- But Tinder is more than a dating app — it is a metaphor for speeding up and mechanizing decision-making, turning us into binary creatures who can bypass underlying questions and emotions and instead go with whatever feels really good in the moment. Its mechanisms perfect the similar either-or options other social media platforms have offered, the yes/no, like/ignore, retweet/pass dichotomy that leaves no room for maybe. Within Tinder, we sort each other into ones and zeroes, flattening away any human complexity, becoming efficient robots. Where a best friend might engage with you about the true motivations behind your choices, Tinder serves as Robot Bestie, there to make complex decisions seem easy, shorn of emotional entanglements.
I have never had a need for Tinder, but I imagine it could have been useful to get me out of a rut from time to time. I don't buy that Tinder is turning people into binary thinkers. It used to be that your dating pool was small. A small dating pool has complications. Now the dating pool is larger, and that probably has its own set of complications. Tinder tries to make it less complicated. I'm am tiring of articles written in the vein of 'look what technology is making us do'. I want to see more articles questioning how we use our technology. Are we using our technology well? How can we use it better? How can we improve upon what we have to create what we want? Of course, we are products of our environment, but a little discussed truth is that our environment is the product of a subset of us. You can always walk right off the field.
You sure are good at finding articles that make you think the sky is falling, aren't you? So I've never used Tinder. Probably never will. I sunset on the dating scene back when Match.com on dialup was state-of-the-art. But I've spent a lot of time counseling people, hanging out with friends, and observing this brave new world of dating. I've said it before and I'll say it again: all these apps and trends and fads and what-have-yous are about meeting, not dating. The analogy is not apt; Tinder is hot-or-not.com is, as 'Ben summarizes, bone or don't. The oppression of choice is all about the ability to compare fifteen different models across 27 metrics on seven websites, four of which offer free shipping but three of which take Paypal when the fact of the matter is, if you schlepped your ass down to Best Buy and laid hands on it, you'd discover that the remote feels like it was assembled out of returned hair dryer parts by the mentally handicapped in Bangalore. What's happening is we're surrounding ourselves by a million different mediated experiences instead of actually experiencing choice. Who the fuck says Tinder knows what you should look for in a girl? Tinder and only Tinder. Who the fuck says Amazon knows what you should look for in a toaster? Amazon and only Amazon. But since there's no way to appify the way a pair of headphones fits on your skull, you'll spend 45 minutes cross-referencing head-fi.org with Amazon with Crutchfield with Consumer Reports with Reddit in order to buy a brand you've never heard of before (and then another 30 researching whether burn-in is real) when prior to the Internet you would have gone to Fry's and paid for the ones from a brand you trust in a color you like. Dating is no different. There is no secret sauce. No metrics to be found that will measure whether or not you'll click with someone. It's entirely about how you collaborate and to do that, you'd best start interacting in a non-mediated environment. What the Internet has brought to the table - when it comes to human experience, or things that face the human experience - is a dizzying array of mediated pseudoenvironments to postpone the interaction you actually want. No wonder that the people trapped in those pseudoenvironments bemoan the lack of interaction... and hearken back to the glory days when they didn't "have" to use Tinder and the like. So much easier to blame the interface than recognize that it only ever gets you to the first date anyway, try not to take it so seriously.
It's my one and only talent. Disclaimer, I don't use Tinder at this point, but have been feeling very overwhelmed by technology and virtual interactions and constant connectivity. I'm exactly the person who does this: and it's exhausting but at the same time, in this instance, I want to feel like my money was well spent. When it comes to dating I'd like to feel like my time was well spent. I guess it comes down to not wanting to waste anything unless it's something I want to do. Meanwhile you have 5031 dating sites, 31905151351 review sites, and maybe 10 people who have a clue what they're talking about. We need to scale back.You sure are good at finding articles that make you think the sky is falling, aren't you?
you'll spend 45 minutes cross-referencing head-fi.org with Amazon with Crutchfield with Consumer Reports with Reddit in order to buy a brand you've never heard of before (and then another 30 researching whether burn-in is real)
Here's a good way to know if your dating time is well spent: Find a place you enjoy. Go there. Introduce yourself to the people who work there (bartenders, waitresses, managers, whoever), and become a regular. Notice the other people who are around you. Notice that there are others who come here often as well. Introduce yourself. Share an appetizer. Recognize them next time they are there. Wave. Say hi. Ask about that thing you talked about over the appetizer last time you talked. And guess what? You have just met someone with similar interests, and not a bit of technology was used.
Yes. This is how you meet friends, AND potential dating partners. I don't Tinder, but in the past 2 years I've made a lot of friends and dated (for a month or more; not just gone on "one date with") like, 4 separate people. Go to a place and become a regular. Don't like drinking? Find other activities. I know of 2 regular poetry workshops in my area I could go to. Don't like that? Pick up a physical activity like running and start doing local 5ks with regularity. You will meet people. Some of them will even be cute and single and of a gender to which you are attracted.
(_refugee_ too) Y'all are certainly helping with refining how I'm feeling. Is there a such thing as social exhaustion from meeting people? Because, despite the tech thing, there are three days of the week where I'm involved with three separate organizations/places/whatever that have been a completely offline way of meeting folks, and yet, at the same time meeting people in general feels like a chore and the same path of events and discussions. Maybe living in 5 places in 3.5 years and going through this process time and time again filled with meeting people and short term relationships has taken some of the fun out of it. And I'm only interested in certain demographics of people as far as relationships go, and friends for that matter. Both of which are more of personal problems than anything else.
