Is love an illusion? If so, it is a costly one. Love — or was it consumerism? — was in the air this week. The second week of February is marked by a chain of commemorative days — rose day, teddy bear day or a day dedicated to some equally absurd commodity — that lead up to the grand celebration of romantic love on Valentine’s Day. While all this may be great news for businesses — sales of trifles, trinkets and toys shoot up and Tinder sees an increased footfall — it is far from pleasant. Quite the contrary. It is a week when those not in a conventionally romantic — heteronormative? — relationship are made to feel left out and those who are part of such a liaison are pressured to make public avowals of their love.
Little wonder then that recent years have seen the invention of defiant observances that seek to take the edge off this week of forced fondness. More reason for Hallmark to cheer. The latest addition to this is Galentine’s Day. Inspired by an American sitcom, this is a day of “ladies celebrating ladies” that includes women friends leaving their husbands and boyfriends behind to catch up with each other and doff their hats to platonic love. Conveniently enough, it comes a day before Valentine’s Day so that this show of female solidarity notwithstanding, women are free to return to said husbands and partners the next day. The emphasis on a platonic bond, too, is revealing. Why does a day when women raise a toast to other women have to be about platonic love? Galentine’s Day started as an attempt to liberate love from the reductive definition that Valentine’s Day accords it. Yet, it fails to recognize and eliminate various forms of exclusion. Take, for instance, the ‘he’ and ‘she’ cards that are sold for the occasion, ignoring a multitude of gender identities. Another byproduct of the Valentine’s Day fever is Singles Awareness Day, which comes a day after and is meant to rally behind single lads and ladies who have not succumbed to furiously swiping right on Tinder just to avoid being alone on that day. If the concept sounds retaliatory, just buy one of the many candles or box of chocolates with inspiring quotes inscribed on them that have been specifically manufactured for SAD — the acronym is telling.
Its politics is not all that is wrong with Valentine’s Day — or of any of the events that it has spawned — either. How many people can afford to buy the kitsch fare that has come to be the accepted means of expressing romantic love on this day? Fewer still would be able to foot the bill for the spa days or restaurant lunches that are part and parcel of Galentine’s Day. This, in fact, is a bigger challenge. There is financial incentive in making such days more inclusive politically — diversity in love, after all, is directly proportional to variety in glittering cards and an attendant rise in sales. Producing affordable baubles, on the other hand, would mean that companies would have to forgo a slice of their profits. Saint Valentine might have made the ultimate sacrifice to unite lovers — he was beheaded for going against a royal decree and marrying couples in secret — big businesses can hardly be expected to do the same.