Reps. Lee and Weiner: The case against pay dating sites

By J. DeVoy

While normally totally useless, Congress has taught us quite a bit about online dating.  Namely, paying for it is a fool’s game.  Chris Lee trolled for women and transsexuals on Craigslist.  Weiner, now infamously, used twitter and facebook to set up his fwb’s.  I have no judgment about what these men did or liked, other than believing Weiner is a dumbass for crafting an elaborate web of lies that later collapsed under its own weight, and deserves to lose his office for that alone.

What do all of these services have in common? Craigslist: FREE. Facebook: FREE. Twitter: FREE AND UNPROFITABLE. ALL OF THEM ARE FREE.  Why are you paying $12-20/mo for Match.com when dudes obviously are having success using Facebook and Twitter and, hell, even Craigslist?  Niche dating sites make sense, and I would pay $20/month for conservative-future-stepford-wife-in-a-sundress-dating.com if it had real female members.  But for an aimless service like Match.com when you just want to hook up?  Skip the charade of dating and go the free, somewhat seedy routes; clearly it’s where all the action is.

5 Responses to Reps. Lee and Weiner: The case against pay dating sites

  1. writerdood says:

    At first, when this story started going, I couldn’t believe anyone would be that stupid. But then I reconsidered the thrill of sending some strange chick shots of myself in underwear. There was some Eddy Murphy movie where his handlers were constantly trying to keep him from “showing it to the ladies.” I realized that this must be some kind of fetish. It must be some sort of thrill. I mean, he’s getting something out of this right? I can only assume he gets off on exposing himself. Yet, somehow he managed to restrict himself from sending the full monty (or did he)? In any case, as a member of Congress, he should certainly hold back on exposing his package. Obviously, people aren’t ready for that type of disclosure from a Congressman.

    Regardless, I’m impressed that someone with his last name managed to get elected. The irony of these events in combination with his name infers a serendipity that is impossible to overlook. He’ll probably be replaced by someone named Richard Uranus. What will they expect from him?

  2. Scott Nazzarine says:

    I just don’t get it! I don’t know all the facts necessarily (I try to avoid this salacious crap on the news whenever possible), but he didn’t break any law did he? Just because you’re in Congress, you’re not allowed to send pictures of your bulge to someone? Or (gasp, horror!) a shirtless picture like the other guy did? Big freakin deal! If one of these pussies would just say, “yeah, maybe I sent it, maybe I didn’t. Unless you’re my wife, it’s none of your business” I think the whole thing would blow over much more quickly. Or, even better, if they would pull a Charlie Sheen and say something crazy like “hell yeah, I sent it, wouldn’t you if you had a package like this?” I think they’d probably get a lot of respect. Yeah, they might lose the next election (esp. if they ran as a “family values” asshole hypocrite, but its certainly no reason to resign. And even less reason to even discuss impeachment or whatever than these lies they always give, which gives the other assholes cover to say “we don’t care about the sex; its the lies.” Didn’t anybody learn anything from Clinton?

    • J DeVoy says:

      It’s hilarious how everyone has let the Bin Laden death picture issue die, but is outraged about this. I don’t think he’s necessarily broken any laws; he may be under the gun ethically for using government property to do this.

      The web of lies shows that he’s a mealy mouthed loser who nobody with an ounce of self-respect, to say nothing of an interest in accountable government, should vote for again. I’m also suspicious of the way he went after the press for investigating the story. The guy should have used the following standard alpha moves: 1) blame everyone else, and 2) deny (wrongdoing, not the act) and ignore. While every man in national politics is too beta-ized to do these things, imagine if the reaction was one press conferenced on the day this story broke where Weiner said:

      “Yes, I did it. I got carried away on the internet – who hasn’t? The real predator here is my wife, who hasn’t slept with me in weeks. She rations sex as if there won’t be any left if she gives it up more than twice a week. What’s worse: I’ve never seen her cook. Ever. All she can make is a reservation. I can never relax; my married life is a medley of dressing up and going out to expensive meals, playing the socialite game 24/7, and then not getting laid by a middle-aged woman who can take half of my stuff in a divorce premised on my infidelity. I was, and am, trapped. Of course I wanted hotter, younger girls. Obviously, I went about this wrong, but it’s what I did. Why my proclivities are anyone else’s business are beyond me, and I will employ more discretion in the future.”

      Bam. Done.

    • splifton says:

      Tiger Blood and Adonis DNA…

  3. Misty Craven says:

    This is an interesting dispute. I definitely agree with argument of free dating sites. If sites like facebook and twitter are free why should dating sites be free? If you really wanted to you could use these free social networks in place of paying for dating sites.I’m sure in time all dating sites will be free.

%d bloggers like this: