An intriguing theory that has captured my attention over the years is derived from the popular television show “How I Met Your Mother” — the Dobler-Dahmer theory. This concept, coined by main character Ted Mosby, suggests that, “If both people are into each other, then a big romantic gesture works: Dobler. But if one person isn’t into the other, the same gesture comes off serial-killer crazy: Dahmer.”
The terms Dobler and Dahmer originate from Lloyd Dobler in the 1980s film “Say Anything” and the notorious serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer.
Drawing parallels from classic ‘80s films such as “The Breakfast Club,” “Sixteen Candles” and “Pretty in Pink,” these films consist of the underdog constantly trying to pursue the protagonist romantically. The message being: the more I persist, the better the results will be. At a certain point, what defines the line between creepy and genuinely romantic? Does it hinge solely on the mutual level of attractiveness felt by each party involved? This theory prompts reflection on the nuanced dynamics of romantic pursuit and the subjective nature of its interpretation.
In “Say Anything,” a scene that many people reference is Dobler holding up a boombox outside of Diane Court’s house, while playing the Peter Gabriel song “In Your Eyes.” This gesture could easily be interpreted as forward and borderline scary depending on the person. But in the film, it was appreciated. The more grand of a gesture, the blurrier the line can be.
University of Oregon senior David Muhich explained his experience with people pursuing him.
“It all depends on the intention behind it,” he said. “Is someone being authentic with their words or are they trying too hard?”
Muhich provided examples from his own experience of how acts of kindness could be interpreted in multiple ways.
“I had someone that called me before we were dating — she was stranded somewhere. She called me to come pick her up but was very grateful in a way that was very sincere and personal,” Muhich said. “If someone else did that and seemed like they were lying or it was an excuse to see me, it would be a red flag.”
Understanding people’s intentions can be challenging in itself. Moreover, establishing boundaries poses its own set of difficulties, particularly since we cannot predict how others will respond to these limits. Putting one’s heart on the line is a risky game that can resort to any type of response. “I gave her my heart, she gave me a pen,” Lloyd Dobler said after being broken up with. Was it mutual or was their dynamic a facade?
Societally, there is a prevalent misconception that we unequivocally support the underdog, often without taking into account the emotions and perspectives of the individual being pursued. Similar to 80s films, that doesn’t allow the protagonist to feel comfortable enough to say no to their advances. While one can also argue we put a majority of the responsibility on the pursuer to evaluate the situation. “Well, they should have known.” Whose responsibility is it to assess the situation?
UO student Ajewelina Daniels shared her experience with dating. “One thing is someone giving you attention and you’re not feeling it,” she said. “It may not have to do with that person personally but how strong they may be coming off.”
I often pass up opportunities not based on the person involved, but rather on the level of chemistry we share. While any gestures can be appreciated, the presence of genuine chemistry significantly influences my appreciation for them. In the context of dating, establishing clear boundaries on both sides proves beneficial in navigating the dynamics. It’s a delicate balancing act.
