StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Esther Brown
2/13/02
ENGL 309


Christmas, Easter, Hallowe’en, Mardi Gras—all these holidays originally had religious significance, a significance which society has swept away in an admirable effort to make them accessible to all. Whether a person is Jewish, Muslim, or atheist, she can trick-or-treat and hunt Easter eggs to her heart’s content. However, one holiday still exists which makes no effort to veil its discriminatory nature, casting the dark shadow of exclusion and rejection on all those who do not conform. This holiday is known as Valentine’s Day. Young or old, male or female, single or involved, none can escape its insidious grasp. In fact, all that Valentine’s Day accomplishes is a perpertuation of the dominant social heirarchy, allowing the successful to bask in their status and the unsuccessful to be further humiliated. Valentine’s Day is a very real problem, one whose presence darkens the lives of children, singles, and couples. Only by recognizing the holiday for what it is can we seek to break free of the social bonds we ourselves have made.

The first foreshadowings of these bonds come as early as childhood. For Valentine’s Day, children have two possibilities in their schoolroom: either they will be forced to buy cards for everyone in the class, or they must only give cards to those friends whom they choose. This situation is essentially lose-lose. In the first scenario, the celebration of Valentine’s Day becomes a yearly tribute to greeting card companies and candy manufacturers. The ritual is devoid of true sentiment, aside from providing children with yet another excuse to exchange and consume sugary treats, and it reinforces the idea that a pointless exchange of presents is necessary on the fourteenth of February. On the other hand, if children can choose whom to give their valentines, then the day becomes a popularity contest, reaffirming the schoolroom social order. Those with fewer cards look on enviously, while those with more cards learn to value superficial social ties more than individuality or intimate friendships. Nobody wins. Of course, this situation is merely a preview of the pattern that will take hold once those children grow up. The boys and girls quickly learn that Valentine’s Day is either a meaningless and expensive ritual or an opportunity to reiterate the losers and the winners in the social heirarchy.

Of course, these options are made the most painfully clear to those who are single on Valentine’s Day. For weeks beforehand, shops affront their eyes with pink and red flowers, candy, chocolate, teddy bears, cards, and the like—presents which they are painfully aware they have no chance of receiving. After all, Valentine’s Day is intended to celebrate and perpetuate the joys of romantic love; hence, to those for whom such a celebration is impossible, the day becomes a searing reminder of their lack of so-called “success.” By glorifying partnerhood, Valentine’s Day denigrates the single life, which many people intentionally choose, and embarrasses those who . Now, in the eyes of some optimists, Valentine’s Day helps singles by giving them the perfect chance to approach that “special someone.” However, this attitude assumes that being single is a problem to be fixed, not a valid lifestyle choice. Moreover, even for those who desire to be in a relationship, the extra pressure of Valentine’s Day’s romantic associations turns a casual date into something awkwardly serious. Thus, Valentine’s Day provides virtually no benefits for singles, yet results in weeks of humiliation for their “failure” in the realm of romance.

Now, my arguments so far might lead some readers to assume that I am simply bitter about being alone on Valentine’s Day. Those readers would be correct. However, having spoken with many friends who are differently situated, I feel qualified to claim that the day is no less of a problem for couples. Though its effects are less overtly unpleasant, they are still frequently negative and rarely positive. I shall begin with the latter. While I concede that Valentine’s Day provides an easy excuse and means for couples to express their affection, such an excuse is both unnecessary and dampening to normal sentiments. If a young man wants to buy his girlfriend flowers because of her birthday, or because she needs cheering up, that thoughtful gift is entirely different from the chore of buying a Valentine’s bouquet, lest he invoke the wrath of a woman neglected. Likewise, while an evening out with a significant other is certainly a nice occasion, the fact that it becomes an expectation on Valentine’s Day means that the lack thereof is sorely felt. In other words, by setting romantic expectations so high, Valentine’s Day ensures that the best which couples can hope for is no better than what could happen on any other day of the year, but that any less than the ideal is rewarded with disappointment. Thus, even for couples, Valentine’s Day results in less benefit than harm. Considering that couples are supposed to be the privileged class on Valentine’s Day, it is no wonder that the situation is even worse for everyone else.

Thus, Valentine’s Day does little good to anyone beyond Hallmark and 1-800-FLOWERS. The holiday discriminates between those who do or don’t have partners, humiliating singles and ultimately disadvantaging everyone, whether young or old, single or involved. Despite the veneer of love and happiness which the day attempts to evoke, it is indeed a very serious problem to all who suffer its effects. Perhaps the only positive act of this painful “holiday” is the day after—a celebration which truly can be appreciated by everyone. After all, though we may have to endure weeks of expense, annoyance, disappointment, and embarrassment, all for the sake of one sappy day, at least we get half-price candy out of it.

Now, my arguments so far might lead some readers to assume that I am simply bitter about being alone on Valentine’s Day. Those readers would be correct.

Malecoda wrote:Nobody's named fucking COLUMBUS, so let's scratch that off the calendar too!

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:

Malecoda wrote:Nobody's named fucking COLUMBUS, so let's scratch that off the calendar too!

I know you're being sarcastic but that's a good idea.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:And now that I mentioned orgies, we will witness the thread being hijacked by the more immature members, as it seems they're not capable of thinking outside of their pants.