Happens every February: first the groundhogs are coaxed out of their holes, then the love doctors pop out of theirs. Come Valentine's Day, just as the usual suspect pundits are rounded up after the State of the Union address, experts on the State of Dis-union (some call it dating) routinely hawk their various theories on why and how men and women do or don't manage to hook up in the Modern Age.
Witness Daniel Jones, editor of the NY Times column Modern Love: he's done a round-up of his findings from the last year and a half, reporting on the state of contemporary romance in a piece called You're Not Sick, You're Just in Love. His pithy summary includes these observations:
In pursuing love, electronic communication allows us to be more reckless, fake, distracted and isolated than ever before.
(Yes, I'm currently carrying on an e-mail correspondence with a sweet and flirtatious young thing who may actually be an elderly nun -- anything wrong with that?)
The number of women being dumped by men "for no reason" appears to remain high.
(The number of men being dumped by women for reasons they'll give you the many specifics about for like, years remains just as impressive.)
Reconnecting with an old high school or college sweetheart late in life seems to result in happiness more often than not.
(Suzanne Kavet, are you out there? And if so, would you be willing to bicycle over here if I help you finish that English essay like I promised?)
Gay marriage turns out to be yawningly similar to heterosexual marriage.
(Gambling in Casablanca? We are shocked, shocked...)
Among the lovelorn and childless, many seem resigned that pets and people are better at forging successful relationships with each other than people and people.
(Now that you mention it, I sometimes do find myself missing my ex-wife's dog more than I miss my ex-wife.)
Meanwhile, another discipline heard from: as fellow journalist Rachel Lehmann-Haupt reports, anthropologist Helen Fisher, whose life work has been to demonstrate that romantic attachments have a biological and chemical basis, has been hired by Match.com as chief scientific adviser to Chemistry.com, the idea being that her laboratory insights will help daters find their perfect mate.
Evidently Fisher getting her gig is a result of the slowed growth in subscriptions to on-line dating services. In theory, her more scientific approach should better meet the needs of Match.com's members, because she's matching up personality types according to their body chemistry.
A guy with an active dopamine system, see, ought to hook up with a woman who's got the right levels of serotonin. And then the fact that he's into Nine Inch Nails and bondage while she's all Enya and knitting shouldn't make a difference, right?
I dunno. You newspaper reporters and scientists work it out amongst yourselves. When it comes to matchmaking, I'm putting my money on this cowboy:
During the Q &A I heard at the NuArt the other night, documentary filmmaker Michele Ohayon explained that she decided to make her movie Cowboy Del Amor about Ivan Thompson when she heard him interviewed on NPR. "Here was this guy from New Mexico who was making a living finding Mexican wives for American men," she said, "and he'd already divorced the Mexican woman he married."
Writers, you'll note the logic in her interest: character complexity's a good hook, every time. And Ivan Thompson is some character, with a capital C. This "Cowboy Cupid," who busses lonely American ranchers into Mexico for $3,000 to meet the Hispanic match of their dreams, is so amiably droll and personable that you can nearly forgive his politically incorrect ideology, which would indeed make your average feminist see red.
To put it blunt, this redneck's a pisser, and one of the joys of Ohayon's eminently entertaining doc is to listen to Thompson drawl his outrageous homilies ("He rode her hard and put her up wet" he says of one unsuccessful relationship) and then just when you'd like to smack him, watch him demonstrate an endearing humanity (Thompson does succeed, right before your eyes, in coaxing a briefly wayward customer into properly pursuing the clearly lovable woman who turns out to be his rightful bride).
Considering that the guy's business is tacitly racist and sexist at the core, it's kind of amazing that the movie is so much fun, and that you end up with a grudging admiration for Ivan's folksy know-how. Right or wrong, this Cowboy Del Amor is bringing people together and creating palpable happiness. The film affords us the rare opportunity to literally witness love at first sight. While it can't really explain the how and why of it, damn if it doesn't prove that such a phenomenon does exist in real life.
Cowboy Del Amor, appearing this week for a limited run in selected cities, could be considered a Valentine's night alternate to Brokeback, if you're already hitched. And as for the male singletons among my readership... Scientists, shmientists: I believe Mr. Thompson is still in business.
Well, gee, I dunno, which is more politically incorrect - shipping a lonely guy south of the border to meet women who would love a better life north of the border, or being a guy wanting to go out with women young enough to be his daughter? Ew, ew, ew!!!
Posted by: lezlee | February 13, 2006 at 12:19 PM
Lezlee, thanks for the comment, but I'm a bit puzzled: who is "the guy wanting to go out with women young enough to be his daughter?"
Posted by: mernitman | February 13, 2006 at 05:57 PM
"Cowboy Del Amore" sounds hillarous. Won't pay to see it in the theatre, but will rent it if I see at the local video shack.
Thanks for the tip!
- E.C. Henry in Bonney Lake, WA
Posted by: ECHenry | February 13, 2006 at 06:43 PM
OK, I'll see the movie - It's got to be livelier anyway than Broken Flowers.
Happy Valentine's Day - Great post!
Babs
Posted by: B.A. | February 13, 2006 at 07:42 PM
Scientific advisor...
How long before we all just prick our fingers and let the Justice of the Peace notify us by mail of our chemically suitable mates and scheduled wedding dates?
Posted by: MaryAn | February 13, 2006 at 08:24 PM
E.C. you're welcome, B.A. thank you!
...and MaryAn: [shudder] slowly we turn...
Posted by: mernitman | February 13, 2006 at 08:39 PM
Filling out a survey? We lie on surveys. Making sure our likes and dislikes match? BS. The most solid unions are actually between opposites.
Looking for love on line is like trying to find a gay man at a Bush rally. There's probably one there but it'll be blind luck if you run into him.
Now, if you'll excuse me, my Russian wife is preparing hot towels for my eyes.
Posted by: JJ | February 14, 2006 at 10:57 AM
Does anyone know of any good Online Dating sites that are literally 100 percent free, like you can send messages and read messages for free?
Posted by: singles | September 27, 2010 at 11:50 PM