Ya know... I think I'm reading something between the lines in your comments... I don't think you are "whole" right now. And you can't be a good partner to someone, unless you are first good to yourself. Moving 5 times in 3+ years is a BIG sign. It takes TIME to get settled in. To figure out who you are in this new place. To find your rhythms. And you can dance with someone else until you can figure out your own rhythms. I think maybe you are pushing it too hard. Rushing into something that you know you aren't going to be completely committed to, and therefore self-sabotaging. BUT. I think you are doing the right things. Settling in. Doing the three-days-a-week stuff. Making friends. Being YOU. So be YOU for a while. Get comfortable. Only then will you become someone that others want to snuggle with. (All meant in good spirit. No abuse/jibes intended.)
Thanks goobster, definitely no jibes felt. I think you're completely right. The best part is I'm likely to move again in a few months (staying the same region, but still). The cycle of move or do something new - make friends - keep friends for a period of time - repeat is a lot more draining that I thought it would be, and, to be clear on the last point there are people who to snuggle with me at this point in time but not entirely sure where I'm at mentally to be doing like that.
People with a similar level of interest in music and local artist, musicians, and local culture, mostly. Chances are if a person has enough of a passion to be involved small and local, they'll have some of the same values as me. In the process that shuts out a lot of people though but eh. That was nondescript but I'm apparently the only person with the viewpoint I've been trying to express and I'm tired of trying to articulate things right now.
Great. Perfect. Endorse this idea completely. Where I think you're going off the rails is in allowing an external application to place a value judgement on how you spend your time. If you are spending your time on their dating sites to evaluate the people they think you should be into, you are not spending your time wisely.When it comes to dating I'd like to feel like my time was well spent.
I found the paragraph about chill interesting, but I'd like to say that This is bullshit and everyone knows it. A similar maxim: we all believe the person we desire is having sex all the time, because we want to be having sex with them [and are insecure about it]. In reality, it's simply not true. No one's bringing home a new guy or gal every night. Most people really don't even want to. The person who doesn't reply for texts for days isn't doing so because they are so popular they are overwhelmed by their texts. I've never known anyone to experience that or profess to experience that. The person who doesn't reply to texts for days in general is a shitty person who doesn't want to be your friend even though you would like them to be yours. This article seems to say that "being chill" does not depend on the person that you are. But of course it does. A girl who is chill to me is not chill to the guy she wants to bone. She's chill to me because she has enough friends and I don't matter. But she's sure as hell not going to forget to text back that new codpiece.not reply to texts for days because you are receiving too many
re: The texts thing. I personally don't reply to some texts for days because I have developed a sort of "queuing" system for messages. I have adhd, and I really do get overwhelmed with the amount of email/texts/phone calls/snail mail I get. So I put it in order, I have to reply to everyone in the order it was received (FIFO) or if it is something that is REALLY urgent move that to the top of the queue and work from there. It really really really isn't a personal thing, and I've had some friendships struggle because of it. I guess I'm saying please don't assume because someone is a slow texter that they are being passive aggressive from the outset, some of us need extra time to process :D
This article wouldn't exist if straight women used Tinder the way it was meant to be used, as the heterosexual counterpart to Grindr. In my mind, this 'tinderization' is just part of the formation of the global brain that was once such a popular topic of discussion around here (Paging theadvancedapes if you're still around Cadell). Nodes in the network need to establish linkages with other nodes, and part of that process is establishing nodes that will NOT connect, or will connect only shallowly. The rate of turnover for all kinds of things is going up, and I'd bet that romantic partner turnover has never been as high as it is right now, excluding periods of high mortality/violence.
I wouldn't say that, a big part of the article, the overabundance of choice, would still hold true. I certainly suffer from seeking out too much information in an effort to make an "informed" decision, be it Yelp reviews to find the "best" restaurant or comparing options on Tinder or wherever else. The constant connection and availability of information is exhausting at times, and that side of the article was a bigger takeaway for me than relationship turnover rate.
I'm really just not happy with the use of Tinder as the analogous app of choice, because that overabundance you're talking about is pretty one sided. I agree with the sentiment of 'We have more data than we know what to do with' and can relate to the experience of data/choice paralysis. For what tinder was designed for however, 'Bone, or don't bone' it's Supposed to turn people into a 1 or a 0. That is literally the intention. When we design for nuance, well, that's how you get hubski. I think.
I think the fact that it's turned into a more nuanced app is an indictment of society, though. Yes, I agree that the intention of TInder was to provide a Yes/No 1/0 binary, but it has evolved beyond that into a "Yes but not if I find someone else on this next swipe" and the feeling that there is always something equally or more enticing available. The latter is much more prevalent in society today, at least in my experiences. Then the question becomes: Why are we using Tinder in such a way, why do we feel like there's always a better option available in our hook-ups, relationships, restaurant choices, etc.?
Really? I have not had this experience, in part because everyone is gone once you swipe them, so it's not possible to make comparable decisions. I will also state that occasionally, when I have Tindered, there is a third option to the left/right binary: for whatever reason I have come across individuals I neither want to swipe left, or right on, and when that happens, I exit the app. (Usually it's people I know in real life that admittedly, yes, I know I'd like to bone, but I don't want them to know I want to bone them. Usually because boning isn't actually what it's all about. Let's call it "confused attraction." Am I currently dating someone who I was confusedly attracted to and refused to swipe either way on? You bet your pants I am. The confused attraction is always reserved for people I know IRL, of course.)it has evolved beyond that into a "Yes but not if I find someone else on this next swipe"