My Love Language is Bullshit

 Entry 1 8:54 A.M.

When Jenny was explaining why we were really like oil and water, which is, she claimed a primary reason she had the affair with el pinche, she explained that we had different love languages, the two of us. She, who left home as frequently as dandelion seeds hit by a lawn mower, insisted that her love language was quality time, and that mine was receiving gifts. She had determined mine simply through her years of proximity to me. 

I had started hearing about "love language" several years ago, initially not paying

Valentine's Day breakfast, a la Jenny, circa 2014.

much attention to the idea. I also didn't question it. I eventually swallowed it in one gulp, when Jenny talked to me about it--ostensibly to make me understand how different we are--how incompatable. Ultimately, her love lingo argument was made clear that this idea was a primary post-hoc excuse for cheating on me and neglecting our children aover the 19 months she was dying.

Perhaps it's more common for me to believe in ideas born of speculation and folkways than I care to believe. I may not be the only one, as a Google search of "love language" returned 18,600,000 results. "Love language" is on our minds and seems to be quite believed across the culture. But, it turns out, according to an article in Live Science, both the provenance and theory of "love languages" are utter bullshit. The theory came from a book aptly titled, "The Five Love Languages" written by a Baptist minister in 1992. The five love languages, according to the theologian are affirmation, quality time, receiving gifts, acts of service, and physical touch. The author claims that each of us has a primary love language and that matching such love languages is integral, in fact the sine qua non, of relationship happiness. 

Plato said there were four elements: fire, water, air and earth. Like the Baptist minister, Plato was utterly wrong because he pulled these ideas out of his ass. In Plato's defense, it was his successor Aristotle who invented the "scientific method," so he did the best with what he had. The minister could have used this same method to determine whether his theory was real. He didn't. Perhaps he prayed on it. Or maybe he just put it all out there or shouted into the void. Whatever, it's in the zeitgeist now.

In fairness, it is clear the scientific method is not really known by the broad public, despite it making our world as it exists. Furthermore, books like this fill some niche to help guide people, however misdirected, scientific method be damned.

I should be clear that I am not saying that these things don't matter, but it isn't a zero-sum game and there aren't only five "love languages" and compatibility has far more determinants. I know this because of a myriad of studies-discussed in the article-that blows the whole notion up.

Happy Valentine's Day!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------










Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Life, A Cascading Series of Disappointment

Still Muddling Through Somehow

Don't Do It, Don't Do It, Oh, Lord