Once a Cheater, Not Always a Cheater

March 22, 2013

Brad-Angelina

 

In a recent New York Post article, Naomi Schaeffer Riley tackles infidelity and those who commit it. “Yes, They Will Cheat Again” (bit.ly/XqZZl5) is her venting frustration with the women who get involved with men with a dubious history of fidelity. Her assertion is that once a cheater, always a cheater. She not only permanently ties men to their guilty past but criticizes women who get involved with them and suggests that they are naïve or self defeating. This wholesale condemnation is not accurate for everyone. Of course, there are examples of serial cheaters but that does not mean that everyone that has ever strayed is destined to stray again. Schaeffer Riley does not take into account change, growth, maturation or the very critical ingredient of being with the right person, someone for whom you feel tremendous attraction thus mitigating any urge to stray. She sites Tiger Woods and Brad Pitt as particularly egregious and suggests that Angelina Jolie and Lindsey Vonn are duped and destined for heartbreak and humiliation. Regarding Angelina Jolie, she says, “getting together with Brad Pitt, what’s the thinking there? Sure, he’d cheat on Jennifer but I’m so much hotter that he’d never cheat on me.” We’re sure Angelina Jolie wasn’t thinking that. She was completely and wildly in love with Brad Pitt and didn’t want to give him up. As for her criticism of Pitt and Woods, we cannot attest to the intentions of either man, but we are well acquainted with people who were unfaithful in the past and once they found the right partner and sustainable chemistry, that behavior was history. Not only does having a facial feature match with whom there is real compatibility reduce the incidences of infidelity, but some people do actually change. People make mistakes and those who have any wisdom at all learn from those mistakes. And it is poison to enter a new and serious relationship without some faith; trust is as critical ingredient as attraction. Schaeffer Riley laments the fact that increased legal and social rights for women has not insulated them from being with men who exercised faulty judgment in the past. She never takes into account that these women have a powerful connection to these men and, when mutual, that connection is a powerful barrier against the many temptations that both partners may face. She also never mentions women who cheat; does she think men are guilty perpetrators and women are helpless victims? We are seeking a much more complex and sophisticated analysis than that. We at FYFM certainly don’t condone cheating, but rather than caution people against involvement with someone who once cheated, we caution people not to invest too much in someone with whom they haven’t sufficient chemistry. It takes two to have a great connection; mutual attraction is the name of the game!

Above: Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt stripped of their hair to highlight their similarities.
Below: LeAnn Rimes and Eddie Cibrian, Tiger Woods and Lindsey Vonn.

LeAnn-Rimes-Eddie-Cibriantiger woods  lindsey vonn

Date Quest

January 10, 2013

kate winslet

In the February 2013 issue of Ladies’ Home Journal, the article, The Divorced Mom’s Guide to Online Dating (http://www.lhj.com/relationships/divorce/dating-after-divorce/online-dating/), raises some interesting issues. The writer is a single mom in her 40s who, three years after her divorce, decides to re-enter the world of dating. And at the prodding of a friend, she reluctantly agrees to go online. In order to do so, however, she has to “swallow her pride” and tackle what she claims is a “last resort.” The age of the internet taboo is now fully behind us. I understand that when the writer first got into the dating world, computer dating was either a marginal enterprise or non-existent. But times have changed and our mentalities and habits must change with them. People in their 20s and 30s see nothing odd at all about broadening their social and romantic horizons on the internet. It’s an unfortunate generational misconception that cyber dating is embarrassing or desperate. On the contrary, it is both wise and practical. Forty five million Americans are already looking for love online and with longer work hours and greater reliance on computer technology, it would be foolish and short sighted to neglect that one avenue where so many possibilities live.

Once the writer goes online and posts a profile on a traditional and popular dating site, she is inundated with responses and begins her dating adventure. After 37 dates, a lot of time and energy, and a few fleeting romances, she feels sufficiently empowered and desirable to take down her profile and focus her dating efforts offline.

We, at FYFM, wish we could have intervened into two distinct ways. First, had she been on findyourfacemate.com, she could have narrowed her pool of potential dates to those with whom she was really likely to have chemistry based on the scientific theory of facial feature similarities. Kissability was one of her criteria and yet she laments the many dates she has with those with whom she feels no attraction. FYFM does not promise that all matches we make will lead to a sustainable romance, but our goal is to offer the chance to find real chemistry with someone who has similar style and compatible values. A lot less time will be wasted. Second, we would encourage her to stay online. Why not have an even bigger pool of potential partners. After college we don’t many people who spark our interest and fuel our desire. There are only so many singles to whom we feel attracted in any given location; the internet is just another way to help locate them.

Above: Kate Winslet and Ned Rocknroll  Below: Mario Lopez and Courtney Mazza

mario lopez and wife Courtney Mazza

Are Your Expectations Based in Reality?

November 19, 2012

Common mistakes that too many people make when they embark on a relationship are the expectations they place on their partner; a projected fantasy of sorts. A good friend of mine told me this weekend how frustrated she is with her husband of 20 years. They’ve had issues for a long time. Yet, her husband knows of her unhappiness and chooses to continue to hope, while she believes that she will never be happy with him.  She is unsatisfied with the quality of their conversation and it’s led her to doubt their union. I am not qualified to determine whether they should stay together, but I do feel that we must recognize that people often have very different conversational styles and gender can be a factor exacerbating that. I told my friend to remember why she first fell in love with her husband and asked if those reasons are still valid. Her expectations of her husband’s conversation might be unrealistic; in fact, they might be getting in her way. It’s difficult enough to find love at any age but at 62 it’s even more challenging.  As an older single woman, I can tell you that, unless you are very lucky, it could take up to ten years or longer to find another suitable partner. Until someone misses the person they loved, it’s often hard to recognize the good things and evaluate their own idiocy. It’s only when the person is gone form their life completely for at least a year that they can tell, and then it’s usually too late; that person has likely moved on.  Many woman tell me they are not satisfied with the conversation they have with their husbands, men can be quieter or less social, or not interested in the same subjects as their wives. That does not mean the love is not valid. My advice would be, get your small talk elsewhere.

I learned that the deficits I perceived in my own marriage didn’t really exist. At one point, I found myself at a wedding with my husband but instead of enjoying his company, I was fixated on the tender exchange I saw between another couple. The way an older man tended to his wife and offered her his hand when she was stepping down a stair filled me with sadness and made me scrutinize my own relationship. We were in the middle of some very stressful times, but at that moment my husband had done nothing wrong.  I subconsciously blamed him and cast him in the role of the inattentive partner. He was not a particularly attentive or doting man to begin with, and because we had four children and a tremendous amount of stress, I felt it more acutely. What I neglected to consider was how much I loved my husband, how important he was to me, and how well we got along in so many other critical ways.  Had I stayed with him, there may have been a time when he became more attentive; but at this point and with all our difficulties I added this perceived neglect to the list of my own unrealistic expectations. I can tell you now that I don’t give a hoot about someone doting on me! 

If you are lucky enough to have love, don’t jeopardize it by hoping that your partner be something or someone else. Women who are considering leaving their partners often tell me that they won’t mind being alone. But, being alone day in and day out for years is completely different without a caring partner. Until you experience it, it is difficult to imagine.

Honor love with all of its nuances; acceptance is the attitude most likely to engender growth and increase harmony.  Psychologist Henry Grayson, writer of the best selling Mindful Loving, reminds his clients and readers that, while we cannot change anyone else, we can change ourselves. We can alter our perceptions of the target behavior, we can try to change the circumstances that surround the behavior, or we can try to be a catalyst for change without being attached to the outcome. Love is precious; enjoy it. Don’t waste your time and energy expecting something unreal, when what you have is real!

