Apparently breakup movies are on everyone’s minds these days.

Not content with just five, eHarmony broke out the 20 Essential Breakup Movies — this time “High Fidelity” makes the list, along with a lot of other BG reader favs. Though, oddly, no one here has mentioned “Chungking Express” yet.  Focus, people, focus!

Who knew collegehumor.com was doing such quality videos? While it doesn’t have the originality of Doctor Horrible, this retelling of the Tony-Maria love story still impresses with its production values and its spot-on parody lyrics. A sample: (to the tune of “Maria” naturally) “Pandora/ Type it in and there’s music playing/ Watch the ads and and it’s almost like paying.”

From collegehumor.com, via BuzzFeed.

Formerly arrow-straight eHarmony.com “has come out of the closet,” the L.A. Times reports. As BreakupGirl.net noted in November, the website, which has eHarmonized only male-female couples since its inception in 2000, is launching a gay matchmaking service. The catch, as the L.A. Times put it: “EHarmony’s new relationship with the gay community is more like a shotgun wedding.” How so? Because the company agreed to start the gay service only as part of a settlement with the New Jersey attorney general in the wake of a discrimination suit.

Which makes BG wonder even harder about the name of the new venture: CompatiblePartners.com. No, yeah. Really. What went on in that meeting? Did no one raise a hand and say, “But wait, aren’t the gays more … sparkly?”  Did that name edge out Meh.com?* Plus: though the L.A. Times reports the site’s up as of yesterday, well, go look. Urrr? As of this posting, anyway, it’s totally still just a placeholder.com.

I mean, does someone over there want this to fail?

* Anyone remember “Lowered Expectations“?

Here’s another study for you: the latest research suggests that people who are in love with their partners are less attracted to other people. Where was that data collected, University of the Obvious? Published in the academic journal Duh?

Well, from a broad psychological standpoint, this conclusion is apparently not that obvious. Because our default setting, as humans, is “instant gratification.” Nationally, constitutionally, and gubernatorially, we are not champions of self-restraint. So why should lust, even in the context of presumed monogamy, be any different? Or, as The Raw Story put it: “Why do people in stable relationships so often pass up the chance for a little sexual gratification on the side, even if they can get away with it?”

(more…)