The Science of Attraction

Last night I watched that documentary on love. Supposedly on love. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say it was on the physical manifestations that we label 'love'. I prefer to call it the Science of Attraction and it coincides nicely with a cynical wee theory of my own.

The idea that love is a form of insanity is by no means original. That lust is simply the reproductive urge doing its thing to promote the species. But wait! Now we have conclusive proof that in selecting a partner we look for:

• similar characteristics to our own; and
• a different immune system to our own (which we discover by smell, clever huh)

in order to perpetuate our genes by combining the similarity and the diversity of these respective attributes. And that's that.

But what purpose is served by broadcasting the 'fact' that post-orgasm, women are biologically programmed to desire attention while men are conversely programmed to go to sleep? I didn't notice any attempt to explain that one away, and I declare it socially irresponsible to validate such a claim.

And the 'long-term' couple used as an example. They'd only been together six years! (I'm not one to talk but I'm told relationships occasionally go into double figures.) If the idea was that they've been together forever therefore the 'cocktail of chemicals' much like a 'love drug' will have long since subsided, why have them screaming down a roller coaster minutes after tying the knot? Someone's attempt at a clever analogy perhaps; it rather missed the mark.

Don't get me wrong, it was entertaining viewing. I do like British documentaries. There's no room for confusion.

Scientist type person: "Look, the clever presenter/guinea pig correctly identified as least attractive the smelly t-shirt worn by the pig."
Presenter/Guinea Pig: "What a relief, what if I'd chosen the pig?"
Scientist type person: "Uh... We're not sure what that would mean (and we're quite relieved too.)"