Behold the face of evil

Jan 29, 2009 19:10

There is no God, but if there was one, I'd hope to him that DABA (Dating a Banker Anonymous) Girls is a hoax. Women who date married men already belong in some suitably low circle of hell, but women who date married men, and then bitch about it when their married men can't afford to give them $1000 bottles of wine and daily pedicures anymore--well ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 9

saunders January 30 2009, 03:38:01 UTC
*facepalm*

I hate to give "Courtney" any credit, but her comment about banker's wanting "more" really strikes a Walter Benn Michaels note with me. His article, "Dreiser's Financier" is rather fascinating; he aligns the "freely giving mistress" with the unstable market forces, whereas the wife represents cultivated production. Of course, these mistresses don't seem to be so "freely giving," but it is an interesting comparison between personal insatiability, and professional insatiability.

Reply

shannon_f_r January 30 2009, 04:42:14 UTC
Ha, I was thinking of that article, too.

Reply

circumfession January 30 2009, 05:30:57 UTC
I'd be curious to see a copy of that article. Godden has somehow talked me into doing a paper on fictitous finance capital, which I find to be highly impressive since I a) wasn't interested in the subject and b) did not plan to write a paper at all for this class.

I suspect there's something about having a mistress that reinforces the "power" of money...the very idea that such a pretty creature can be bought adds a greater sense of "value" to the money itself...and of course, money is the one thing that the "rich bankers" (and such) have.

Shannon, this makes me sick, and not merely because their "stipend" is probably far bigger than mine--with the little disclaimer that mine is for food, shelter, student loans, as well as etsy indisgressions.

Reply


madbard January 30 2009, 04:35:16 UTC
From what I saw, the blog seemed like a joke.

Reply

shannon_f_r January 30 2009, 04:37:53 UTC
madbard January 30 2009, 07:59:29 UTC
This CNet article expresses suspicion on the authenticity of the site. Apparently their domain was only registered a few days before the NYT article came out, frinstance.

Reply

shannon_f_r January 30 2009, 17:28:16 UTC
Well, this just introduces new heights of creepy.

Reply


john_j_enright January 31 2009, 00:48:12 UTC
The site seems a bit self-aware. Whether or not it's legit, the phenomenon is real enough.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up