Where the field of psychology has continued to be the main authority on the nature of one’s inner world – thoughts, feelings and anything concerning the subjective inner-psyche, there seems in recent years to be an awakening of a new cultural sociology of emotions. While perhaps not as statistically and empirically rigorous as the psychological sciences, observing the human psyche within the prism of the sociology of emotions, with its wider-reaching perspective on cultural and global trends, may offer new insight and a no less rich vocabulary to the underlying processes shaping modern societal and individual life (Illouz, 2019). Furthermore, in the last century, psychological terminology has grown to dominate the social sphere via self-help books, popular media and magazines, thus psychology, coupled with its neo-liberal consumerist counterpart, has come to form the very bedrock of modern Western culture and terminology as is (Illouz, 2008). For this reason, precisely, sociology, and specifically the sociology of emotions, offers a unique vantage point in analyzing the malaise of modernity, viewing personhood more critically than psychology can. Lastly, since emotions are often shaped, understood and experienced depending on the culture and social context (Keltner & Haidt, 2001), the study of ideas and cultural knowledge is crucial in understanding emotions. Thus by reviewing the ways in which specific narratives are construed during times of heightened emotion, it may be possible to glimpse the governing cultural knowledge schemes, or as I will refer to them: “Memes” (Dawkins, 1976; Blackmore, 2000).
In this essay, the empirical point of interest is that of the reflexive narrative of the modern “breakup” – the end of an intimate relationship. The working definition of the “breakup” is of one or both parties deciding on changing their relationship status, no longer treating one another as romantically and sexually intimate or exclusive, whilst ceasing to exhibit further expressions of affection. Specifically, we will draw upon 7 of the most highly ranked posts between February 2020 to February 2021 found in the Reddit forum: “r/BreakUps”, where people share stories, tips and insights on how to deal and later overcome breakups and their associated hardships.
The reason for choosing breakups as an empirical local where cultural schemes manifest, is that the breakup itself, the events leading up to it, as well as the events proceeding it are often so emotionally intense, that it may be of great interest in understanding the cultural norms operating in shaping such experiences. This field of inquiry, despite its growing interest in popular culture, has been neglected in sociological research, and this essay is one of growing attempts to rectify it (Illouz, 2019).
I suggest that the one useful model of viewing the breakup narrative is by competing “memes”, opposing cultural values that clash one with the other. The term Meme was coined by Dawkins (1976) in analogy to replicating genes, and was later expounded upon by Blackmore: “Everything that is passed from person to person in this way (via imitation) is a meme. This includes all the words in your vocabulary, the stories you know, the skills and habits you have picked up from others and the games you like to play.” (Blackmore, 2000, p. 7) Thus, using the Meme-eye view of culture, it may be possible to view cultural norms as memetic units that replicate from mind to mind, thus governing much of a person’s thoughts, behaviour and emotion.
Before directly examining the expressions of clashing memes, it may worth noting the assumed framework operating throughout the following analysis. Modern dating, romance and love have been shaped by four simultaneous cultural forces (which influence and shape on another): first, the growing centrality of the “therapeutic habitus” of the psychologizing terminology assuming the constant need for self-work (Lerner, 2015; Illouz, 2008), that is to become emotionally and psychologically proficient and communicative: “Homo communicans” (Illouz, 2008, p. 95), where even men can express more “emotional” forms of masculinity (de Bois & Hearn, 2017). Secondly, dating and romance have been heavily marketized, following the rules of the capitalist free market where a sense of abundance of potential new partners is always readily available instantaneously (Illouz 2012, 2019). Thirdly, as opposed to previous centuries, where relationships were characterized by certainty and known cultural norms, today there does not exist explicit and highly formulated norms of attractiveness and interaction, causing a further feeling of ontological uncertainty (Illouz, 2012, 2019). Fourthly, the governing philosophy of both the choosing of romantic partners and the relationship’s subsequent erosion is done in the name of maximizing happiness and well-being by valuing above all autonomy and freedom (Illouz, 2007, 2012, 2019).
The members of the subreddit community “r/BreakUps” remain mostly anonymous, thus it is hard to say with any amount of certainty the demographics or occupation of the people sharing their stories. From the content and expressions used, speaking of “moving to college” for example, there seems to be a young North American similarity between the members of the community. Yet as this site is open to all, it may be reflective of all English speakers of varying ages and nationalities. The main common dominator seems to be the mutual support they share for one another’s stories, often the most upvoted comments being extreme exhibitions of support: “MY MANNNNNN \ YOU DID ITTTT”, or “You’re an absolute legend. I think I speak on behalf of this entire subreddit when I say that we’re so proud of you, and the steps you’ve taken”.
I will argue that these posts illustrate 4 common manifestations within the therapeutic-self narrative characterizing the post-breakup stage: 1) preferring certain coping strategies in the multifold dichotomies of clashing of memes, 2) a win-lose battlefield as measured by self-improvement 3) a performative hypothetical ideal constantly contrasted to and 4) personal yet widespread blind endorsement of support, forgiveness and empowerment.
The conflictual memes, or alternatively, the competing cultural schemas, exhibited in the posts are: autonomy vs attachment, rationality vs emotionality, reality vs illusion, maturity vs immaturity, hard work vs comfort, communicating vs exiting (leaving abruptly), self-forgiveness vs self-blame, self-control vs addiction, growth vs lack of change, finding happiness by moving on vs reliving the pain. In all these dichotomies, the posts’ discourse almost always prefers the former values characterized of the psychological proficient and rational “Homo communicans” (Illouz, 2008, p. 95) as opposed to the ladder emotional, fantastical romanticism, more characteristic of 19th-century novels (Illouz, 2012). For example, as says the writer of the post titled: “To those who broke up because you ‘lost feelings’ for your partner”:
Long-term relationships take actual work and commitment, and feelings of love and romance come and go so quit hanging onto happy moments in the past and work on the present to be happy again… Real love isn’t made up of feelings… (emphasis added).
The author of the post, whilst disparaging all partners that allegedly chose to opt-out of the relationship rather than remain and do the “actual work”, goes as far as to argue the surprisingly paradoxical statement: “Real love isn’t made up of feelings…”. Thus by contrasting reality from fantasy, work as opposed to comfort, the person offers a conception of “true love” that allegedly is necessary for a long-term relationship to last, solely as a product of rationality, that can be achieved only by both parties having “better communication”. Thus “love”, a concept that traditionally was defined as feeling itself, comforting attachment and both the goal and prerequisite of romance are distilled into a cognitive, highly-aware, verbal and objective entity that may only be achieved through deliberate labour. This love is not ineffable, mystical, or idealized, it is not even romance, rather it is viewed as a daily reality that like a job (borrowing the same terminology “work”), requires effortful attention and communication. These needs espoused are also based on the same modern psychological assumptions, the memes replicated via popular media and literature that promote the need for self-monitoring and the constant sharing of one’s subjective experience.
These tensions are further highlighted in the distinctly female voice having had met her ex after 16 months post-breakup. She recounts the disappointment she felt:
I saw him Monday night. The whole day I was nervous, I barely slept, I looked forward to this day… and it was anti climatic. \ I waited to see him for so long and I had hyped him up in my head SO much, that seeing him was a disappointment. \ I have grown so much since the relationship, and I grew away. I became more whole alone, I raised my standards and my expectations, and he does not meet my standards for a partner anymore… Logic over emotion is the best way to go through these things guys. Logically him and I just don’t work. Emotionally there is a lot of history there and potential. But learn to accept things at face value without forcing things.
Here the same main contrast is reality vs illusion, where the act of disillusionment upon seeing the ex is needed in order for her to “accept things”. Here too, the contrast is made explicit: “Logic over emotion”, again echoing the same need to differentiate the two, viewing emotionality as distinguishably and unequivocally opposed to rationality. This highly reflexive account, emphasizes the theme of “growth”. She argues she has changed so much, she has done the “self-work” while he remained static, he has not changed.
Interestingly, her mere involvement with self-improvement gives her the perceived sense of superiority, thus reversing the power-dynamic of being the one broken up with “the dumpee” to the one who turned out better. Therefore, whether explicit or not, this post exhibits the same notion of victory and triumph echoed in many other posts on the forum, including the post titled: “My ex finally texted me back :)”. It may be construed that the breakup is implicitly understood as a battlefield, a zero-sum game, a competition where both parties may be able to score points. It seems that there are 2 distinct rounds: the first is the one who initiated the breakup, and the second – the one who “turned out better” following the breakup, that is the one who improved the most, found “more” happiness, has most changed etc.
This need to “win”, to show to the other that one is “better off” seems to result from the same underline competitiveness of neo-liberal capitalism, but instead of measuring success by wealth, it is measured by “self-improvement”. Yet because self-improvement is much less tangible, and cannot be as easily quantified as money, it seems to take the form of a multiplicity of metrics that give some indication of the betterment of the self. As one post summarizes: “ex broke up with me to sleep around. After losing weight and focusing on myself she asked for me back and I said no. (emphasis added).” Here too, the post is a self-satisfied declaration of how, in this case, a man, has initially “lost” the first round but regained his self-esteem via self-improvement, thus winning by the metrics of becoming more physically attractive (losing weight), more caring of his various aspects in life: ”My dating, work, and everything is so much better”, finally winning by getting to be the one to reject the ex after she attempted to reconnect.
Another interesting finding in these posts is the notion of the “right one”. As the post “How to Handle Getting Dumped Like a Pro” notes: “Remind yourself through this process that he was not right for you, because otherwise, you would still be together”. What is particularly interesting in this post is the construal of the ideal partner, “the right person” as by definition, being someone who will never leave or even be in a breakup to begin with. Thus it seems to render the good match as a performative act – by staying together one becomes the right partner.
The notion of there existing a perfect match of personalities seems to be a notion commonly echoed in popular culture. According to it, for every person, there exists another with complementary and identical “tastes”, which form the deepest core of the self (Bourdieu, 1984; Illouz, 2019). This consumerist taste, being a part of one’s identity, makes a sharing of tastes a crucial part of a partner’s romantic decisions (Illouz, 2019). This too is a meme, a cultural script, that has been highly replicated in popular media, notably in the very famous 2000’s sitcom “How I Met Your Mother”. This show, spanning 9 seasons and 204 episodes, idealizes the anonymous mother figure from the very first episode, where the romantic protagonist, Ted Mosby, begins by recounting to his two children the events proceeding the fateful encounter with the mythical romantic partner – “the right person”. In one episode named “Cindy”, Ted dates Cindy which, unbeknownst to him at the time, is the mother’s roommate. Upon entering Cindy’s room, he picks up three objects attempting to prove to her how much they have in common. All 3 items, in fact, belong or are connected to her roommate, the “right person” which Ted eventually meets and marries only in the last season of the show. This scene captures well the way in which tastes, consumer objects such as music, playing the bass guitar, and reading a certain book are understood as reflections of one’s core personality, the indication that one may be “the right person” that will allow entering a long-lasting fulfilling relationship.
Lastly, another point worth touching upon is the universal, yet personal empowering speech given in the posts. Though the writers and readers are all anonymous with no previous encounters or familiarity of any sort, it is not uncommon to find statements such as: “It’s not your fault”, “You Are Awesome. Even if You Can’t See it Now”. It’s as if the authors, knowing the kind of emotional state the readers of the forum must be, currently having low self-esteem following the breakup, the immediate response is that by merely existing, without concern for the details or events that took place, one is worthy of forgiveness and compassion. Not only that his “fault” is forgiven regardless of the actions (since they are not known to the writer of the post), one is, by the sheer fact that he\she has read the post, is awesome.
This immediate self-help mentality, giving anonymous (and unearned) support and acceptance may or may not be beneficial for the reader who is at the moment of reading, may be suffering from low levels of self-esteem. Yet it should be called into question the effects of living in a culture where blind compliments are shared online (on blogs, or magazines) without being attached to any source of familiarity, achievement or action. It may cause a sense of cynicism and disbelief when such statements are in fact based on one’s character and said by a close acquaintance. Thus, I urge wariness of the current trend of inflating compliments, forgiveness and compassion which are written in such a form publicly for anyone to read. They may cheapen and lessen the effects of more genuine support based on personal relationships and genuine one to one help. Yet, this is mere speculation and requires further empirical research.
To summarize, this essay attempted to outline the need for a furthering of the sociology of emotions and the framework of neo-liberal and therapeutic narratives operating in the discourse of relationship breakups. By analyzing highly upvoted posts on Reddit concerning breakups, I have argued that 4 interesting manifestations should be noted: a preference to therapeutic rational memes (logic over emotion), a win-lose conceptualization following the breakup as measured by self-improvement, a performative hypothetical ideal of the “right person” and the potential harm of blind, widespread empowerment, inflating the form of support.