women really do want to be in a committed relationship.

good post Farrah.

Vanilla Vice said...

1. Did you ever think that women have bonded as a response to the behaviors of men and this isn't a cause and effect?
2. K8 made a great point that all the women WANT a relationship and see fulfillment in it. Even Samantha who in the beginning has "sex like a man" ends up being the cougar and falls in love with a cub.
3. I do agree that they push the designer and money issue too much, but it catches up to Carrie, who realizes that she spent $50,000 on shoes, which was unwise and left her broke.

There were plenty of lessons to be learned. In the end things all disappear, things can be replaced and even a diamond doesn't last forever. It can be stolen right off Carrie's hand...or foot like her Mahnolo's.

Dubious Brown said...

I totally hate that show too, but mostly just because it sucks a lot...