Viewport width =
May 15, 2016 | by  | in Editorial |
Share on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestTweet about this on Twitter

Editorial—Issue 10, 2016

New Zealand now has nothing to tweet about on Monday and Tuesday evenings.

Whether you watch the show or not, whether you love or hate it, or literally give no fucks, it’s pretty hard to avoid hearing about The Bachelor NZ. Rumours are circulating, there are ‘shocking’ revelations, and there is awful media attention being given to some of the contestants.

The winner turned out to be Fleur, although her ‘win’ was short-lived and it turns out they’ve already split up. And now everyone is wondering what she’s going to do with the expensive awkward-not-engagement ring she received.

Some people will refuse to watch the show because they see it as a sexist piece of shit, that treats women like girls or sexual objects to be won, to compete for the prize of a lackluster man. “Putting such crap on TV that is degrading to women sends out a message to young people, to all people, that is backward and sexist and wrong,” Aimie Cronin wrote in the Herald. Yet maybe it’s not that simple, because the contestants are made up of some incredible women, who are well aware of the artificial, archaic construct of the show, and have their own reasons for being there—aside from the dude.

Viewers of The Bachelor will include many people who ‘hate watch’ the show, and enjoy being able to critique the sexism we see everyday presented back to us on the screen. However productive this is is questionable, but maybe it’s just entertainment—the basic principle of the TV show appeals to our inherent voyeurism. More concerning is that some people watch the show genuinely echoing its sentiment of women being little more than sexual objects, as shown on George FM.

The questions Naz received were inappropriate to say the least, the camera work even more so, and we will spare you the details, because it makes us feel yuck (mostly imagining Thane saying these things). It’s hard to imagine Jordan, or some male contestant, receiving the same questioning from Thane Kirby. It goes to show just how easy it is for people to accidentally buy into the cheap sexist basis the show works off; how easy it is to not question so many problematic representations of women that the show displays. Thane was, it turns out, the basic bitch.

As the NZ media grieve the separation of Fleur and Jordan, they will also (hopefully) get over the story (we just read a Newshub story with screenshots in it ugh), and the TV show will cease to exist. Hopefully the show dies, along with Weldon’s career.

We totally didn’t want to spend our whole editorial talking about The Bachelor, so we’ll also just finish with a few non-Bachelor related things. Michael Hill is real weird, and his wife’s shell rings look so uncomfortable to wear. Getting flown via helicopter before / after getting dumped would fucking suck. Ball gowns are shit. And so is Jordan.

Emma & Jayne xoxo

 

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestTweet about this on Twitter

About the Author ()

Add Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent posts

  1. Work
  2. Editorial—Issue 22, 2016
  3. I, Daniel Blake and the Welfare State
  4. Young Voters: Waking the Sleeping Giants
  5. The Sky Is Falling
  6. Tell us about Talis
  7. Vic group launch their Reclaim-munist Manifesto
  8. Bye Bye Little Karori (in two years time)
  9. Students seize opportunity to rant at Grant
  10. Binge drinking is still a bit bad for you
i-daniel-blake

Editor's Pick

I, Daniel Blake and the Welfare State

: Recently at the NZIFF I was fortunate enough to see Ken Loach’s I, Daniel Blake, this year’s winner of the Palme d’Or at Cannes. By the end of the film nearly everybody seemed to be in mourning and most of the people seated around me were sniffling and wiping their eyes. I,

Viewport width =