New Paradigm: How Couples Enter Relationships in the 21st Century

The YourLoveCode team has managed to uncover the truth about real partner formation, which clearly follows different rules than previously known. We have conducted thousands of comparison tests on couples regarding their Synchrony-Energy (SE) and found that we choose partners based on the 5x Similarity Rule.

Why understanding the true mechanisms of partner formation today, which are 100% different from what is depicted in the media, is of great importance to our Western society, we explain in our exposition.

What is considered beautiful depends on the zeitgeist of each culture. Even within a culture, beauty ideals differ. Blonde hair was considered beautiful in ancient Rome, while in the Baroque period, bodies became fuller. A large buttocks became the beauty ideal, but this trend didn’t last long. In the 1920s, women appeared androgynous, with bobbed hair and flat breasts.

From the 1950s, the media began shaping beauty ideals, postulating faces like those of Elvis Presley, James Dean, Grace Kelly, Marilyn Monroe, Audrey Hepburn, or Romy Schneider as beautiful. Ten years later, hips became particularly narrow, and the super-thin model Twiggy took over the fashion world. Men at the time wore long hair.

Back then, the direct influence of media-propagated beauty ideals was relatively low compared to the rapidly increasing negative impact on society today. (For instance, Facebook-2020 had over 2.7 billion monthly active users, Instagram-2018 had 1 billion, Twitter-2020 had 330 million, TikTok-2021 had 1 billion, and YouTube had over 2 billion. Advertising revenue in 2019 amounted to over 15 billion USD).

These numbers highlight the rapid development of digital platforms and their profound impact on the global flow of information in all areas of life, including the definition of beauty ideals. This contributes the most to the negative consequences for the mental health of many people, including children.

Why Is This So?

“The beauty ideals propagated by films, fashion, television, and social media tend to be very specific and often unattainable. Only a relatively small proportion of people in the Western world match these ideals:

1. About 2-5% of people fit the strict facial beauty ideals. The media beauty ideal often features clear skin, symmetrical facial features, full lips, a straight nose, and large, expressive eyes. Studies on facial attractiveness show that such idealized features are relatively rare in the population.
2. Only about 5-10% of people fit the strict beauty ideals, which include broader features like certain body shapes, skin tones, hairstyles, and facial features.”

The actual problem is not in the beauty standards defined by the media, but in how we deal with these images, messages, and the knowledge conveyed. Apart from the fact that the media primarily define beauty ideals out of economic interests and often act out of a lack of knowledge, we humans mostly adopt these concepts. It must not be forgotten that almost 95% of us do not meet the beauty ideal (face):

• This message is true.
• We consciously or unconsciously confront the media-propagated beauty ideal with our own appearance and, if we have children, with their appearance too. If we or our children do not fit into this beauty image, we project our insecurity onto our child.
• This message indirectly tells me that I am a second-class person.
• I will be less successful in dating.
• I will not get an outstanding job, and so on.

Thus, the media play a crucial negative, even destructive role in the psyche of individuals by propagating beauty ideals.

“A typical Western European or American generally has knowledge about partner formation that comes from a combination of cultural norms, media consumption, social expectations, and personal experiences. This knowledge often consciously or unconsciously influences decisions and behaviors regarding partnerships and relationships.”

“Overall, knowledge about partner formation is shaped by a complex mix of cultural, social, biological, and personal factors, which can unconsciously influence behavior and decisions in relationships.”

Why Do We So Often Believe These Statements, Which Are Primarily Propagated Out of Economic Interests and Often from a Lack of Knowledge?

We would like to give some examples related to widely held assumptions and thus describe the general state of knowledge:

1. People learn what is “beautiful”. How do people even know what is beautiful? Is there such a thing as a sense of beauty? Researchers asked this question and conducted tests with babies, as they are considered unbiased. They showed the babies photos of people deemed attractive and less attractive. It turned out that the babies looked significantly longer at photos of people who were also rated as more attractive by adults. “Overall, there are numerous studies (at least 5 to 10 significant studies) that confirm that even very young infants show a preference for faces perceived as attractive.” This research suggests that the ability to recognize attractiveness may be an innate ability that develops very early in life.

