‘MILF Manor’ — dystopia or reality?

Reality TV and consumer culture encourage unethical projects, exacerbate underlying mental health issues of participants

Disturbing as it is, TLC’s “MILF Manor” should surprise no one, as it follows logically from the problematic themes that viewers have long supported by watching reality shows.

“MILF Manor” is as bizarre as it sounds: it is a reality series where older women visit a resort in Mexico under the premise of dating younger men, only to discover that each of the men are one of the participants’ sons. Critics have compared the absurdity of “MILF Manor” to satirical media like The Onion and have brought up its shocking plot similarity to a disgust-centered joke played on the sitcom “30 Rock”. But it is easy to forget that absurd humor like satire works precisely amplify a hidden truth at the center of a story. This series is not an outlier to the genre it builds from, it logically follows from it. “MILF Manor” distills the problematic patterns that have long existed in reality television, including participants’ deep emotional baggage, a comical lack of self-awareness due either to stupidity or pure greed, clear scriptedness designed to get more views and the shallow appropriation of social justice messages.

Fans of reality shows often joke that the people who take part have serious mental issues or personality dysfunction. Media psychologists like Pamela Rutledge have pointed out that the personality profiles of reality show stars have a large overlap with the behaviors of con artists, as they often have a narcissistic need for admiration or employ deceit or manipulation to get the audience on their side. Psychologist Jamie Huysman, who directly works with people in reality TV, said that the attention addiction that participants experience is often a “symptom of a much deeper emotional problem.” Deep-seated issues are no clearer than in “MILF Manor,” where the otherwise goofy tone of the first episode is set off by a disturbing exploration of several participants’ emotional baggage.

April spent her youth raising her children and declares herself finally “ready to have fun” at 43. She doesn’t question why this romantic fun must be found with men the same age as her sons. Charlene lost her 27-year-old daughter less than a year prior to filming and is already eager to get on air. Kelle has six children from different fathers and so far, avoids talking about her past. She refers to her outgoing side as “Disco Mommy” and speaks about it as if she has some bizarre alter ego.

Then, after setting up all these women’s backstories, we get the plot twist that has disgusted viewers worldwide. These women are here to find younger men. But the men attending are each of their sons, and each mother-son pair will be sharing a room at the resort. While participants like Gabriel briefly mention feelings of discomfort, they all decide to stay.

This twist brings us to our next axiom of reality television; the “MILF Manor” participants crave attention so much that they will endure or perpetuate unethical situations just for publicity or money. Many of these women are business owners, and it seems clear that participants like Kelle are using the show for exposure. Opportunistic behavior is not new for reality TV, as the genre has a disturbing number of stars turned con artists who have faced legal trouble for exploitation or theft.

This pattern includes Jen Shah from “The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City,” who victimized thousands through a telemarketing scheme, as well as Teresa and Giuseppe Giudice from “The Real Housewives of New Jersey,” who together served more than four years in prison for tax fraud. Like Rutledge said, this industry attracts a certain personality profile, and it is the kind of person who is okay with creating strong incestuous un- dertones so long as there is financial gain or attention on the line.

Participants have an incredible lack of self-awareness that can only be attributed to either stupidity or the desire to be famous, no matter the cost. Reality shows like “The Real Housewives” often show their actors as oblivious or inept because viewers eat it up, and “MILF Manor” makes this play too. Gabriel feels strange about dating the women there because they “all have sons,” particularly adult sons -- meaning, he has a brief moment of perspective where he realizes that from the outside, the dynamic seems unethical and strange. This realization forces him to stop objectifying the women, forgo his lust and think critically about himself. Unfortunately, this uncomfortable thought is quickly cast aside. None of the participants ever connect the dots on the fact that this exactly why you should not date someone 40 years older or younger than you. You are in fundamentally different stages of life and that dynamic allows people to get taken advantage of.

But in an entertainment genre that is well known for being scripted, the contestants’ lack of self-awareness cannot be attributed solely to stupidity. “MILF Manor” is full of transparently scripted encounters and comments that keep the audience just on the edge of discomfort by maintaining the image of pseudo-incest. This ranges from a minigame where the women must feel a lineup of shirtless men to guess which one is their son to off-handed comments like Kelle shouting “who wants to sleep with their moms?” Again, despite their display of discomfort, every one of the participants chooses to stay. The feeling of scriptedness also plays into the personae of the “MILF Manor” participants. These women are clearly intelligent, driven and professionally successful, shown by how they all achieved different careers while raising children. Despite this, when the

Microaesthetics dangerous for young adults, not liberating

The trendy micro aesthetic lifestyles cluttering the internet might seem appealing and harmless, but they are actually obstacles to true individualism.

We live in a society where it seems like a necessity to identify with a categorical lifestyle – an aesthetic. Most aesthetics took root in social media during the early 2010’s and began with basic ones you may already recognize: “2014 Tumblr,” “E-boy” or “E-girl” or just about anything you can put the word “core” after. Fast forward to 2023, and the primary aesthetics have evolved into an entire universe of micro aesthetics. Especially popular among young adults and teens searching for their own sense of style, micro aesthetics have flooded the internet at an overwhelming rate. With the growth of these micro aesthetics, endless young people are finding pieces of identities online to claim, slowly piecing them together until they can maybe, just maybe, find an identity of their own. Perhaps you’re studious – great! Are you a dark or light academia kind of person? Chaotic academia, perhaps? Or maybe you’re more of an athlete – if you’re big on going to the gym, you better decide if you’re considered a “gym bro” or a “pink pilates princess”. There are endless choices, and because micro aesthetics are made of unrealistic, constantly rising standards, the practice of taking one on has become dangerously unsustainable. In fact, the countless details of micro aesthetics encourage consumerism and aren’t realistic enough to become lifestyles. Nobody can expect to find success – or an identity – by applying curated aesthetics to the real world. Personally, you may not be actively pursuing an aesthetic – maybe you’ve only tried a couple green juice cleanses in the past, or perhaps you bleached two front locks of your hair in 2020. Surely that doesn’t put you at the mercy of micro aesthetics, does it? In a way, it does.

Of course, trying new things is an experimental part of growing up. You haven’t lost your entire identity by entertaining a new favorite color or outfit style, but there is harm in trying to take on an entirely new lifestyle solely for the sake of an aesthetic. Micro aesthetics may seem fun or even enlightening at first, but that’s only at the beginning. The moment you attempt to pursue a trending, curated lifestyle – an unrealistic lifestyle – is the moment you begin to bargain a little bit of your individuality as payment.

In reality, the true harm of micro aesthetics lays in the power of boxing yourself into one. The idea of having your own aesthetic is often associated with taking on an already existing one, but in truth, your personal style doesn’t need to align with popular or niche aesthetics online. Aesthetics are nothing more than ever-changing social constructs – so don’t get caught up trying to identify with them. Trying to label your lifestyle as “rainy-day-yogagirl-classic-grunge-core” is reductive to your individualism and can’t possibly encompass the nuance of who you are. Free yourself from the constricts of aesthetic labels.

Because of the endless number of pre-existing aesthetics online, it may seem complicated to develop your own sense of style, but it is possible. When it comes to fashion, don’t only go searching for pieces that recreate an outfit you saw in a TikTok video. Look for individual items that suit you and flatter you visually, even if they aren’t popular or considered “trendy” online. And if a clothing item or accessory is trending, don’t buy it immediately, – you’ll be surprised at how quickly it falls out of fashion.

When it comes to the style of your environment, instead of seeking a cohesive set of matching items to form a perfectly curated Pinterest room, fill your walls with memories and photos unique to your life. Music posters that make you smile and decorations you appreciate because of your own taste, not because you saw them in a YouTube room tour. Most importantly, when it comes to develop- ing your own style, refrain from connecting the lifestyles of popular influencers to the items and clothing they own – as much as people like to think otherwise, tangible items are never a straight shot to suddenly living a dream “aesthetic” life. Fragments of micro aesthetics may serve as inspiration, but pursuing one to wholeheartedly embody your way of life will only take away from the traits that make you unique. camera is rolling, they come across as vapid and verbally inept like most reality show stars. You can blame the tequila, but it’s difficult to believe that these women would struggle to communicate basic ideas or use malapropisms left and right. Then there are participants like April, whose laughing is so forced that she seems to be in pain. Could this be a touch of discomfort slipping through the cracks?

In theory, individualism should thrive because of the infinite library of characteristics that social media micro aesthetics have brought to light. In reality, individualism suffers because micro aesthetics restrain these characteristics and idealize them with unrealistic standards. Life isn’t something we can control, and it won’t follow the guidelines of something like dark or light academia. Take pieces of what you see as inspiration and nothing more. Embrace anything and everything that makes you content as an individual, and don’t be surprised when that brings you far more happiness than anything curated for your phone screen.

Most entertaining is how the show shallowly brings up social justice issues in an attempt to excuse how bizarre its premise is. But just like shows like CBS’s proposed reality series “The Activist,” “MILF Manor” does not truly care about empowering women. Its sole goal is to get as many views as possible by whatever means necessary. In the first episode, an announcement cites the double standard where “an older man with a younger woman is accepted,” but the contrary is taboo. This theme attempts to portray the environment of “MILF Manor” as some sort of safe space to explore socially controversial ideas. However, it entirely misses the point that significant age gaps are suspect across the board. People taking advantage of youths is not worth defending, and glorifying these types of dynamics is not an attempt to “tip the scales.” It is greed.