Couples who stood the test of time. Above: Johnny Cash and June Carter Cash; Below: George Burns and Gracie Allen, Marc and Bella Chagall

Express Yourself

August 17, 2012

We, at FYFM, have explored many aspects of the face and its critical role in determining attraction. But in addition to being the site of similarity, it is also the central region of the human anatomy for self-expression.  It’s the face that denotes feelings and fears from sorrow to surprise. Facial expressions are a major source of how we understand and sometimes misunderstand one another. But there is no disputing that our expressions are closely tied to our emotions and thus the main way we signal our feelings.

Faces have a limited range of movements and subtle motions are often minuscule thus reading them requires some sensitivity. But there are seven universally recognized emotions shown through facial expressions: fear, anger, surprise, contempt, disgust, happiness, and sadness. Regardless of culture, these expressions are all the same.

Perhaps the most significant facial features for the purposes of revealing emotions are the eyes. They not only reveal how a person is feeling but sometimes what they are thinking. Eye contact regulates conversation; it communicates interest and involvement. The eyes can convey the entire spectrum from rejection to flirtation, affection to intimidation.

There is almost a limitless range of emotions that are worn entirely on our faces. Fear usually renders one’s mouth open and eyes wide. Confusion generates a furrowed brow while sadness and surprise are evinced mostly in the eyes. Joy is written all over the face but most evident in the smile. Consider the smile for a moment; it can be the most inviting, calming and nurturing non-verbal cue we give. Even when a total stranger smiles at us, we are immediately put at ease. A genuine smile cannot be suppressed.

Interestingly, there are both voluntary and involuntary expressions, and certain emotions are unable to be disguised.

Our face has a certain shape and configuration but what we do with it and how it responds to external and internal stimuli is part of the package. Attraction is all in the power of the face.

Above and below are portraits of marines in the 13th infantry before, during, and after their deployment from 2009-2010. Photographer Claire Felicie arranged the portraits to show the toll war taken has on a person’s eyes and face.

Love Before Language

June 6, 2012

There are varying and competing theories about the origins of human language. Since language predates recorded history, we have no empirical evidence as to its beginnings. Scientists are perpetually plagued by the question of how and when we evolved from animal vocalizations to the complexity of human language. Prevailing ideas range from the continuity theory (language evolved from our primate ancestors) to the discontinuity theory (language appeared suddenly and uniquely among humans). And there’s still no consensus about whether our linguistic faculties are innate or environmental; is it nature or nurture? In short, the entire language piece of our ancestral puzzle remains a mystery. Evolutionist Carl Zimmer summed it up by stating, “No one knows the exact chronology of this evolution, because language leaves precious few traces on the human skeleton. The voice box is a flimsy piece of cartilage that rots away.”

But we can draw interesting parallels between the homo sapiens in our developmental infancy and individual infants and their own acquisition of language. Babies are not born with the capacity to employ language but they are born with one very specific innate gift, the ability to recognize faces. Despite the poor vision and physiological immaturity of young babies, they are capable of face processing. They are able to discriminate among faces and studies show that they are more responsive (via head and eye movements) to facial movements than to other motions. They have a keen eye specifically for faces and the more exposure they get, the better they are at registering different faces. This is extraordinarily important when analyzing how pre-linguistic humans made connections.

Whether we are talking about ancient history or early infancy, the face is among the most important social identifiers. Before we know each other’s names or even had names, our brains contained a special section of the temporal lobe devoted entirely to facial recognition.

Without language, how did our ancestors effectively communicate and identify one another? It was the face and our innate ability to distinguish the nuances between them that proved our most valuable tool for social bonding and creating necessary ties for survival.

Above: Clark Gable and Carole Lombard   Below: Bonnie and Clyde and Newlyweds from the New York Times Wedding section

 

 

Less Math, More Chemistry

May 2, 2012

A recent study published by The Association of Psychological Science goes a long way toward debunking many of the grandiose claims made by internet dating sites with regard to the efficacy of their algorithms. In Online Dating: A Critical Analysis from the Perspective of Psychological Science, Dr. Eli Finkel, professor of social psychology at Northwestern University, asserts that “to date, there is no compelling evidence any online dating matching algorithm actually works.” Professor Finkel and his fellow researchers analyzed a significant host of dating sites and evaluated their algorithmic claims of compatibility. Most sites make promises they cannot keep and instead of offering scientifically valid algorithms, they offer a pool of potential suitors and some personal data. What internet dating does offer is opportunity by giving such range and access.

At findyourfacemate.com, our revolutionary algorithm bypasses all the promises based on similar likes or shared passions and goes right to the necessity of chemistry. We know our clients are smart enough to determine for themselves whether they are potentially compatible. Our evolving proprietary algorithm is uniquely designed to generate matches based on one criterion; shared facial features. Once an attraction is established, clients are free to explore their compatibility on their own; we just provide opportunities and options, because as Dr. Finkel notes, “At the end of the day, the human algorithm — neural tissue in our cranium called a brain — has evolved over a long period of time to size up people efficiently.” Dan Ariely, a professor of behavioral economics at MIT currently researching algorithms concludes “the sites are claiming a lot, but show no evidence of doing anything useful in terms of matches.”

Because we at FYFM are so new and still relatively small, we were not part of the aforementioned research and we feel confident that our unique algorithm offers our clients a lot more than promises, we offer real faces and real opportunities.

Above are photos used by other dating websites to showcases their matches. These couples were statistically very lucky. But note how similar they look! For more look-a-like couples, just glance at the weddings page of the New York Times every Sunday in the Style section, it’s uncanny!

Keep Your Eye on the Prize

April 4, 2012

As much as we strive for gender equality, we cannot ignore distinct gender differences. Men and women ought to have equal access, opportunities, and rights – but that does not mean that they are equally predisposed. There are several important sex differences beyond the obvious biological ones. These differences begin in utero. We share the same sexual identity just after conception; but thereafter, the structure of the fetal brain begins to develop male or female form. Sex hormones inform the way we think, evaluate and perceive. With advances in MRI technology, studies reveal more and more about the sexual differences in brain function.

Of interest to us here at FYFM are the aspects of the brain that process sight and visual perception. The greatest difference can be found in the region of the brain that governs spatial ability. The fact that males generally have better hand-eye coordination combined with their superior perception of faraway objects likely harkens back to antiquity when hunting was the purview of males.

Men needed long distance vision to ensure an adequate protein supply.

Women, on the other hand, have more accurate vision when it comes to close range objects. Dr. Oz notes that women also have better peripheral vision while men have stronger straight-on vision. This, too, stems from the need in hunter/gatherer societies for the women to keep watch on the children in the homestead. Dr. Oz’s noted difference between men’s and women’s vision supports the old division of labor, but it also tells us something about contemporary dating.

Single men tend to walk into a room, reminiscent of a hunter on the plain, and seek out the person to whom they are most attracted. They have great visual acuity and will be more attentive to a face with features similar to their own.

Women, too, are prone to seek mates but their hormone fueled brain function is differently oriented. Psychologist Helen Stancey claims that “Our results suggest that the near pathway is favored in women and the far pathway is favored in men.” Men can detect a desirable partner from far away; they still have the innate hunter within. While women are more likely to need to meet someone up close in order to determine desirability.

Above: Theodore and Edith Roosevelt   Below: James Cagney and Frances Vernon, George and Martha Washington, Kofi Annan and Nane Maria Lagergren

The Gestalt Theory of Attraction

March 15, 2012

The concept of gestalt is an evocative one; it’s been a pivotal point of exploration in fields as diverse as psychology, philosophy and neurology. The term itself references ‘form’ or ‘shape.’ The principle behind gestalt is the unity of perception, the holistic idea that we are physiologically prone to seeing the whole rather than the distinct parts; the human eye sees objects in their entirety prior to seeing any individual parts. This is enormously significant in the arena of romantic attraction.  Often there is something almost indescribable about the qualities of the person to whom we are most drawn. We have evidence that supports our claim that people are most attracted to those with similar facial features, but it is often an overall impression and one that can be difficult to describe.

I have been researching and reflecting upon this theory for over 15 years and I used to spend a great deal of time looking at specific features and evaluating similarities among various partners. There were times, however, when the similarity was so obvious but it could simply not be reduced to eyes, cheekbones or mouth. There was something more than the parts; the similarity was in the whole.  It became abundantly clear to me when I saw stunning photos of my grandfather when he was young. There was an undeniable resemblance to my ex-husband – one so striking that it could not be reduced to features. Hence, the application of gestalt theory to physical attraction.

It’s something so unified and holistic that it cannot be easily atomized. The similarity is found in the grouping of features, the entire pattern. We, at FYFM, have an algorithm to discern similarities but when individuals are attracted to someone, they see the face as a whole and, more often than not, they have a similar face, whether they are aware of it or not. Our brains signal our eyes to take in the unified, and the face as a whole is even greater than its parts.

Keep that in mind in your search for a partner who can help make you more whole.

Above and below are descendants of Benjamin Franklin. Over the course of several generations; note the overall similarity in the faces of the couples.

“Love is the most selfish of all the passions.” Alexandre Dumas, The Three Musketeers

February 14, 2012

Our previous blogs have touched upon the effects on the brain of falling in love; that amazing neurological transformation that we undergo with the release of certain chemicals and synthesis of certain neurotransmitters. In addition, we exhibit behaviors and traits that are a direct product of the intensity of emotion and desire that we experience as we first fall in love.

Falling in love can be so encompassing that little else matters. Priorities shift and attentions are diverted. It’s the most generous form of selfish!

It’s selfish in that we overwhelmingly attend to the needs generated by the burgeoning love; we heed, first and foremost, the passion and love we feel for our new partner; the connection becomes our oxygen. It doesn’t mean that we love others less or that we don’t care for our friends and families, but the ‘honeymoon phase’ takes so much energy and attention, that other things fall by the wayside, or become temporarily marginalized.

I did things when I fell in love that I would have never thought I was capable of.  I was a devoted mother of two small children when I fell in love with someone else. I had a wonderful husband, but I was not in love with him. I didn’t even really know what love was until I met the man that became my second husband. As I’ve alluded to before, the intensity of emotion and longing was so great that I was willing to do almost anything to be with him. So, I left my first husband. I just couldn’t live without the man whom I loved.

I am not the only one this happened to.  The smile on the face of young Amanda Knox, for example, made her look even guiltier of the tragic murder of Meredith Kercher. But we believe that her smile was a product of falling madly in love; it was not intended as a sign of disrespect in the face of such a heinous crime; a crime of which she was eventually exonerated.

Similarly, when Governor Mark Sanford went missing and lied to his wife and constituents, it was all in the name of love. We don’t defend these actions, and we understand the distress they can cause; but we do recognize what causes them and it’s critical to note what can happen during the early signs of falling in love.

Even though the initial stages of love can invite selfish actions, ultimately, love makes us all more generous over all!

Close But No Cigar

January 19, 2012

One of the many discoveries made during my years of observation is that people often choose mates who might be similar in some ways but who are not a facial feature match. This is likely because our instincts are to be in a relationship; but since we don’t know what a truly compatible partnership can offer, we engage someone who is “close enough.”  A good example is J-Lo and Marc Anthony. The upper portion of their faces is similar but the lower/jawline area is not at all. Their stresses were obviously not just face related, but no doubt their satisfactory match made sustainability much more challenging.

There is both an art and a science to the chemistry people feel and getting it just right can be luck.  I have known couples that are similar but not a good enough match to sustain a truly committed long term relationship. Sometimes it takes a few tries before we find our face matches. Some are lucky enough to meet their match early in life, but many have a series of shorter relationships with those with whom they have just enough chemistry and compatibility to get them only so far.

They may not be a good match because what’s lacking is complete chemistry, the sort of deep and abiding desire that is usually found between really well matched facemates.

To complement my observations and the anecdotal evidence we at FYFM have collected are a host of scientific studies which corroborate our claims and assert that similarity is a fundamental ingredient.

One of the unique and important contributions that FYFM makes to the world of online dating is that we help people select partners with whom they are more likely to have the chemistry critical for romantic success.  We hope to save people the time and energy it takes to wade through a series of potential partners and zero in much sooner on dates that promise real attraction. Of course, there are several factors that go into forming a lasting bond, but without facematching, chemistry is lacking!

Above is a line up of the women that Alex Rodriguez has dated in the past few years. Note the uncanny resemblance.

Below are Lance Armstrong and his various partners over the years. You can see how similar they all look and how similar they are to Lance.

He is searching for that perfect match; we hope he found it with Anna Hansen.

The Eye of the Beholder

December 15, 2011

Diane Keaton’s new book, Then Again, has received wonderful reviews and purports to be a fascinating and well-written journey through her life and the life of her mother. In it, Keaton discusses her various love affairs and those relationships that have been most significant in her life. Needless to say, this Hollywood icon has had some very famous lovers and her descriptions of the men and the deep feelings that accompanied those relationships are most revealing.

It seems, despite long involvements with the likes of Warren Beatty and Woody Allen, that the love of her life was Al Pacino, and her intense attraction to him started when she saw his face. She claimed on the Joy Behar show that, “the first thing I noticed about him was his nose. That nose. Those eyes. On that face.” She goes on to say that, “it was the most beautiful thing [she’d] ever seen.” But more than just her passion for Pacino’s face, “there was something familiar to me,” she says. Keaton and Pacino were facemates; their passion was, in part, a product of the subconscious familiarity that is born when we see in someone facial features similar to our own. Keaton did not only see a handsome man, she saw something beyond that, something that evoked the past, her past. Without knowing it, her eyes signaled the portion of the brain that focuses on faces and he “reminded [her] of [her] family.” Charles Darwin called the eye the “organ of extreme perfection.” It does not lie.

It is unlikely that Keaton was searching for her facial feature match, but the intense chemistry she felt helped her locate her facemate. The goal of FYFM is to help you locate yours. Happy holidays to all and wishes for a loving season ahead!

Above: Diane Keaton and Al Pacino from the Godfather; Below: Woody Allen, Al Pacino and Warren Beatty

