MAFS Australia: Emotional Vulnerabilities and Confessions Week
I have had some more thoughts...
So, I have managed to get halfway through Married at First Sight Australia (well, at the time of publishing this piece, I am more than halfway, but for this blog post, I will focus on the first half) and I’m not going to lie, it has been a pretty wild ride. Now, before anyone gets in with an “I told you so,” I thought I would get in there first and say that it is a very compelling show, and I must admit I am very hooked on the drama despite myself (I hope you can appreciate the humility required to admit this). I am sure many of you will be pleased with this as an outcome and if you feel the need to gloat, I will gladly receive it.
However, despite how hooked I am on the drama, there are a few things that I would like to discuss. But, to ensure that this blog is not unduly long, I will break down my thoughts into a few digestible written pieces over a period of time so that a) it’s not too overwhelming, and b) I don’t lose too much MAFS watching time... (see, hooked!!)
But before we get into that, here is the same disclaimer as last time...
The commentary offered here is psychologically informed opinions about a heavily edited show created for entertainment purposes. I can only offer opinions on what is aired in the show and any additional media resources written/made about the programme. Therefore, anything I say will be about what happens on the show and does not apply to individuals and their actions beyond the show’s scope.
My main focus will be on what The Experts say, but I may also venture into offering opinions about the participants’ behaviour or the show’s general premise. Some of this may be from a psychological perspective, while others may be from a personal perspective. I will make sure to differentiate between the two perspectives.
These opinions will be informed by several things.
Firstly, my profession, which is as a Clinical and Forensic psychologist. I am not an expert in relationships, but based on my work, I have some insights into human interactions, behaviour (particularly of the anti-social and harmful kind), and personality characteristics. However, I do not speak for all psychological professionals, and my opinions are not necessarily “right”. They just are. They may also not be any more accurate than those of The Experts, but they might be different.
Secondly, my gender. I am a man, so the way I watch the show - that being the things I pick up on, how I interpret them, and whether I choose to talk about certain things I notice - will be influenced by my socialisation as a man.
Thirdly, my feminist ideological stance. I tend to see things through a feminist lens, which, again, will also be influenced by my gender and the experiences I have had in the world as a white man rather than any other marginalised group.
As stated several times throughout this disclaimer, these are just opinions - nothing more. I may use psychological terms and apply them to certain behaviours or presentations, but I am not in a position to make any clinical or therapeutic assessment or declarations about the participants (see previous statement about the heavily edited and entertainment-driven focus of the show). I may be able to offer stronger views on The Experts’ advice, but I will be clear about this throughout my commentary.
Psychological Views
The first thing I want to touch on is the level of emotional vulnerability many participants seem to have. Now, as humans, I understand that we all have significant difficulties in our lives, and we all have things that will impact us somehow, of which the nature and degree will differ for each person. However, the thing I found striking in MAFS was that the things that potentially made these participants emotionally vulnerable seemed strongly related to either relationship-related traumas or the timing of very recent difficulties. For example, Cassandra talked about how the love of her life died in a motorbike accident when they were young; Sarah talked about being in an abusive relationship for five years; and Tim talked about how he was in an unhealthy and abusive relationship with his girlfriend up until six months before the show started. Additionally, some participants (specifically Collins and Tristan) have had such a lack of relationship experience, with Collins having never been in a relationship until he was matched with Natalie on the show. Regarding recent difficulties, the other area of vulnerability seemed to be related to how soon somebody had experienced a bereavement or loss. For example, two of the contestants (Timothy and Natalie) talked about how they had recently lost their fathers, both within several weeks of starting the show, and again, Tim only broke up with his long-term girlfriend six months before being on the show. Talk about having some raw emotional wounds.
Admittedly, not all the participants had this level of emotional vulnerability (either that or I can’t remember all the reasons the participants gave for wanting to take part in the show), but there is enough of a theme to suggest that these individuals may have been specifically chosen not just because of their wish to find true love, but also because of their specific emotional vulnerabilities. Possibly with the intention that because they are so emotionally vulnerable, they are more likely to react to things the producers and the Experts get them to do. Which, if you think about it, feels very dodgy.
This brings me to the second thing I wanted to consider, the so-called “Confessions Week”. If you are unfamiliar with the show, Confessions Week involves the newlywed couples – who by this point have known each other for a grand total of three days after committing to getting married to each other – being given several tasks to complete. One is for participants to write and share a letter with their partner about a significant event in their past that has shaped who they are today. This went horribly wrong when Jayden (whose emotional vulnerability related to being cheated on multiple times by several girlfriends) confessed to Eden (whose emotional vulnerability related to her boyfriend cheating on her with her lifelong best friend) that he – as a means of getting revenge against his girlfriend for cheating on him – slept with his girlfriend’s best friend while the girlfriend watched. Eden was – understandably and obviously – horrified by this (which was made worse by Jayden’s lack of awareness of how this would have affected Eden, especially seeing as he knew about her history with her boyfriend… There is also a theme of some men seeming to have a real lack of awareness about how their actions would impact their partners – that might be a discussion for another day).