Reality shows are all about appearances, and “MILF Manor” is no exception. But despite its clever use of aesthetics, it is hard to escape the truth behind this series. If we as viewers do not gain more dignity and force the reality TV industry to change, it will only continue to churn out disgusting examples of life imitating art. So please, don’t buy up their lies. Don’t take “MILF Manor” as some silly little joke. Pay attention to how disgusting it really is. Reflect on what it says about us as a consumer culture, since a studio correctly predicted that this series would get views.

Posting a picture of your partner’s side profile on your Instagram isn’t a “soft launch,” you’re just media obsessed.

Love is in the air! Valentine’s Day and its capitalistic hold on the American public has once again invaded aisles in the form of chocolate boxes and teddy bears at our local grocery stores. It has also revived the divisive social media discourse on one trend: the soft launch.

For those unaware, a “soft launch” consists of posting cryptic, unidentifiable pictures of your romantic partner on social media. A soft launch is more casual, whereas a “hard launch” means posting a fully identifiable picture of your partner, somehow more committal. The purpose of a soft release is to share your relationship without explicitly identifying who you’re dating.

A soft launch isn’t the end of the world, but the trend is a larger reflection of the impact of consumerism on dating. Debates on the effectiveness of dating apps and the changes in dating culture are both impacted by the reality that so much of the way we view ourselves is through the lens of our social media. Further, the way we view other people is intrinsically connected to their social media presence. Trends like the soft launch demand that we examine why we value relational ambiguity. If the aesthetic you’ve created for yourself online is impacting your relationships, that is a problem.

When it comes to social media during Valentine’s Day, I think we need to examine the trends we’ve allowed ourselves to get swept up in. If a soft launch is what you’re concerned about during this time of the year, you need to reconsider your definition of dating.

If you find yourself having to choose between a soft or hard launch of your romantic partner this season, consider putting down the phone and telling them you love them instead. Happy Valentine’s Day!

Comets Rocket Through Mcmurry To Make Asc Playoffs

Men's basketball defeated McMurry, 103-79 on Feb. 6 before dropping a game to The Cru, 77-83 on Feb. 9. The Comets are set to be in the top three seeds, no matter how the next two games go

Racing toward the American Southwestern Championship, the Comets dominated McMurry’s War Hawks on Feb. 6 at one of the final home games of the season before dropping their seven-game win streak to top-seeded Mary Hardin Baylor at an away game last Thursday.

Before their loss to long-standing foe, Mary Hardin Baylor, the Comets stood at 18-3 in the season and 13-1 in the ASC; the Comets now stand at 19-4 at 14-2 in the ASC. Through their loss, the Comets maintain the top seed in the ASC with the Cru. Both teams are tied across all conference categories. UTD is also now among seven teams in the first NCAA Division III regional rankings, which include two other schools in the ASC – Mary Hardin-Baylor and East Texas Baptist.

Graduate guard Kyle Poerschke led both the Feb. 6 and Feb. 9 matches with top scores of 25 points and 19 points, earning him his third seasonal ASC Player of the Week award. In addition to his ASC accolades, Poerschke was named U.S. Basketball Writers Association

Third head coach in history of women's soccer

Stephen Shirley replaced Kanute Drugan as head coach of the UTD women’s soccer team, becoming the team’s third ever head coach. After a 7-7-2 record in 2022, the program hopes this change will boost them to their first championship since 2002.

Division III National Player of the Week earlier in the season for setting a school record of 43 points made in a single game. Poerschke set the new standard at the Comets’ Jan. 14 win against the Polytechnic Insti tute, where he shined in shooting efficiency, scor ing 71.4% of field goals and 70% of 3-pointers. Men’s basketball coach Terry Butterfield de scribes Poerschke as one of the top players in the ASC league at this moment.

“Kyle is one of the most impor tant parts of our team,” Butterfield said. “Obviously, he can score the ball, but he can do other things as well. He also brings some maturity and some leadership to the team … I don't think that we'd be having the same level of success this year without him.”

Poerschke also posted his first career double-double at last Monday’s match, following 11 rebounds and six assists, contributing to the Comet’s powerful victory of 103-79.

“We knew that [McMurry] would play really fast,” Poerschke said. “We knew that they were going to be running and taking as many shots as they could, and we just knew that we had to get back. We knew we had to take good shots on the offensive side and then get back whenever it was time to get back for defense. And so we really had to focus on defense. They averaged 90 points a game. We held them under that tonight, which is a good job for us.”

Senior guard Hunter Stevens was responsible for the team’s early lead in each match, both defending the court and working offense. Stevens said his forte is making solid passes and setting up his teammates, which is evident by his leading seven assists in the Feb. 6 match and four assists in the Feb. 9 match.

“That’s what I enjoy most, but when I start getting shots up and hitting them,

SEE MCMURRY, PAGE 2