Skip to content Skip to footer

Valentine

Could Valentine’s Day, a holiday meant to celebrate romantic relationships, somehow bring about their untimely end? A 2004 study at Arizona State suggests the answer is yes: Researchers found that Cupid’s arrow may actually shoot down some not-so-strong relationships.

Could Valentine’s Day, a holiday meant to celebrate romantic relationships, somehow bring about their untimely end? A 2004 study at Arizona State suggests the answer is yes: Researchers found that Cupid’s arrow may actually shoot down some not-so-strong relationships.

Katherine A. Morse and Steven L. Neuberg surveyed students about their relationships one week before and one week after Valentine’s Day. They found that couples were more likely to break up during the holiday period than those surveyed at different times in the year.

“Valentine’s Day facilitates the downward trajectory from ongoing relationship difficulties to dissolution,” they write. “We believe that Valentine’s Day places romantic relationships at risk because, contrary to popular perceptions, it instigates a set of processes often detrimental to romantic relationships and catalyzes existing relationship difficulties, making it more likely that these difficulties will lead to dissolution.”

Some relationships, they argue, might be able to make it through rough times in other months, but the added pressure of Valentine’s Day may inspire couples to cut their losses. Not sure where your relationship stands: If you’ve lowered your expectations for your relationship and it still doesn’t quite measure up to other people’s, or if you’ve recently noticed how many attractive and available alternatives to your significant other are out there, you might be in a low-quality relationship.

The researchers say the holiday has no apparent influences on very high-quality relationships or new relationships on an upward trajectory. But if things haven’t been going so well with your significant other lately, the holiday spirit may be the nail in the coffin.

Confectionary Consolation — or the “Chocolate Cure”

If Valentine’s Day ruined your new-but-not-going-so-well relationship, you may wish to console yourself with a box of chocolate. Research published in November in the Journal of Preteome Research indicates that this approach is scientifically sound: Chocolate may ease emotional stress.

The researchers found that entering into a chocolate regimen has health benefits. Eating about an ounce and a half of dark chocolate every day for two weeks reduced stress hormone levels for people who described themselves as highly stressed and, the scientists report, had a partially corrective effect on other stress-related biochemical imbalances.

So if you’re feeling lonely, reach for the chocolate — it may not help you bag a date, but it should at least reduce your stress about not having one.

Motivations for Valentine’s Day Gift-Giving

Why do men give Valentine’s Day gifts? Are they driven by a sense of obligation, a desire to be romantic or perhaps the adage, ‘Give, and ye shall receive’?

Researchers at the University of Newcastle wanted to find out. They conducted in-depth interviews with 61 men between the ages of 18 and 25 who had made a Valentine’s Day purchase for a romantic partner in the past two years. The overwhelming winner? Obligation.

All of the men who participated in the study thought gift-giving was expected of them, which in their eyes made it necessary. In fact, 91 percent said that if they didn’t give gifts, their partners would react negatively.

The research team found that a sense of duty wasn’t the only thing driving purchases. Men had a self-interest motive when they bought certain gifts: For example, 89 percent of males said they would be thinking about themselves while buying lingerie and would derive pleasure from the gift.

The researchers also noted that when asked directly if they expected something in return for giving a Valentine’s Day present, 25 percent of the respondents said yes. Many of the other responses implied immaterial expectations, namely sex, with some “very descriptive” answers.

Cheap Flowers Hurt the Environment

Whatever their motivations, an estimated 32 percent of U.S. households celebrate Valentine’s Day with flowers. Whether you regard the holiday tradition of giving flowers as outdated and misogynistic or wonderfully romantic, University of Leicester researcher David Harper urges you to think before you give: Cheap flowers won’t just upset your date — they’ll also hurt Mother Earth.

Harper pointed out last year that many of the cut-price Valentine’s Day roses exported from Africa for sale in the U.K. have disastrous environmental consequences. And an article by Martin Donohoe in Human Rights Quarterly argues that the flowers and jewelry bought for Valentine’s Day support industries that degrade the earth, lead to health problems, use forced labor and add to violent conflicts.

Harper suggested choosing fair-trade roses over their cheaper counterparts; Donohoe recommends alternative gifts, including videos, home improvement projects, homemade meals and donations to charities.

Before you decide what to give your sweetheart this year, you may want do a little research. If you hurt the environment, your only respite may be the box of dark chocolate you buy yourself.

Elisabeth Best graduated in June 2009 from the University of California, Santa Barbara with a BA in Global Studies and a minor in professional editing. As an undergraduate, she studied in the urban jungle of Madrid, Spain; volunteered in the tropical rain forests of Costa Rica; and got her political fix at the George Washington University in D.C., where she hosted The Backseat on WRGW. Her work has appeared in the GW Hatchet and Coastlines Magazine.

We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.

As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.

Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.

As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.

At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.

Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.

You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.