Daters often seek out matches who are carbon copies of themselves: Fitness buffs swipe right on potential running buddies. Liberals announce in their dating profiles that Trump supporters should swipe left. Sometimes those with strong connections to their religious or ethnic backgrounds prefer someone whose upbringing mirrors their own.

What would happen if singles sought pairings specifically for their differences? This is a question Tunde Wey, a chef and activist, is serving up alongside dishes from his native Nigeria. Earlier this year in Pittsburgh and this month in Washington, D.C., Wey hosted matchmaking dinners where he’s paired U.S. citizens with non-naturalized immigrants with the intention of creating couples where one person might share their citizenship privilege with the other.

It’s an idea explored on the popular reality-TV show “90 Day Fiance,” soon starting its sixth season. On the show, foreign nationals have just three months to decide whether they’ll stay and marry their American partner, or go back home. Wey’s experiment, however, just lasts a few hours.

He thought it was especially important to make a stop in Washington, given the Trump administration’s antagonistic attitude toward undocumented immigrants. RapidVisa, a company that helps people get K-1 fiance visas, reports that the District of Columbia, along with Alaska and Hawaii, receive the most K-1 entrants per capita.

Wey, himself an immigrant married to an American, is careful to point out that he’s more of a provocateur than a love professional. “I’m not Dr. Ruth,” he says in an interview before the D.C. dinner he hosted earlier this month. “I’m not trying to find your life partner.”

But he does want singles to think about how they might use love as a political tool. “The outcome is not as important as the demonstration,” Wey says of his dinners, adding that “in a climate where immigrants have been vilified by the administration and other folks ... I’m actively trying to bring folks together to be in love.”

How does it work out in practice? Just eight participants showed up to Wey’s first D.C. dinner.

The atmosphere was certainly romantic: Pairs were seated at intimate tables, under soft lighting, many drinking a signature cocktail called Love Will Bloom — Prosecco mixed with cognac, lemon juice and egg white, topped with a dried strawberry to represent the heart and chamomile to represent love’s potential. In an attempt to prompt deep conversation, each course arrived with selections from the 36 questions to fall in love, an experiment for building intimacy that was popularized by a New York Times Modern Love column. Questions such as: Given the choice of anyone in the world, whom would you want as a dinner guest? If a crystal ball could tell you the truth about yourself, your life, the future or anything else, what would you want to know?

Novel experiences like this one can be aphrodisiacs, but love is a tricky recipe to get just right. Only one pairing had sexual orientations that matched up, and that alone is not enough to make sparks fly. Two straight women who were matched with one another remarked that it was a typical D.C. situation: Come to a matchmaking event and get set up with a woman because there’s only one straight man.

“I fundamentally believe good food leads to good conversation,” says Amanda McDonald Crowley, an Australian woman who came down from New York for the event. She’s been in the United States for 14 years and was paired with a gay man, Regie Cabico, and even though it wasn’t a love match, he was still trying to talk her into moving to Washington for the career opportunities. They bonded over the food — she snapped a photo of one of his dishes and Cabico commented about how Americans rarely take the time to savor their meals, instead focusing on convenience and speed.

Despite the conviviality, the diners weren’t as open to transforming their love lives as completely as Wey might want. When Wey asked the group, after dinner, if anyone would commit to dating only immigrants for a year, the room was silent.

(6) comments


Ok, since my comment was deleted on this retread of a story I’ll make it again. This time I’ll make it a little softer for those who can’t handle the truth. The headline should read PHIs instead if immigrants. PHI is defined as person here illegally.

Comment deleted.

If you think they're criminals, show us their record of conviction. There must be a record. One cannot become a criminal without a record of the process one has to go through to become one.


Citizenship is no privilege. No privilege at all. A privilege is something you earn. Citizenship isn't earned. You get it just by being born here and once you have it it cannot be lost except through extraordinary means by the same person. All those people spewing nonsense about illegal immigrants? They were just born here. They did nothing to "earn" their citizenship. Nothing at all.




If your were born here you are not illegal! If you enter the USA illegally and drop a baby YOU are still illegal. No wonder your a fake principle...can never make it as a real one. Or maybe it was in Californication that you were. Different sense of morality an law and morals and ethics.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Engage ideas. This forum is for the exchange of ideas, insights and experiences, not personal attacks. Ad hominen criticisms are not allowed. Focus on ideas instead.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
No trolls. Off-topic comments and comments that bait others are not allowed.
No spamming. This is not the place to sell miracle cures.
Say it once. No repeat or repetitive posts, please.
Help us. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.