The "Blink" theory of dating?

ALDaily linked this morning to a Washington Post article about the seemingly random reasons people have for dumping people. I was about to stop reading when, near the end of the Taquito story, the guy mentioned mayonnaise. Specifically, how much he hates mayonnaise, which he describes (accurately) as "the most repulsive thing in the world."

I still think the guy may have some kind of issue, what with all his fluidy-food hangups, but the mayo thing is right on. While reading further, I couldn't help thinking about the weirdest, most random reasons I've ever broken up with somebody (or just stopped calling.) The only thing that leaps immediately to mind is one girl who expressed an uncomfortable enthusiasm for Sting on a first (and only) date. Of course, I once told a girl that I liked Billy Joel, and that was before our first date. I'm not sure which I'm more embarrassed by now.

If I think of any other interesting, random reasons I've had for breaking things off with a woman, I might list them (and welcome contributions in the comment,) but what surprised me about this article was that it didn't link these obvious cognitive short cuts in relationships to the trendy Malcolm Gladwell Blink thesis, that "snap" decisions can often be as good or better than more deliberate decisions. Gladwell even has a section on speed dating.

Arguably, more deliberation on relationship issues doesn't just produce diminishing returns, it actually makes decisions worse. I've thought myself into some really dumb choices. Still, it's a thin line between snap evidence of incompatibility and snap evidence of stimulating difference. It's a cliche, but who hasn't been turned on by mutual intransigence? If you haven't, you're missing something.

Anyway, Gladwell points out some of the problems with blink thinking and the Taquito Moment has problems too. They do, however, probably leave us with the comfort of certainty we might not get with more circumspect decisions.