‘dating in the dark.’

Much of the show resembles a low-budget porn film.

This show bears a strong resemblance to a train wreck, albeit a ridiculous one, if massive accidents and death could ever be considered ridiculous. Here’s the premise: 3 men and 3 women meet in a dark room, though we the audience can see them because of fancy infrared cameras courtesy of ABC’s technology department. The fact that they can’t see each other is supposed to be a ‘social experiment’ and reveal how shallow we all are. Of course, they still try to find out what the other person looks like. One guy offered to teach a woman golf, presumably because it was an excuse to touch her and determine if she had a nice figure or was ‘plus-sized’ (always a moral ineptitude in reality TV). After ‘dating’ in the dark a few times, the people who liked each other most are allowed to see what the other person looks like. I’ve only seen the show once, while sitting in front of a fan, but all the contestants were attractive (their personalities less so), so most were content with each other’s looks, and there weren’t any dramatic or revealing moments.
The forcefulness with which they forge emotional bonds is hilarious and may be more vomit-inducing than the moment when their looks are revealed. Contestants are asked to bring something of value to ‘show’ the other, who, of course, cannot see it; one lady brought a ring her father had given her and proceeded to explain the value of family to a man she met twice. She then put the ring on his finger. This struck me as particularly awkward.
Is there anything wrong with wanting to date someone to whom you’re attracted? No. Thanks, ABC, for this inane reality TV, I mean, riveting social experiment. Lastly, the daters look creepy in the infrared light, oftentimes reminding me of the lions filmed in night vision attacking an elephant in ‘Planet Earth.’