Love Will Keep Us Together

November 14, 2011

Time to get personal. I learned the hard way what it feels like when you give up on love. When you are in love with someone, work at it! My ex-husband and I had so much stress with our blended families that I lost touch with the love that brought us together. I believed that I deserved better than the conflict and chaos that seemed to dominate our lives. I became indignant, resentful and insensitive; and I walked away.  Interestingly enough, we still managed to have great times together when it was just the two of us; but when we were with our children it was a disaster. We failed to communicate about our issues.  Good communication is necessary for one-unit families and even more essential for blended families! My parents didn’t communicate either; a lesson I failed to learn until it was too late. To be fair, we had four teenagers; two from my first marriage and two from his. In all honestly, mine were the bigger challenge. So, because I had so few coping mechanisms, I just bowed out.  I come from a big family and life was chaotic growing up; peace was something I never had or even knew I needed. When things get tough I tend to run. What did I expect? Peace with four teenagers? It wasn’t my ex’s fault, just as it wasn’t my fault. But I blamed him. I was so tired of being the one blamed for everything (as mothers tend to be).  So, I left! Not as quickly as KIm Kardashian; (I was with him for 15 years). We jumped through hoops to be together and then I just gave up. I was so stressed and resentful that I could not see the light. I learned the hard way; I missed him so much that I cared about nothing else. I still haven’t forgiven myself and perhaps I never will. By leaving my ex it was as if I said he wasn’t special to me; and that was completely wrong. He met someone a year later and he was inaccessible to me. Again, what did I expect?  It was like a piercing through the heart. I had a lot less tension in my life but a whole lot more heartache. The pain of loss is so great that it can impact your body. Emotional pain is so devastating that it can take years to recover.  The first year that we didn’t speak I felt like a dead person. After that I was on a mission to fill up my time because time became the enemy.  My hope is that everything I learned I can share so that others don’t make the same mistakes that I made. This is why I launched FYFM. We all know so much about a lot of things but very little about love. Even professionals are misguided. On the eve of my first marriage, a reputable therapist said that I didn’t want to get intimate with my fiancé because of my parents’ dysfunctional relationship. That diagnosis was ridiculous. I didn’t want to get intimate with my first husband because I wasn’t attracted to him. He was and is a wonderful man and a great father but there was no real attraction. This is why I have been fixated on chemistry.  I married him because I didn’t get much guidance from my large family. I sought it from him instead. But that is not the foundation for a committed romance. If you find chemistry and it leads to a healthy love, stick it out!   We don’t mean to suggest that all couples should stay together, but think hard before you leave someone you love. Love only comes along a few times in a lifetime; cherish it, take time for it, nourish it, and it will grow.   Keep talking and try to hold onto the memories that started your fateful love. Today’s gallery of photos is devoted to couples whose love was greater than any physical or social obstacles.

Above: Manuel and Claudia Uribe   Below: Stephanie and Christian Nielson (before and after their plane crash), Tyler Southern (who lost three of his limbs in Afghanistan) and his bride, Ashley Statti, and Neil Patrick Harris and David Burtka

The Flip Side of Love

October 25, 2011


On a recent episode of The Piers Morgan Show, Kelsey Grammer talked about the dissolution of his last marriage and how he found new love. In a touching confession, he alludes to the power of mutual desire, the intensity that is generated when both parties are equally committed and passionate about their attraction. Grammer says he was willing to give up sex but there was one thing he longed for; “I want someone to kiss me again in my life and mean it.”

The bliss he experiences from having a partner who can give as well as receive love is evident in his sharing of the story of their first meeting. He comes close to tears just referencing that longed for and finally experienced kiss.

There’s a flip side to loving, and that’s being loved. The magic of passion is not in unrequited love or longing for the impossible; the gift of real love is in its being reciprocal. Falling in love, the power of attraction, and the psychological and physiological impact of being in a healthy relationship takes two! Popular culture saturates us with news, information and gossip about who’s in love with whom, but it’s rare that we hear about the blessing of receiving love in return.

What’s so significant about seeking a facemate is that the foundation for a mutual attraction is already laid. Both parties experience the intensity of desire that is born from the chemistry ignited when two people have similar facial features.  Facemates don’t only have a greater likelihood of compatibility and longevity, but of mutuality, as well.

Above: Kelsey Grammer and Kayte Walsh   Below: Jeb and Columba Bush, Melissa McCarthy and Ben Falcone, Nikki Reed and Paul McDonald

Love Sees No Color or Ethnicity

September 28, 2011


In a recent internet tabloid article about FindYourFaceMate, the writer referred to our mission and our theory as ‘crypto-racist.’ Needless to say, we here at FYFM are deeply offended.  We thought a blog dedicated to more fully explaining our vision might be necessary to combat that insulting ignorance.

In direct contrast to that fallacious assertion, the theory behind face matching celebrates and honors cross cultural and interracial romance.  As we’ve repeatedly stated, race and ethnicity have absolutely nothing to do with the potent chemistry that is ignited when people with similar shaped facial features get romantically involved.

It is absurd to reduce similarity to color; that is racist.  There are couples from every possible cross-cultural configuration that share facial features and maintain long term and powerful romantic unions.  We have shown several on previous blogs and we offer some more today;  some we’ve removed hair and color just to highlight the similarities.

The science of face matching is located in the subtly of shape. It is not about size,  it is not about melanin or lack thereof! It is about how features rest on the face in relation to the bone structure and in relation to their other features.

In a world where the legacy of racism is still palpable, interracial coupling is still not as prevalent as those from similar backgrounds. But that is changing and the change is long overdue. All people, regardless of their ethnic or geographic background, share over 99% of the same DNA. Race offers no greater variation than may be found among those with different blood types, eye color, or medical conditions.  Clearly, features are often more similar among members of a family – but just as we patently condemn incest, so, too, with racism.

Racists see the barriers between themselves and others; face matching does not. We have examples from all over the world of people who, not only fell in love with their facial feature matches across racial line but even across language barriers and cultural obstacles; a US soldier who fell madly in love with an Afghani woman, an Israeli and Palestinian who married despite fierce objections, white and black South Africans during apartheid, etc. Romantic attraction, particularly when buttressed by similar facial features, is a force so powerful that not even antiquated social conventions can derail it.  We do not necessarily find love; love finds us. And when it does, it comes with its very real challenges. Just because two people with powerful chemistry and similar background are in love, does not mean that their relationship is pure harmony. Love can be work, but there is no job with a better pay off!

One of the great battles of our time is that between wisdom and bigotry; the theory of face matching is firmly on the side opposing racism.

Above: Heidi Klum and Seal, Iman and David Bowie

Below: Vera Wang and Arthur Becker, Lamar Odom and Kloe Kardashian, Sammy Davis Jr and May Brit

It Only Takes a Minute

September 7, 2011

 

Glee star Jane Lynch said recently that when she first met her partner of many years “I was immediately smitten, I had only known her a minute.”  All you can get in a minute is a good impression of a person’s face.

 

A recent article in the Science and Technology section of The Economist  (http://www.economist.com/node/18925759) explores that outdated science of physiognomy, the idea that one can discern a person’s character or personality by just looking at their face. The piece asserts, however, that what remains scientifically valid and relevant from a practice that lost credibility during the middle ages is the importance of the face in generating romantic attraction and sexual satisfaction.  The article cites a study conducted by a team of researchers at Penn State, to be published in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior, which examined the effects of perceived attractiveness on a partner’s orgasms. In a study designed, in part, to evaluate heterosexual mating and conception, the findings showed that women were significantly more likely to achieve orgasm when making love to a handsome man. The attractiveness of the man was based entirely on his face; another indication of how crucial the face is in determining desirability.

 

Beauty, as we know, is in the eye of the beholder. There are obviously many different handsomes and almost as many versions of desirable as there are people. This study reveals how critical the face is even when it comes to physiological responses as intimate as orgasm. Because orgasms in women tend to accelerate conception, the face is further implicated in generating offspring. Another study conducted by a team of psychologists at the University of Toronto further demonstrates the power of the face as a major determinant of desirability. Here, it is the face that women unconsciously scrutinize to determine whether or not a man is gay or straight. It turns out that ovulating women are even better detectors of a man’s sexuality based only on looking at their face; another example of how important the face is in evaluating the potential of partnerships.

 

Whether seeking to conceive or not, the face is the most crucial component in sexual compatibility. From the spark ignited by the face, people go on to determine whether compatible styles and values can generate real sustainability.

Above:  Model Gia Carangi and lover Sandy Linter

Below: Edward Norton and Shauna Robertson, Sheryl Crow and Doyle Bramhall II

 

ROYAL MATES

August 18, 2011

Since antiquity couples have been matched for a multitude of reasons that had little to do with love or compatibility. Arranged marriages were the norm for most cultures for most of time. And even the most privileged among us, such as royalty, have often had to compromise passion for politics. Partnerships were often based on strategic alliances rather than romantic harmony. There are, however, historical examples of monarchs who refused to capitulate to the nation’s political will and sought true love even if it cost them the throne. Similarly, there are examples of royals who insisted on choosing a partner for whom they had real chemistry and it seems that the monarchy is finally catching up to modernity and marriages are no longer predicated solely on statecraft. When we examine the royal relationships of the past couple of centuries we can extrapolate from our theory and see how the couples that were most in love and committed to being together were often facemates. A most recent example is the marriage of Prince William and Kate Middleton, one of the first unions between a member of the British Crown and a spouse not from a royal or aristocratic background. There is undeniable chemistry between these two and we applaud the throne for not imposing a wife on young William and allowing him to wed the woman whom he clearly loves and desires. In another era, that union would likely have been frowned upon. When Edward VIII married Wallis Simpson in 1937, he was forced to abdicate the throne. As the nominal head of the Church of England, a monarch is forbidden to marry a divorcee. Edward chose twice-divorced American socialite Simpson over the throne; and despite their objectionable political views, their love was that powerful and it lasted until his death in 1972. Queen Victoria was particularly lucky in that her pre-arranged suitor and cousin, Prince Albert, was indeed, the love of her life and the two had 9 children together and remained passionate friends and lovers until his untimely death, from which she never fully recovered.

Thankfully, most of us are not bound by rigid national or familial obligations when we choose our partners and we have the freedom to seek relationships based on chemistry and compatibility rather than compromise.

Above: Wallis Simpson and Edward VIII   Below: Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, Prince William and Kate Middleton

Noah’s Ark

July 20, 2011

In previous blogs, we’ve explored some of the various scientific theories behind face matching. There are a host of studies, which support our claims that people are, in fact, attracted to those who have similar facial features. Interestingly, different theorists prioritize different thesis for why we match up. The two most common hypotheses revolve around narcissism and trust. Those studies suggest that we either project our love for ourselves onto a desired mate or we feel comfortable and safe with them because they remind us of our families and ourselves. The latter seems plausible considering the importance of facial imprinting during infancy but the narcissism hypothesis fails to take into account the fact that facematching is instinctual and unconscious and therefore less a product of vanity than of evolutionary biology. I am not a scientist but I think the reasons are more organic. There is an evolutionary impulse that even modernity has not diluted and we are still instinctively drawn to our face mates. I find both the trust theory and the narcissism theory too facile. The phenomenon is so nuanced and complex that it defies simplification. As we’ve said before, it’s not about finding a look-a-like; it’s about facial symmetry and shape.

We no longer seek partnerships based solely on procreation; on the contrary, we are often looking for love, passion and partnership regardless of family rearing. Gay and lesbian singles, older singles and those who choose to opt out of parenting are just as eager to find a romantic partner with whom they can share their lives. That does not negate what I see as a biological imperative to unconsciously seek a romantic partner. Noah is no longer choosing couples to repopulate the desolate landscape; but at Findyourfacemate we will help singles through this often foreboding terrain and offer a time tested way to find real love with your face match!

So, please join the thousands who are already on board at findyyourfacemate.com and help us build a bigger database to offer the best possible matches for all!

Here are some photos of couples who have facial features similar to a parent or child, hence they seek a mate who resembles a family  member.  That doesn’t mean they are attracted to a family member, it only means that thier partner resembles their own facial features!  Pictured: Miley Cyrus, boyfriend Liam Hemsworth and father Billy Ray Cyrus, Hulk Holgan and family, Ivanka and Melania Trump.

An older blog called “The Nose Knows”  also had photos which identify  this phenomenon in Angelina Jolie, Brittany Murphy and Gwyneth Paltrow’s families.

To read more about this, also see: http://totallylookslike.icanhascheezburger.com/2009/06/24/hulk-hogans-girlfriend-totally-looks-like-hulk-hogans-daughter/

As Old As Time

June 29, 2011



Findyourfacemate is a new website employing new technology designed to offer a new avenue to finding love. But we are relying on a very old phenomenon, one that long predates Internet dating and matchmaking. There is historical evidence which grounds our theory in evolutionary psychology and demonstrates how seeking similar facial features is as old as time. Darwin offered many insights into mate selection and they seem to be relevant even when love and passion replace child rearing as primary motivations. We are always host to a wide variety of impulses, some culturally and socially constructed and some innate and genetically determined; at Findyourfacemate, we are seeking to better understand our instincts so that they can better serve our choices and help make meaningful matches.
In Darwin’s seminal text, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relations to Sex, he claims that animals (specifically humans) do not mate randomly. Anthropologist Dr. Dennis O’Neil asserts that “the most common non-random mating pattern among humans is one in which individuals mate with others who are like themselves phenotypically.” Evolutionary psychologists often reduce the phenomenon to a narcissistic impulse, but one that is unconscious. There is an ancient and obvious desire to propagate the species but to do so in a way that fosters natural selection. Assortative mating “exists when people choose persons similar to themselves,” as defined by the Encyclopedia Britannica; “this type of selection is very common.”
Knowing this allows us to apply our unconscious instincts to our conscious choices!
Above: In celebration of the legalization of same sex marriage in New York, Gertrude Stein and Alice B. Toklas
Below: George Burns and Gracie Allen, Robert and Elizabeth Browning, Isaac and Jane Asimov, Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera

LOVE VERSUS LUST

June 14, 2011

I recently watched an episode of The Joy Behar Show with Whoopi Goldberg and they were discussing the “thin line” between friendship and love. It got me thinking about the difference between the two and I respectfully but vehemently disagree. The line is not thin at all; the gap is great and the difference is distinct.
Friendship is a wonderful and powerful social bond; it provokes a host of rich emotions and can involve deep love but it does not feel like romantic love and those who confuse the two have likely not experienced the intense highs and chemical responses involved with falling madly in love.
But that invites scrutiny of yet another important and relevant contrast – that between love and lust.
Here is where people tend to get confused and mistake one for the other, to deleterious effect.
Lust is primarily concerned with physical attraction and sexual gratification. It is a potent response to another person predicated on physical desirability. It creates a yearning for sex with the desired other but seldom goes beyond that. Lust’s goals are finite and short term. Love, too, involves yearning; but for the whole person, not just for the corporeal experience. Love invites long term thinking, planning and dreaming.  In lust, sex is the end in itself; in love, sex is only one manifestation of intimacy and often leads to many others.
We should be able to discern the difference when we think past the immediate temptations and into our broader social spheres and projected aspirations.  If we want to introduce that person to our friends and family, if we fantasize about sharing a future, if we desire talking to them as much as having sex with them, chances our we’re in love. Lust is defined by passion while love incorporates passion into a much broader array of feelings, which include tenderness, protectiveness, sharing, and interdependency.  Several studies indicate that lust provokes hopes for  self gratification while love generates the desire to give of yourself and consider someone else’s desires. Love invites us to nurture and be our more generous selves. In all cases, it is important that the relationship is not one sided, and that the feelings are mutual.

The differences are not confined to our ideas, however; there are distinctions based in science. Different chemicals are released in the brain depending on the emotional or physiological trigger. Lust is driven by androgens and estrogens. But once the attraction begins to expand beyond the purely physical and immediate, dopamine and norepinepherine levels significantly increase. And once love is established and attachment sets in, a sense of peace and calm are fueled by oxytocin and vasopressin.
Lust is powerful, and friendships are critical. But nothing beats being really in love.

