There's no upside to setting people up. At best, you're stuck writing  a speech for a wedding; at worst, you find out your friends cry during  sex. When I found out you could get paid to set people up, however, I  got a lot more interested. I asked Barbie Adler, CEO of Selective  Search, to let me spend a day setting up men who pay her a minimum of  $20,000 a year to set them up on dates with women who want to be set up  with men who pay $20,000 a year to be set up on dates. This was the kind  of love I could deliver.
I got to Barbie's office in Chicago,  where I was the only man employed. All the women who interview her  clients were attractive and had posters and sculptures about love in  their office. This was not the tone I was going to set with my clients. I  was just going to ask them if they were boob men or butt men and get to  work. (See what single men and women want.)
But  Barbie is a former executive recruiter, so she and vice president  Nicole Wall gave me a 15-page form to fill out for each client that  included questions about charity work, health, exercise habits and past  relationships. There was another form for me to fill out after each  prospective date left, and it included blank lines for items like Rate  her face on a scale of 1 to 10, How is her skin?, What size do you  estimate she is on top? and What size do you estimate she is on bottom?  This system has led to 1,221 marriages and 417 babies; 88% of Barbie's  clients meet their eventual spouse in the first nine months. These are,  unbelievably, even better results than ABC's The Bachelor gets.
Normally,  it would take a year of training before I got to set anyone up, and  then I would spend many hours interviewing the client before combing  through the 140,000 women in the company's database and reinterviewing  some of them with him in mind. But I'm not normal people. In 10 hours,  without a break for food, I interviewed eight women and two men. The  women don't pay anything, but they aren't assured of a date, just like  in the real world. To my shock, none of them seemed like gold diggers.  They had great jobs, went to impressive colleges and had other  priorities — namely, that they would under no circumstance date a man  under 6 ft. (180 cm) tall. He could be bald, fat and jobless as long as  he was at least one standard deviation above average height. It makes  absolutely no sense that we're the gender that doesn't wear high heels. (See the top online dating sites.)
Before  my interviewees entered or left my office, I had to call the  receptionist to run traffic control to make sure that no one else saw  them. Barbie said this was done to ensure client privacy, but I think it  was just so I could stop women as they went to leave and estimate how  big they were on bottom. I, by the way, have no idea what scale is used  to measure on bottom. I didn't know if it was just an S-M-L thing or if  there was a number or if I was supposed to use terms I heard in Sir  Mix-A-Lot songs. I wound up just trying to draw something.
More  shocking than the non-gold-digging women, however, were the men. Who  were hot. And socially well adjusted. With M bottoms. Basically, they  were older guys, often divorced, who were serious about getting married  and having kids and hated dating. Ironically, because of all the gold  diggers. A divorced real estate developer told me, "My first reaction  was, I'd never pay $20,000 for a date. Then I thought about what I  normally spend $20,000 on." I was falling in love.
People were  really honest. The developer said that not only did his marriage become  sexless after he and his wife had children, but she refused for more  than 10 years to go on vacation without the kids. He also said he liked  Brazilian butts. (See the best songs for lovers.)
The  next morning, I went back to the office, sure of which woman to set the  developer up with. But Barbie and Nicole were positive I was going to  suggest this other woman since she and the developer both had kids and  she was South American with an L butt. They accused me of being  attracted to the woman I was suggesting, which, while true, deeply  offended my professionalism after a long day of staring at women as they  walked away.
I agreed to go with their professional opinion. But  I had trouble sleeping that night, thinking I was cheating two people  out of true love and one person out of $20,000. Yes, the woman was  missing lots of things on his wish list — like an L butt — but they had  similar temperaments, shared a sense of quiet confidence, and seemed as  though they would banter and go on adventures and challenge each other.  Barbie was so impressed by my dedication that she said she would give my  choice a shot. They've been on six dates so far. If I have to write a  speech for their wedding, I'm going to be pissed.
  This article originally appeared in the March 28, 2011 issue of TIME.  
 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét