“Tinder sucks,” they say. But they don’t stop swiping.
With estimated 50 million users on a single application,Tinder and with 26 billion matches made every day, the world of internet has altered the dating landscape and has open the argument of the solidity and security once provided by life-long partnerships which is now disappearing by rampant individualisation and technological change. In particular, online dating, which has rapidly become a pervasive means of seeking potential partners, has altered both the romantic acquaintance process and the compatibility matching process. Online dating involves placing one’s romantic fate in the hands of a mathematical matching algorithm to select potential partners for users.
Hookup culture, which has been percolating for about a hundred years, has collided with dating apps. Sex has become so easy and accessible to everyone and with dating apps it has gamified the concept of finding love. The technology has influenced their sexual practices and views on long-term relationships, monogamy and other romantic ideals.
“It’s rare for a woman of our generation to meet a man who treats her like a priority instead of an option,” wrote Erica Gordon on the Gen Y Web site Elite Daily, in 2014
Online dating profiles reduces three-dimensional people to two-dimensional displays of information and finding potential partners by use of 5 photos and 240 words bio fail to capture those experiential aspects of social interaction that are essential to evaluating one’s compatibility with potential partners. In addition, the ready access to a large pool of potential partners can orient mindset and might undermine their willingness to commit to one of them.So now one surely needs to invest in makeup and a phone with good camera! Online dating apps affects on self esteem too compared to people who aren’t on the dating app. According to study by American Psychological Association, Tinder users had lower levels of self-worth, reported being less satisfied with their faces and looks and were more ashamed of their bodies. They were also more likely to think of themselves as sexual objects, to internalize societal ideals about beauty, to compare their appearances to others and to constantly monitor how they looked, the researchers found.
In the article, Tinder and the Dawn of the “Dating Apocalypse” by Vanity Fair Magazine, it talks about how it’s not uncommon for their hookups to lose their erections. It’s a curious medical phenomenon, the increased erectile dysfunction in young males, which has been attributed to everything from chemicals in processed foods to the lack of intimacy in hookup sex.
Along with this, Rhode Island state department of health is pointing to hookup apps like Tinder as one of the driving forces behind new outbreaks of STD cases. The rise has been rather steep: Syphilis cases in Rhode Island increased by 79 percent between 2013 and 2014 while gonorrhea cases increased by 30 percent as social media involves a space to arrange casual and often anonymous sexual encounters, having sex without a condom, having multiple sex partners, and having sex while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Dating apps are changing the social phenomenon drastically and in longer run it might distort how we perceive love. The act of choosing consumer brands and sex partners has become interchangeable. I have designed a series of tongue-in-cheek condom packages to show how these apps advertise themselves as consumer brands with different flavours for choosing your partners (Compatibility).The tag “For The Internuts” is a play of pun for all the people who desperately using internet for hookups.
All the copyrights belong to respective companies. This is a hypothetical graduate project.Not for commercial use.
This was an insightful way to make us aware of how human interactions and relationship-building has become byte-sized, over-simplistic and mechanical in the current age of internet dependency. The search for someone to love has now become a matter of obtaining quick “information” about the nearest availability of sex.
This information, or “dating data,” is presented to us in efficient, user-friendly, instantaneous forms. The consciously minimalist design of dating app interfaces is more suited to facilitating sexual encounters, than romantic encounters. Yet, dating apps tend to conceal this unsavoury framing, because that would make them seem superficial and distasteful. Hence, they brand themselves as search engines for romance, with proximity, attractiveness and hobby-based filters to seek out a suitable mate, thereby turning prospective lovers into target audiences. In doing so, they mislabel the very product these audiences receive. That product is not really love, it’s just sex.
Falling in love or finding a partner is always messy, inefficient, complex, unpredictable, and unfathomable — all of which make it the experience it is. Sex, however, is a biological transaction involving far less complexity and may thus be easier for an algorithm to decipher and deliver. This piece of design highlights the impact of so-called “dating apps” on modern society’s notions of human relationships, and vice versa. Digital media shapes the manner in which we consume information and organize our lives. But conversely, the manner in which we prefer to — or have grown accustomed to — consuming information and organising our lives — also determines the design of digital media products.
Credits: Hemant Gulia for Copywriting.
- Tinder and the Dawn of the “Dating Apocalypse” — Vanity Magazine www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/08/tinder-hook-up-culture-end-of-dating
- The Rise of Dating-App Fatigue www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/10/the-unbearable-exhaustion-of-dating-apps/505184/
- Tinder: Swiping Self Esteem? — © 2017 American Psychological Association www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2016/08/tinder-self-esteem.aspx
- Digital Company Statistics expandedramblings.com/index.php/tinder-statistics/
- Business of Apps www.businessofapps.com/data/tinder-statistics/
- Online Dating: A Critical Analysis From the Perspective of Psychological Science: Eli J. Finkel, Paul W. Eastwick, Benjamin R. Karney, Harry T. Reis and Susan Sprecher