Above: Garth Brooks and Trisha Yearwood Below: Andre Agassi and Steffi Graff, Gavin Rossdale and Gwen Stephani


Style, Style, Style

May 17, 2011

The much reviled and recent autobiographer Jesse James has been making the talk show rounds lately to discuss his new book and his new life. The man who cheated on America’s sweetheart is starting over.  A year after a very public break up with Sandra Bullock, James is newly engaged. Jesse James may not come off as the most sympathetic character but his story is very illustrative.  Here is a man whose marriage lacked the basic ingredients for sustainability. At Find Your FaceMate (FYFM), we believe that relationships, while founded on physical chemistry, only last when partners have compatible styles and values.

Sometimes we get together with someone whose facial features are similar but not a close enough match.  That was the case with Jesse and Sandra. But facial feature compatibility was not their biggest problem; it was style, an all too often ignored component. Not only are James and his future bride, Kat Von D, very good facial feature matches, they are also very compatible stylistically. Both have a passion and a penchant for tattoos.  Their dress, taste and self-expression are very complementary. Both have public careers in entertainment but far from the sanitized bright lights of Hollywood. During his interviews, James reveals a not so subtle degree of hostility toward the Hollywood lifestyle to which Sandra belonged. And about his new partner, he claims to feel a level of connection he has never known before.  They share much more than facial features and for chemistry to be viable over time, values and styles are critical. Hence, at FYFM, we are the only dating web site that offers a style page to help our clients navigate that degree of compatibility.

It does not matter if you are married to America’s sweetheart or the sexiest guy alive; partnerships are personal and everyone’s perfect and pretty is different. Being married to a great person does not mean you are in a great marriage. If the connection is not there, misery or sabotage often ensue I, by no means, condone infidelity.  On the contrary, the inspiration for this blog and the launch of Find Your FaceMate is to help people avoid the common pitfalls that often result in unsatisfying romances and divorce.  We hope to encourage people to pay careful attention to all the ingredients that make a delicious relationship!

The Chemicals of Chemistry

May 9, 2011

A relationship is only as good as it makes you feel. The initial stages of love are fueled by a series of chemical responses in the brain that give us a high like none other.  Increased levels of dopamine trigger a rush of pleasure while adrenaline accelerates your heart rate. Meanwhile serotonin and norepinephrine generate greater fixation and lust. These are the potent neurological responses of attraction; in other words, the chemicals of chemistry.

But, they cannot be sustained forever. The human body is unable to withstand such a prolonged assault by Cupid’s neurotransmitters.  After the initial stages of love, we settle into a calmer, more neurologically balanced, phase and it is here that the foundations for sustainable love are laid.  But just because we are out of the hyper adrenaline period does not mean that love should not make us feel good. Healthy romances are ones where partners fuel one another’s healthiest and happiest selves. Realistic relationships don’t only consist of bliss and harmony and romance. Couples have stresses and conflicts and real life challenges to navigate. But how we do that offers significant insights into the health and vitality of a relationship. Couples need to resolve their problems with honesty and openness so as to avoid the possibility of resentment and future hostilities. It is almost inevitable that long term couples face the occasional tension or worse, but communication is critical and mutual respect is the hallmark of longevity. Even when our post infatuation chemicals have settled down and we are cozy in our relationships, we should continue to honor and support and appreciate our partners with as much intensity as we did during those early highs. Don’t we want the same from them?

Above: Cheryl Wright and fiance Lauren Blitzer

Below: Prince Charles and Camilla Bowles, Kris Humpheries and Kim Kardashian


Online Dating is Here to Stay

April 13, 2011

Arranged marriages, set-ups, blind dates, personal ads and singles bars all seem to have given way to the magical potential of online dating sites.  But has the industry fulfilled its promises? Not if we judge by the number of frustrated singles out there still eager for a meaningful relationship. Internet dating was once stigmatized. People were embarrassed to be looking for love online. But things have changed radically in the past few years and the industry is growing and becoming, not just socially acceptable, but socially necessary. Dating websites are the third largest revenue generators on the internet, and it’s only growing The stigma has give way to the functionality and people now see it as an important and effective way to meet people in our increasingly technologically driven culture.  The traditional methods of meeting people have changed with longer work hours, more travel and less civic involvement. In short, internet dating is here to stay. The goal now is to improve it and make it accountable to the 96 million single Americans and others abroad who want to be in relationships. That’s precisely what motivated the inception of FindYourFaceMate. We at FYFM know that there is no paucity of dating sites out there, but we wanted to create one that actually serves the needs of serious singles. Our unique and sophisticated technology provides matches that have the potential to generate relationships with sustainable chemistry and compatibility. Check out www.findyourfacemate.com as we develop our site.

Above: Taye Diggs andIdina Menzel  Below: Elvis Costello and Diana Krall, Marc Andreessen and Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen

 

 

THE REPLACEMENT THEORY

March 25, 2011


There are few things more excruciating than a broken heart. Most of us know the searing pain of love lost. And many of us know the healing benefits of love found.  Even when relationships are toxic or partnerships fail, losing someone with whom we had real chemistry is often very hard to get over.  We obsess; we fantasize; we act out and we sometimes romanticize the past. But why is it so difficult to move forward? Once you have profound chemistry with someone, the loss of that person cannot be assuaged by just any new romance. No matter how attentive, loving and kind a new partner might be, if he or she is not a facial feature match, it’s unlikely you will have the attraction necessary to take your mind off a previous love and offer the possibility of new love. In short the, there is no substitute for real chemistry.  And without it, the heart and the eye tend to wander.  Thankfully, people are blessed with more than one facial feature match; and our goal at Find Your Face Mate is to ensure that people are not stuck in the past but afforded the opportunity to move forward, with hope and find sustainable love with a facial feature match and replace the older facial feature partner with the real deal!

Above: Mike Myers and current wife, Kelly Tisdale. Mike Myers and ex-wife, Robin Myers.  Below: Mark Wahlberg and wife Rhea Durham. Jessica Simpson and Eric Johnson. Brittany Spears and Jason Trawick.




The Healing Power of Love

March 2, 2011

Love doesn’t only feel good; it’s good for you. Multiple scientific studies have measured the impact of giving and receiving love on our physical and psychological health and the benefits are numerous. The healing power of love is manifest in a variety of ways but let’s focus on perhaps the greatest immune booster of all, romantic love. The combined impact of the neurotransmitter dopamine and the hormone oxytocin which are triggered when we are in love not only conveys pleasure and feelings of euphoria but it also reduces blood pressure, decreases stress and anxiety, shields against disease and usually translates to less risky behavior and greater self care.

Scientific evidence from a variety of studies demonstrates that those who are in loving relationships have fewer colds and decreased incidences of cardiac problems. Dr. Dean Ornish goes so far as to assert that love and intimacy are among the most powerful ingredients for good health.

The National Longitudinal Mortality Study has tracked over one million subjects and concludes that married (or partnered) people live longer and face fewer life threatening illnesses than their single counterparts. Both men and women are significantly less likely to die of heart disease, cancer or suicide, but the benefits for men are even greater. Both have lower cholesterol and body mass index.

The ways that love promotes longevity are myriad and we have yet to calculate them all. What we do know is that love is powerful medicine and one of the best ways we can ensure a healthy mind and body.

For all we are discovering about the healing benefits of love, the challenge of finding love has remained mysterious. Until now.

If love has been eluded you so far, stay tuned for the launch of Find Your Face Mate later this month.

Here’s to good love and good health!

Photos:

Above Steven Rattner and Maureen White Rattner   Below two couples from New York Times engagement announcements.

