He is the very model of a modern metrosexual

I was watching “Joe Millionaire” last night with four members of the Canberra diaspora in Sydney.

The end of civilisation is clearly at hand.

Anyway, they were down to three women and white-trash gum-chewing girl got the boot. (Yawn.)

The most bizarre part is that this guy can pass as a millionaire at all. Cretinous just about begins to cover the territory.

“Did you get that dr - breast in Paris?” he asks one date, staring down her tube top.

Another moment, a date comments: “You seem a really regular guy. Like you don’t have a lot on your mind.”

Friend on the couch: “Or a lot in his mind.”

“What do you look for in a woman?” white-trash asks.

“Legs,” he replies. “That’s who I am.”

Actually, who he is - is an underwear model. Well, his hands and feet are certainly huge.

It all put me in mind of Odalisk’s recent entry on the mixed messages of pop culture about materialism/capitalism: yeah, sure it’s bad – but don’t worry, everyone can aspire to be materially successful. Our culture makes some token condemnation of materialism’s evils, while remaining utterly in the thrall of its values.

So in this show, knowing the cruel comeuppance that this guy hasn’t a cent, we get to smugly deride these women for being mercenary and him for being a liar – yet the producers will engineer a happy ending by giving him a million dollars and creating (a much smaller scale) millionaire. Sure, this is no worse a final plot back-flip than the average Gilbert and Sullivan musical – but meanwhile the show sails on with the sexual politics of the middle ages: men need to be well-endowed providers with the profile of a Disney hero, and women should make no threatening intellectual conversation and just flirt and put out to get their man.

But wait - some media icons are challenging the gender mould, apparently. Ian Thorpe “loves Armani, is seen just as often near a catwalk as competing in sport, confesses an adulation for Kylie Minogue, even designs his own jewellery. But he's not gay” proclaims the Sydney Morning Herald.

“Men - of all sexualities - are taking a greater interest in their appearance. They go to hairdressers rather than barbers, avoid using soap because it's too harsh on their skin, visit the gym instead of playing sport and even have difficulty deciding what to wear. They're spending their time differently - not only occupying more of it in front of the mirror but also shopping at boutique stores, drinking at bars rather than pubs, enjoying a dance at a nightclub and going to beauty salons. Cosmetics brands such as Ella Bache say men make up as much as 40 per cent of their salon customers in some areas.”

And the Brit Tabloid term for these modern men? “Metrosexuals”.

I’m not gay, I just shop that way.

Again, what frightens me about this article is it is not about social choices or gender structures – it is about consumerism. Everyone interviewed is a retail-chain purchaser or an advertising guru. We are not the sum of our choices, but the sum of our purchases. Modern sexual equality means making men beauty-obsessed consumers and sexual objects also. Hurrah. (Still it is only the Sydney Morning Herald, analysis or insightful social journalism would be a little much to ask.)

“Joe Millionaire” is also a constructed product, a consumer good, not just to those of us watching – but the women throwing themselves at him. He is a brand name, a status-good, a big wodge of purchasing power. In a grim kind of final equality, we are all consumers now. But, of course, some consumers are more equal than others …

Anyway, you’ll have to excuse me now. There are rumours of 60% off brand name business shirts at a store in Martin Place.