Monday, January 4, 2010

BeautifulPeople.com? What the deuce?

BeautifulPeople.com is a dating site consisting of - you guessed it - "beautiful" people as rated by others on the site. In order to sign up, people must meet certain physical appearance criteria as judged by other members of the site.

The site has banned 5000 people who displayed photographs of themselves after gaining weight during the Christmas break. In my opinion, that seems to be quite ugly behaviour. I'm sure the newly-banned people who showed their photographs were just looking for a laugh or two with their friends.

The site founder said that the site's high standard of beauty needed to be maintained. To be fair, it is his site, and it is exactly what it says on the tin (well, external beauty, anyway). Furthermore, it is ultimately up to individuals to decide what they want.

Still, it is a good time to consider what is important in looking for a long-term significant other. External beauty (already subjective as it is) is ultimately fleeting. People grow old. Finding someone who is a good fit personality-wise seems to be the key. Unlike external beauty, people will also grow wiser over the years, hopefully increasing their "inner beauty", so to speak.

People don't grow old into their thirties anymore, as they did for our ancient ancestors. People now live well into their eighties or more. It might be a good idea to think about the long haul and place less importance on subjective external "beauty" (as judged by people on BeautifulPeople.com, anyway) that lasts only a fraction of a person's lifetime.

Peace and long life.

2 comments:

  1. Hedonism and narcisism at their worst.

    Looks like this is what our society is all about now ... sadly enough.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Agreed.

    What really stunned me is how brazen, forthcoming, and downright insulting the site founder was about it. Perhaps I just wasn't expecting honesty (crass, but honest) after being immersed in the shiftiness of Harper's actions and interviews over the last week or so...

    ReplyDelete