 

Fine Tuning Your Search

February 11, 2011

As we approach yet another Valentine’s Day, we take the opportunity to reflect upon love. What is true love, anyway? And more important, how do we find it, nurture it and sustain it? Romantic love offers plenty of mysteries and enigmas, but it also contains several discernible and specific ingredients. Both experience and research have confirmed my idea that successful romantic relationships can be understood as the potent and intricate web of chemistry, style, values and compatibility. We’ve talked a great deal about chemistry, the spark that ignites when two people who share similar facial features are powerfully drawn to one another. Style is the second thing we notice after the face; it’s how we present ourselves to the world. Values are crucially important and reveal a tremendous amount about our beliefs, convictions and ethics. And lastly, we combine the aforementioned with an affinity and harmony that generates real compatibility.

My advice to those who are spending Valentine’s Day with no partner or with the wrong partner is to seriously consider these four pillars of love and endow your search with them. Too many people settle for relationships that lack a seminal ingredient or two. A relationship is as good as it makes you (and your partner) feel. Aside from our health, it’s whom we share our time with that matters most. Don’t waste time on unhealthy or unhappy romances; they can be toxic and interfere with the opportunity of finding real and meaningful love.  There is no substitute for true love, and there is no shame in spending the time and energy necessary to locate it.

Stay tuned as we launch a website designed to assist in that search – http://www.fyfm.com.

And happy Valentine’s Day to all!

Celine Dion and Rene Angelil, Rebecca Romijn and Jerry O’Connell, Nick Lachey and Vaneesa Minnillo

Sex Therapy’s Missing Ingredient

February 10, 2011
Now that media titan Oprah Winfrey has her own network (OWN), her brand of journalistic socio-cultural anthropology can continue in a variety of guises. One such manifestation is a new series on her network called In The Bedroom featuring sex educator, therapist and columnist Dr. Laura Berman. Dr. Berman brings her many years of clinical and research experience to weekly episodes designed to explore the most intimate aspects of couples’ lives. She examines problems lovers and spouses face with regard to intimacy, particularly sexual intimacy. She employs talk therapy as a means of generating better communication among partners and often makes recommendations on how to rekindle the fading passion. And while Dr. Berman is clearly an insightful and highly intelligent practitioner, there is one tool in the arsenal of understanding romantic relationships and that she fails to employ; and that is chemistry.

On a recent episode, Dr. Berman sat down with married couple Becky and Steve in an effort to help their deteriorating sex life. It seems that Becky does not find sexual satisfaction with Steve and that Steve is increasingly frustrated and alienated by Becky. Dr. Berman sought to analyze the origins of their lack of sexual harmony but she never stopped to consider that they just might not be well-suited romantic partners. This couple is raising a family together and, despite the lack of fulfilling romance, there appears to be affection, respect and even love. But that is not a recipe for chemistry. Chemistry is born of sustained passion, and cannot just be ignited with scheduled intimacy assignments or choosing sexy outfits for your partner to wear. There are profound and deeply important ties that bind couples together and these include being emotionally compatible, having complementary styles and sharing similar values. Long term relationships start with an intense surge of passion without which longevity is unlikely.  Chemistry is a powerful glue and it is doubtful that it can be ignited on a therapist’s couch.

I know this from experience. I had two children with my first husband. I loved, admired and appreciated him. And, despite the fact that he was a very handsome man, I wasn’t really attracted to him. I did not know that until I actually met someone with whom I did have real chemistry. And as I’ve alluded to in previous blogs, true passion is not something you can fake, it is a force that takes you by storm and demands unqualified attention. Certainly, it is not the only thing or even the most important thing in a relationship, but it is an absolutely necessary element and one that is seldom generated in the absence of similar facial features. The face is the spark that ignites the fire; and while it does take more than passion to keep the fire going, chemistry is that sustaining ingredient.

http://www.oprah.com/own-bedroom-dr-laura-berman/The-Laundry-Basket

Upbove: Queen Elizabeth & Prince Philip

Below: Hugh Jackman and wife Deborra Lee Furness, Bruce Jenner and Kris Kardashian, Kelsey Grammar and Kayte Walsh

Mystery Solved

January 28, 2011

In a summer 2009 issue of Women’s Health Magazine, one intrepid columnist seeks to explore the mystery of attraction. In Chemistry Lesson, the writer examines the ingredients necessary to “find and hold onto your soul mate.” The Women’s Health article pays homage to the importance of shared values and common interests but it goes on to recognize that what keeps people together, what makes them “click,” is chemistry. Apparently, in 2009 chemistry was still “enigmatic and intangible” as the article claims.  But evidence and data increasingly reveal the solution to this allusive mystery.  The article subtly alludes to it by quoting doctor of psychology, Kevin Hogan, in his assertion that our choices in partners are often unconscious “because we’re conditioned to like what feels familiar.” But neither the author of the article nor any of the Ph.Ds cited in the article unwrap the precise ingredient that is both unconscious and offers familiarity.

As we’ve discussed facial feature similarity is the flame that keeps the fires of passion burning. It is both the most ancient of instincts and the most revolutionary of ideas. Human evolution was accelerated by the invention and the use of tools. If we utilize this tool I believe we will be much better off in our relationships; with less heartache, less loneliness and less potential to wreak havoc on our families.

Stay tuned for our launch on April 1st of our dating website www.Findyourfacemate.com  so we can help in your search for the perfect partner!

Facing Love’s Eureka Moment

November 29, 2010


A Eureka moment is often credited to a single person who has a sudden unexpected revelation, realization or discovery. It is described by scientists as a smart, almost immediate, insight somewhere between and epiphany and an ‘aha’ moment, and it is accompanied by a surge of electrical activity in the brain. But what is becoming more and more evident is that the discoveries and innovations made in these flashes of awareness are circulating through or are generated by networks of people simultaneously. This is a product of both collaborative efforts and of cultural timing. While I blog about an idea about which I have been passionately researching and exploring for many years, more and more people are catching on or discovering it for themselves. Important and/or pertinent ideas are not always ahead of their time; on the contrary, they are often rooted in their time. And the time is apparently ripe to seriously consider the theory of facial feature similarity. It is impossible to calculate the exact ingredients that combine to finally unleash our most powerful ideas but we do know that great ideas are more often incubated in networks or among various groups.

Recently, there have been a spate of magazines, journals and commentaries noting the similarities among current partners or among past and present partners. Gossip magazines often show how one celebrity’s love interest looks uncannily like their previous love interest. Likewise, people are beginning to note when partners themselves resemble each other. On the other end of the spectrum, scientific journals and behavioral biologists are studying the appeal of physical similarities and seeking evolutionary explanations. All of this, whether celebrity gossip or scientific data, serves to buttress my theory and demonstrate the incontestable potency of similar facial feature attraction. There are countless examples entering the public dialogue about relationships and we ought to pay attention to the potent clues they contain. Take, for example, former US Solicitor General Ted Olsen. His deceased wife, Barbara Olsen, who was tragically killed on Flight 77 on September 11, 2001, looked so much like his current wife, Lady Booth Olsen, that people wonder if it’s possible it is the same woman. Certainly, speculators mean no disrespect to the dead; but the similarities are so great that for those unversed in the theory of attraction, it begs the question. The focus tends to be on how similar the two women look and therefore Ted Olsen, like so many others, is said to have a ‘type.’ The next eureka moment will come with the overdue collective revelation that those who seek similar looking people are, in fact, seeking their own facial feature match. This is not simply a ‘type'; this is a hard wired mating instinct and one to which we ought to pay serious attention. At this juncture with shifting cultural norms, finding love and sustainable passion is proving so challenging that we have this realization to offer us guidance and expedite our search. Let’s use it!

Ryan Phillipp, his ex wife, Reese Witherspoon, ex girlfriend, Abby Cornish, and current love interest Amanda Seyfried (above).

Lady Booth Olsen and Barbara Olsen (wives of Ted Olsen); Norman Mailer and Fifth wife, Norris Church; Liam Neeson and his deceased wife’s grandfather, Michael Redgrave;


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Animal Magnetism

November 10, 2010

Animal Magnetism

In previous blogs, we’ve explored the centrality and significance of the face from a variety of perspectives, romantic, creative, familial, etc. But it is not just the human animal who possesses such a hard-wired draw to the unique singularity of the face. Emerging studies reveal how several animal species are similarly face-centric in their acquisition of important data. Evidence suggests that birds, dogs and monkeys all possess the ability to recognize faces, even those from other species. And dolphins and elephants have the remarkable capacity to distinguish their own faces in the mirror. They are able, from a very young age, to discern the subtle nuances among a wide variety of faces, including their own. Like humans, animals have a distinct area of the brain that is dedicated to facial recognition. The aforementioned species, like humans, are social and, therefore, benefit from being able to discern individuals and decipher meaning from the facial expressions on their peer’s faces.

These animals enjoy the remarkable capacity to differentiate faces and extract pertinent information, which can only be revealed via the face.

The face is so central to our engagement with others because it manifests a wide variety of behavioral and social functions. Faces act as a potent form of stimuli and animals and humans alike respond to such stimuli in a host of crucial ways, only one of which is romantic attraction and desire.

Facial recognition is so critical because it seems to connect the socio-cultural cues to the neurological impulses. The brain area that specifically processes the face is located at the exact crossroads where the social, associative and emotional brain regions meet.  Thus, the brain combines with vision to help all species process the subtle and nuanced information that is often crucial to our very survival.

So, it’s not just your scent and your voice that your dog or cat is responding to, it’s your face!

Katy Perry and Russell Brand, Michael J. Fox and Tracy Pollan, Mariah Carey and Nick Cannon, newlyweds from New York times marriage section.

Winning the Prize

October 22, 2010

I’ve often heard that couples that lack chemistry in their relationship are akin to a time bomb waiting to go off. That’s exactly what happened to me. There is a lot of discussion about sex in the media, but there is very little discussion regarding its relationship to sustainable love. Most people are very confused about this nexus. While many psychologists focus on behavioral and communication issues, both vital components in a successful relationship, there is too little focus on the importance of chemistry.

I did not have chemistry in my first marriage and didn’t realize it until I met the man who would become my second husband. The potency of passion should not be ignored. It’s often the glue that keeps partners together when life’s many stresses conspire to challenge them. Needless to say, couples face a host of problems thus it’s important to be cognizant of the choices we make as we seek long-term partnerships. Compatibility must include the seminal ingredient of attraction. Without it, relationships are more susceptible to the threat of one or both partners finding that magic element elsewhere.

When applying my theory to couples, I noticed that the failure of certain relationships, such as Shania Twain and Robert Lange, Courtney Cox and David Arquette, Senator Mark Sandford and his wife Jenny and many others have resulted, in part, from a lack of chemistry; these couples were not enough of a facial feature matches and that, combined with other issues, eventually drove them apart. When someone leaves a union, they are not necessarily selfish or evil. Eventually, the absence of the sort of chemistry generated when people share facial features takes its toll. When love is accompanied by real desire, there is nothing like it, and failing to honor that can create a sense of despair and loss. What often complicates this revelation is that families and children are already involved and the pain is magnified. And the new love founded on the solid foundation of mutual attraction can suffer the stresses of resolving old relationships and navigating the often treacherous course of blending families. When I left my first husband, whom I loved but had no chemistry with, I understood how horrible it must be for closeted gay people who suffer the indignities of living a lie. Once I met my second husband, he was like oxygen to me. At first, I felt terribly selfish for leaving my first husband and creating chaos in the lives of my children, but I could not live a lie and I knew that honoring my self was ultimately the best example I could set.

Being aware of the importance of chemistry can help people make wiser and more mature choices so they are less likely to inflict unnecessary pain on their families. If our choices are better guided by better information, we are less likely to jump from relationship to relationship, creating havoc along the way.

Having a family is a prize; we win that prize when we seek healthy relationships with all the requisite ingredients. Other than health, there is nothing more precious than love. Love adds meaning to all our other endeavors. I had the immeasurable gift of love and I lost it. After 15 years with a man with whom I had chemistry, the marriage ended and, while I have two great kids, I know the pain of navigating life without the blessing of a partner. My friends sometimes comment on my lack of love and say you’re picky or the timing isn’t right. I know the reason is that I have not yet met another facial feature match.  As my previous blog attests, for a woman of my age in New York City, finding love certainly is a numbers game. It’s imperative to keep the face in mind when playing that game; it’s the only way to win!

Senator Mark Sandford, ex wife Jenny Sandford and new love Maria Belan Chapur. Shania Twain, ex husband Robert Lange and new husband Frederic Theibaud

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An Evolutionary Insight Into Human Love

October 8, 2010

Richard Burton refers to his sister as that green-eyed, black hair gypsy beauty whom he adored as a child. Later in his life, he said “I saw her in another woman and I realized I had been searching for her my whole life.” Richard Burton didn’t realize that he looked like a masculine version of his beloved Elizabeth Taylor, a woman with an uncanny resemblance to his sister. In the new book Furious Love about Taylor and Burton’s romance, the authors, Kashner and Schoenberger, state that Richard Burton, Mike Todd, and Senator Warner all bore a strong resemblance to one another. (p403)  They are aware that Taylor had a type; what they failed to observe was how the men for whom she had most passion also had features that resembled her own. But the evidence is not just anecdotal. We’ve documented how various scientific disciplines buttress the theory of similar features; here, evolutionary anthropology offers insights into our romantic proclivities and preferences.

Darwin was among the first to seek to understand the evolution of human mating behavior and his theory offers a compelling and brilliant explanation for how and under what circumstances species have developed. The propagation of the homo sapien relied on a couple of crucial advantages, among them natural selection (to preserve and pass on positive mutations) and adaptation (designed to ensure habitat suitability). Since sexual reproduction is the method by which genes are passed into future generations, mating was and remains of significant concern to evolutionary biologists. Darwin’s focus on sexual selection and reproductive advantage gives us powerful clues into mate seeking even when love and desire are the primary coupling motivations. We humans are constantly host to a wide array of impulses, some innate and others socially constructed, but there are certain evolutionary phenomena, which, if better understood, might help us in our current quest for successful partnerships. Dr. O’Neil, Professor in the Behavioral Sciences Department of Palomar College, states that “the most common non-random mating pattern among humans is one in which individuals mate with others who are like themselves phenotypically.”

Men are more visual and often seek attractiveness (as it connotes health and fertility), but in a particular face, usually a prettier version of  themselves but a facial feature match. Women are also drawn to their facematch but often someone stronger and better resourced (connoting protection). Since, there are not a lot of candidates who have similar features, we find evolutionary sense in the fact that we are innately drawn to only a limited number in our lifetimes. Imagine the mayhem and conflict that would ensue if many men were drawn to the exact same woman. I don’t mean celebrity fetishizing, I am mean truly drawn to someone. The narrow pool of prospective partners helps ensure civility and, hence, greater opportunities for procreation and longevity. It also promotes greater diversity insofar as not everyone seeks the same type. Once partnerships are established, the nesting desire sets in and that promotes families, communities and civilizations.

Richard Burton & ELizabeth Taylor, Cecilia Burton (Richard’s sister) & Taylor, Cynthia Lennon, John Lennon & Yoko Ono, Hillary Swank & James Campisi


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 789 other followers