Another task was for couples to go through each other’s phones, which was apparently an exercise in trust. For Tim – whose emotional vulnerability related to a long-term girlfriend whom he had planned to propose to six months before the wedding, broke up with him because she had been consistently cheating on him, which meant he had difficulties with trust – this was a real struggle and leap of faith when his new wife Sara refused to show him her phone. Additionally, she went with what can only be thought of as a seemingly classic emotionally coercive line of “If you trust me, then you don’t need to look at my phone” (which, if you have watched the show, has significant repercussions for Tim later on). The third task was to rate the other contestants in order of attractiveness, which I’m not going to lie – and I’ll admit I am not at all a relationship expert – is not something anyone with any inkling of insecurity would want to be exposed to. For some, it worked out really well as their partners ranked them highest (whether this was subjectively true for them or a way not to hurt the other's feelings is hard to say), but then there are instances – as there was with Richard and Andrea, an older couple in comparison to the rest – where an individual’s confidence and self-esteem is knocked completely.
Now, I can’t quite remember the rationale that Expert John Aitken gave for Confessions Week, but I am sure it sounded plausible and logical. At the same time, taking into account the factors of a) participants having various degrees of emotional vulnerability relating to either significant or recent traumas, tragedies, and hardships, and b) the understandable emotional upheaval that meeting – and then getting married to – a complete stranger in a nationally televised TV programme may bring, it doesn’t quite make sense to ask people then (after three days of knowing each other) to complete tasks that run the risk of exposing and tapping into those emotional vulnerabilities… unless you want dramatic television, of course. It just doesn’t seem like the most trauma-informed way to create a connection with a brand-new partner. All of this seems to lean towards the fact that there may indeed be some couples that have been matched for love and the hopes that their relationship might flourish, but there are also some that may have been matched because the producers know the coupling would create drama – which is actually distress. The fact that Jayden’s confession of purposefully choosing to have sex with his girlfriend’s best friend as a form of revenge, which parallels Eden’s personal trauma of finding out her boyfriend had cheated on her with her lifelong friend, is far too similar to be a complete coincidence.
Surprisingly, the following week was “Intimacy Week”, co-ordinated by clinical sexologist Allesandra Rampolla. While watching the participants in Intimacy Week, I couldn’t help but think that this might have been a better week to start off with. I can appreciate that some participants struggled with intimacy more than others (Timothy springs to mind, and I know that Jonno and Lauren also had their issues), but on the whole, it seemed to be a week that went relatively well. Now, one could argue that this was because the couples had an opportunity to repair some of the breakdowns and ruptures that had occurred during Confessions Week. But part of me thinks Intimacy Week may have served as an opportunity to create safety and connection between the married partners, further creating a sense of psychological safety before going into Confessions Week. However, while each of the Experts talks through why the various weeks may be beneficial – and I can appreciate this is possibly just my psychologist brain being pedantic here – but there doesn’t appear to be any rationale (or evidence-backed research) given by the Experts as to why the various weeks are ordered in the way that they are (or maybe there has been and I missed it). As in, is there research to suggest that a particular structure is needed to build the foundations of a relationship, which involves delving straight into confessions of a deep nature, followed by practices of intimacy? If there is, it would be helpful to know, and it would make much more sense as to why these weeks are designed and the specific tasks are selected. But naturally, there aren’t any insights like that offered.
All of this (and other things which I won’t get into now) leads inevitably to a consideration of the ethics of the show and of social experiments in general, which MAFS claims to be (especially as the show is continually referred to as “The Experiment” by the Experts and participants alike). The discussion of ethics might be quite an involved discussion and one I want to do justice to, so I won’t go into too much detail about that now. But, I wonder about the ethical grey areas of the show and how decisions are made. But maybe being open about how decisions and matches are actually made might ruin the illusion of the show, and maybe I am just a bore (and naïve) for being interested in the show being more transparent and trauma-informed and mindful of the impact that these tasks will have on the participants.
Personal Views
Right, I know that after everything I have just written, this sounds very hypocritical, but goodness me, it is an entertaining show. I wouldn’t say I like it, but it does have the capacity to hook you. The element of “how are people going to react” is very compelling, and as a psychologist, it does appeal to the “people watching” side of my fascination with human beings. And they do a very good job with the music. I am not sure the show would be half as dramatic if it weren’t for the excellent use of music.
There is one thing that I cannot stand, though. It annoys the hell out of me so much, and rather than tell you about it, I will share with you a comedy skit that was shared with me when I was debating whether to watch the show or not…
On that note, thanks, as always for reading. If you have any thoughts, share them in the comment section below, or some say “Hi” on social media (who am I kidding, I am mostly on Instagram).
All the best,
Nice-ish.