From our perspective, this thesis is questionable. The number of studies conducted seems relatively small. We would rather call innateness speculative, as the beauty ideal could be transferred from the mother to the child during pregnancy.

How powerful can this knowledge be on us if even a baby knows what is beautiful and not beautiful?

1. Two minutes of eye contact are enough. Early imprints could cause us to keep falling in love with what we know and associate with positive feelings. A US study also suggests that looking deeply into each other’s eyes can help. In the experiment, participants had to look into each other’s eyes for two minutes. The effect: romantic feelings of affection. This is certainly true, but only if the people also energetically match well.
2. Beautiful people earn more and get better jobs compared to those who are not considered beautiful. There are too few studies to recognize this thesis as true. Clearly, this assumption could be obvious, as their representatives are more likely to meet beauty ideals and this applies to areas like runways, fashion magazines, films, and media (such as YouTube with well-known influencers, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok). It must not be forgotten that these people have a strong influence on the definition of beauty ideals now, more than ever.
3. Beautiful people have more opportunities in dating than those who do not conform to the beauty model. This thesis is especially true for large dating agencies, as they have established beauty optics and their own economic distribution model.
4. Many people feel pressured to meet certain beauty ideals – women twice as often as men. Above all, social media and the media, in general, influence our self-image, self-esteem, and often even our behavior by propagating beauty ideals.
5. In 2018, researchers at Boston University School of Medicine described a new disease related to social media-induced self-doubt: “Snapchat Dysmorphia.” This can result from constantly editing selfies to match the beauty ideals spread on social media. The consequences are depression, social withdrawal, or even suicidal thoughts.

This is another reason why it is important to promote media literacy.

1. In general, the biological and neurological processes of people are relatively well known: When a person falls in love, various messenger substances cause euphoria (dopamine), excitement (adrenaline), intoxicating feelings of happiness and deep well-being (endorphin and cortisol), as well as increased sexual desire (testosterone decreases in men, increases in women). Gradually (according to the WHO, at most after 24 to 36 months), this sensory “intoxication state” in the brain ends.
2. According to evolutionary psychologists, both women and men are guided by preferences in partner selection that have been inherited from our ancestors over millions of years. This “stone age psyche” is supposed to make women react to strong or high-status protectors, while men are attracted to young, pretty women. Beauty apparently serves both genders as an indicator of “healthy genes.” It has been extensively researched which physical traits are considered attractive by both genders (“averageness” as an ideal). Although this knowledge is repeated frequently, it is not sufficiently proven.
3. Beauty ideals are also strongly propagated by the film and music industries, where love plays a defining role.
4. Negative effects on children and adolescents:

• Body dissatisfaction: Children can develop dissatisfaction with their bodies at a young age, leading to long-term problems such as low self-esteem, eating disorders, and other mental health problems.
• Self-esteem: Self-esteem can be strongly influenced by the perception of one’s appearance and comparison with idealized images and peers. Children can be negatively affected by beauty ideals at a very young age. It is important for parents, educators, and society to take action to promote a healthy body image and protect children from the harmful effects of the beauty cult.

Again, it is important to promote media literacy.

By propagating beauty ideals, the media play a destructive role in the mental and overall health of individuals. Therefore, it is important to strengthen media literacy.

The YourLoveCode team has succeeded in revealing the truth about the actual formation of couples, which clearly follows different rules than those previously known. We have conducted thousands of comparison tests of couples in relation to their Synchrony-Energy (SE) and found that we choose our partners according to the 5x Similarity Rule:

1. The selection of a life partner is primarily based on physical similarity. This refers mainly to facial similarity.
2. We choose spouses with similar DNA. Married couples are genetically more similar to their partner than two randomly selected individuals from the same population group, according to a study by the University of Colorado Boulder (USA). Research shows that we often prefer people who resemble us in terms of religion, age, income, education level, or body type.
3. A new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that people are also more likely to choose partners who are genetically similar to them. The team led by Ricky Joshi from the Josep Carreras Leukemia Research Institute in Barcelona examined the DNA of doppelgangers and found that people who look similar actually share similar DNA. Our study provides a rare insight into the nature of human similarity by showing that people with similar faces share common genotypes, while they do not match at the level of the epigenome and microbiome, explains lead author Manel Esteller. “Similarity in DNA code between two people”: The DNA code of any two humans is about 99.9% identical. This means that the differences we see between people (such as appearance, skin color, etc.) result from the remaining 0.1% of the DNA. These small genetic variations are responsible for different physical characteristics and susceptibilities to certain diseases. In the study by the Josep Carreras Leukemia Research Institute, which dealt with doppelgangers, 16 pairs of people who were considered doppelgangers because they looked very similar were studied. This study found that despite their physical similarity, the genetic match between these doppelgangers averaged only about 19%. For comparison: identical twins have a 100% match, while unrelated individuals typically have a significantly lower match, often below 1%. The 19% genetic match among the doppelgangers is thus higher than between random individuals but far from the genetic match found in real twins.

4. Sigmund Freud formulated it differently, but in a similar way on another level, by referring to the psychological aspects of similarity: “We do not meet each other by accident. We only meet those who already exist in our subconscious.”
5. Free Premium Analysis:
   A small elite in the media field tries to impose a so-called beauty ideal on millions of people worldwide, which turns out to be completely wrong when it comes to choosing a partner. It is finally time to clarify the real reasons for partner formation and to indirectly question the concept of beauty.

Through our clear mathematical-statistical concept, which calculates an energy balance between two people – based on facial comparison among other things – we have found the following:

1. There is no unique form of universal facial beauty, and therefore no universal energy that fits everyone.
2. Facial symmetry is important, but not in the way the media present it. Our studies show that potential couples always have symmetrical, meaning similar faces. The higher the similarity, the better they fit together. However, this has nothing to do with the beauty ideal or the golden ratio.
3. It is true that relationships develop mostly according to archaic mechanisms. Unconscious sensations play a fundamental role. YourLoveCode has deciphered these unconscious aspects for those who seek to understand.
4. You are beautiful and seek the beauty that matches you.
5. You are capable of finding a partner with whom you can transition into a state of perfect energetic resonance. The stronger the connection, the more your energies flow in sync, and the more similar your faces are.

From the quote by Wisława Szymborska, the Nobel laureate in literature: “Here we are, naked lovers, both beautiful in their eyes – both delighted,” one can also discern a need for explanation in the statement “beautiful in their eyes”!

95% of the human population must justify themselves internally at least in connection with the beauty ideals represented by about 5% of the people when they do not perceive themselves as beautiful and are with a similarly “non-beautiful” partner.

In the media, the question often arises: “How would you rate your attractiveness on a scale from 1 to 10?” A large portion of the 95% of the Western population would already have difficulty answering this question.

One can assume that, in reality, within the framework of beauty models – without any devaluation and purely based on mathematical-statistical numbers: 1 fits with 1, 2 with 2, 5 with 5, and so on, 10 with 10, provided that the similarity of the couple is truly at the high necessary level, as described in the studies by:

• University of Colorado Boulder
• Josep Carreras Leukemia Research Institute
• Premium Analysis by YourLoveCode. In this analysis, only the mathematical-statistical concept counts. The information presented on our website, which relates to the EPR interpretation or quantum consciousness, has no direct influence on the calculated results.

Albert Einstein once said: “The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking. It cannot be changed without changing our thinking.”

It is therefore time for all media to promote media literacy.

References:

1. “Psychologie Heute”, January 1997
2. University of Colorado Boulder, May 19, 2014
3. Josep Carreras Leukemia Research Institute, Barcelona
4. Sigmund Freud
5. Free Premium Analysis
6. ChatGPT
7. Wikipedia
8. Deutschlandfunk Kultur, 2019