A Psychologist’s take on ‘Love is Blind’
Introduction
Reality television has actually been around, in some form or other, since 1948, when Candid Camera aired in the United States. There are a good many criticisms of reality shows, including that they are overly-staged, and that they exploit their participants. While these criticisms are valid, there is also a lot to be learned about human relating on some of the series. As a psychologist, I have found several series to be teeming with examples of human nature from everything to group dynamics to romantic relationship maintenance.
Love is Blind centers on the idea that love can flourish in a vacuum, purely through conversation and emotional intimacy. This seems to reflect some truth; psychologists have long shown that deep emotional bonds and open communication are indeed central to successful relationships. Love is Blind capitalizes on many of our wishes that love can be free from the superficial trappings of appearance, race, and class.
Thoughts on the Premise
Years ago I was a member of an online virtual world and noticed that there were some virtual couples who had been together romantically for years without ever meeting or even exchanging photos. I interviewed about five of these couples and several of them reported stable relationships that they equated to marriage. Since witnessing this, I have also been intrigued with the idea that removing appearances from modern day mating might produce promising results. It’s a hopeful counterpoint to our swipe-culture where appearances seem so overvalued.
When I heard of the show Love is Blind, I was thus intrigued. The premise of Love Is Blind is a unique social experiment that explores whether people can form genuine romantic connections without initially seeing each other. In this Netflix reality dating series, singles are placed in individual “pods” and have conversations with potential matches through a wall that keeps them from viewing one another. They date in these pods over several days, developing emotional connections purely through conversation. The connections happen quickly– much like online connections get formed quickly due to disinhibition (Suler, 2004). People often share intimate facts and even trauma early-on and seem to grow deeply attached. From that point, they are encouraged to propose to one another. If that happens, they agree to get to know each other in person, until they ultimately have to choose at an altar whether or not to say ‘I do’.
I really like the premise of the show and generally think it would be helpful for most people, if we didn’t live in a world where appearances were so prioritized.
However, from my perspective, the ‘Love is Blind’ producers get it very wrong in their execution of the concept. Here is a list of criticisms that I have. I am well aware that there are many other criticisms of reality TV in general, but these are the ones that I believe are most relevant to psychology.
Providing seemingly unlimited alcohol for consumption
If you want a relationship based on connection only to succeed, take away the impediments to emotional connection. The show does a good job of immersing its participants in the experiment by sequestering them and banning the use of social media. However, they routinely seem to encourage a lot of heavy drinking, both in the pods, and thereafter. Alcohol appears to be abundantly available. Of course, we know that the producers do this because it adds to the drama and drama producing ratings, but it really complicates the relationship development and maintenance. Fights become more heated and feelings more distorted with that much heavy alcohol consumption. There have even been instances of domestic violence on the show.
Intentionally creating drama by exploiting ‘love triangles’
The producers place unnecessary stress on the couples by bringing back participants that they formerly had romantic connections with, while in the pods. This creates the possibility of jealousy and infidelity. Insecurity is thus generated in the new couples. It literally happens every single season. ‘Nathan’ had a connection with both ‘Jessica ‘and ‘Sherry’ (all ‘made up’ names) but ultimately chose Jessica. Later in the show, Sherry will surely come back (alcohol again involved) and there will be tension between Jessica and Nathan. Why do this? I get it’s a show, but I would truly like to see the participants get the best chance for a favorable outcome. At least in ‘Married at First Sight’ the producers seem to better try to set the couples up for success. They even give them access to a therapist. In ‘Love is Blind’, however, the producers prioritize drama over helping couples make it.
Demanding a binary decision by the end of the experiment
Participants are literally told, at the end of the experiment, at their wedding, they must either say ‘I do’ or never see each other again for the rest of their lives. This is ludicrous and unrealistic. Some of the couples seem genuinely quite happy, but not quite ready to ‘seal the deal’. Some people realize, by the end, that they need more time to decide. More recent couples seem to be rebelling against this choice forced by the producers and at least one couple had an agreement to say ‘not yet’ at the altar, and another one ran off together rather than make the choice. I applaud that some of the couples reject this false binary. Having another option might increase couples’ chances at success.
In Conclusion
Of course many of the above mentioned problems exist because the purpose of the reality show is to entertain viewers. There is an assumption that the audience won’t be as entertained if there is less drama. I, for one, have really enjoyed some of the more stable couples and think that Love is Blind has a few life lessons for society, if only they would try a little harder.
References
Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology and Behavior. 7(3), 321-326.