Politics

‘Situationships’ Aren’t Sweet, No Matter What Corporate Candymakers Try To Sell You

Published

on

On or before Valentine’s Day, American consumers spend tens of billions of dollars to commemorate the annual holiday of love with gifts like fine jewelry, provocative lingerie, fine chocolates, or cheap candy. The latter options are pragmatic — who doesn’t want to treat their sweetheart to something … well … sweet?

Among the aisles of seasonal pickings are Sweethearts’ conversation hearts: those iconic, chalky candies that read “For Ever,” “Be Mine,” or “XOXO.” But oftentimes, you’ll pull out a heart expecting a cute phrase and instead see a smudgy, illegible message. Say hello to Sweethearts’ new marketing scheme of taking manufacturing rejects and calling them “Sweethearts Situationships,” which the company proudly touts as displaying “messages as blurry as your relationship.”

This Valentine’s Day, feel reaffirmed by your holiday candy selection to ditch the commitment and romanticize having shallow, casual relationships that provide short-term satisfaction at best, and damaged attachment styles at worst! pic.twitter.com/zMlhSesabO

— Andrea Mew (@andreajmew) January 13, 2024

Sweethearts found a way to capitalize on an already mediocre product by repackaging it using euphemistic millennial bait: the “situationship.” A situationship is slang for relationships of an undefined nature. They solve some animalistic need for intimacy or companionship with potentially zero strings attached.

Psychologically speaking, situationships may be captivating because these unfulfilling relationships fill an innate desire for intermittent reinforcement or delivery of rewards at irregular intervals. Does this sound familiar to you? They’re not reinventing the wheel. Bluntly put, a “situationship” is a modern rebrand of “friends

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Trending

Exit mobile version