Skip to content

If Dating in the Dark Had Been My Science Fair Project, My Hypothesis Would Have Been Incorrect

September 4, 2009

Last Monday I turned on my television and found a gaping hole where my favorite summer show once was. Dating in the Dark wasn’t much, but I liked it. I reviewed ABC’s newest dating reality program last month and attempted to sell it to the masses as an enthralling hour of television.

For those of you who took my advice and set your DVR to record the rest of Dating in the Dark’s six-week campaign… thank you and I hope you enjoy this follow-up. And, for those of you who thought I had lost my mind for watching this trash… I invite you to peruse this site for the other well-written and thought-provoking pieces by the rest of TBTS’s stable of talented writers.

I found that after the season (series?) finale of ABC’s project to find out if true love is blind many lingering questions remained. But the questions weren’t the normal ABC cliffhangers like “who is left alive?” or “why the hell is the hatch omitting a bright light?” It was a more profound question, as in “has society had it wrong all of these years?”

If Dating in the Dark is the “social experiment” ABC claims it to be, then the research offers a surprising conclusion. After watching six episodes and roughly 18 potential matches made in the dark it became abundantly clear that, based on this small sample of the population, sociologists may have it backwards.

Women are much more superficial than men.

That’s right, MUCH MORE superficial than men.

Time after time, we watched women reject men for not being handsome enough, for looking too young, for being too short and for having bad hair.

The final episode gave us one larger, technically “overweight” female contestant’s ultimate rejection of what I would consider to be a good looking guy. Why? Because he was wearing a scarf. Yes, he had the audacity to wear a pashmina to the big reveal. While he admitted to struggling with her weight, he eventually came to the conclusion that they had made a genuine connection and wanted to try to make things work. While she verified that there was indeed a connection, she simply could not get past his accessories.

Perhaps I am jumping to conclusions. Maybe the experiment was flawed. Certainly, I realize that with a sample this miniscule the results can be easily skewed. With billions of people on this planet, the central limit theorem isn’t favorable to our sample size of 18.

It makes sense, I guess. A small sample size is also the only way to explain G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra receiving a 37% on Rotten Tomatoes. There is no way 37 out of 100 people came out of that theater ready for a sequel. I didn’t see it, but I heard Cobra Commander wore a scarf.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: