5 ms·

You say that Tinder reduces the "time investment and biological risk" of [sex]. I'm not a Tinder user, how does it reduce the biological risk? wouldn't the ris

You say that Tinder reduces the "time investment and biological risk" of [sex]. I'm not a Tinder user, how does it reduce the biological risk? wouldn't the risk of an STD be just as great, if not greater, than the status quo?

Yhippa 11y ago
Just a theory of mine. I feel that the odds would be greater going to a bar and doing the usual pick up routine vs vetting them ahead of time.
- dethstar 11y ago
  You really can't know though, unless it's explicitly stated in their profile which I doubt it's very common.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- curiousjorge 11y ago
  there's no free lunch, if it reduces the cost of meeting strangers looking for cheap thrills, then it certainly must certainly raise the risks of contracting disease from the very people which it has allowed to freely enter and leave as they please.
- fredkbloggs 11y ago
  The only barriers to entry are having a smartphone and being able to push a couple buttons and swipe. That's not creating an environment that's even remotely exclusive, and there's zero reason to believe the few people who are excluded by it are more likely than others to have an STI. And vetting them how, anyway? You might be able to find out whether someone is a felon, but I have no idea how I would (legally) find out whether someone has a transmissible STI. This seems like a product of some kind of cognitive bias.
  - xeromal 11y ago
    It buys you time. I think that's what the OP was saying. You can stare at a match for as long as you want. In a bar, the deal expires rather quickly.
    - tripzilch 11y ago
      But you can't tell if someone has an STD by staring/looking at them, either.
- deanCommie 11y ago
  You're falling into a common misconception of assuming you can tell the likelyhood of a person having an STD by the rest of their attributes. Fact is, I see very little correlation. Intelligent, well-paid, well-groomed, well-cultured men who bitch and moan and complain about having to use condoms only wondering if the girl is on birth control. I don't think you can vet someone for STDs ahead of time. You can only practice safe sex and hope for the best.
baddox 11y ago
I think the reductions in risk already happened a while back, with the development and increased availability of birth control, condoms, medical testing and awareness, etc. I've heard similar arguments about a paradigm shift in gender relations after the advent of the pill (COCP) in the 60s.
RachelF 11y ago
More Sex is Safer Sex, according to economists, apparently: http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/revsalud/more_sex_is_safer_sex.pdf http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/revsalud/more_sex_is_s...
- brighteyes 11y ago
  An entertaining theory, but I believe it's wishful thinking. The idea that non-promiscuous people having more sex can reduce STDs is more that the risk to a person having sex is lower, the more non-promiscuous people are options for them. Which is true - if only promiscuous people are looking to have sex with you, then every sex act is more risky. But the risk for those non-promiscuous people goes up the more sex they have. STDs exist that are like vampires in modern entertainment - once you become one, you are one forever, and you have a chance of turning others into one as well. Vampirism therefore spreads without limit, and so do STDs, if enough people have sex, for STDs that are incurable are not entirely preventable by condoms. If people are having a lot more sex due to Tinder, as the anecdotes suggest in this article, there is no doubt that we will see a surge in STDs.
- Torgo 11y ago
  https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2035585 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2035585 "Internet’s Dirty Secret: Assessing the Impact of Online Intermediaries on HIV Transmission" http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/26/technology/rhode-island-tinder-stds/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/26/technology/rhode-island-tind... "Tinder and hookup apps blamed for rise in STDs"

Yhippa 11y ago

Just a theory of mine. I feel that the odds would be greater going to a bar and doing the usual pick up routine vs vetting them ahead of time.

dethstar 11y ago
You really can't know though, unless it's explicitly stated in their profile which I doubt it's very common.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
curiousjorge 11y ago
there's no free lunch, if it reduces the cost of meeting strangers looking for cheap thrills, then it certainly must certainly raise the risks of contracting disease from the very people which it has allowed to freely enter and leave as they please.
fredkbloggs 11y ago
The only barriers to entry are having a smartphone and being able to push a couple buttons and swipe. That's not creating an environment that's even remotely exclusive, and there's zero reason to believe the few people who are excluded by it are more likely than others to have an STI. And vetting them how, anyway? You might be able to find out whether someone is a felon, but I have no idea how I would (legally) find out whether someone has a transmissible STI. This seems like a product of some kind of cognitive bias.
- xeromal 11y ago
  It buys you time. I think that's what the OP was saying. You can stare at a match for as long as you want. In a bar, the deal expires rather quickly.
  - tripzilch 11y ago
    But you can't tell if someone has an STD by staring/looking at them, either.
deanCommie 11y ago
You're falling into a common misconception of assuming you can tell the likelyhood of a person having an STD by the rest of their attributes. Fact is, I see very little correlation. Intelligent, well-paid, well-groomed, well-cultured men who bitch and moan and complain about having to use condoms only wondering if the girl is on birth control. I don't think you can vet someone for STDs ahead of time. You can only practice safe sex and hope for the best.

baddox 11y ago

I think the reductions in risk already happened a while back, with the development and increased availability of birth control, condoms, medical testing and awareness, etc. I've heard similar arguments about a paradigm shift in gender relations after the advent of the pill (COCP) in the 60s.

RachelF 11y ago

More Sex is Safer Sex, according to economists, apparently: http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/revsalud/more_sex_is_safer_sex.pdf http://www.sld.cu/galerias/pdf/sitios/revsalud/more_sex_is_s...

brighteyes 11y ago
An entertaining theory, but I believe it's wishful thinking. The idea that non-promiscuous people having more sex can reduce STDs is more that the risk to a person having sex is lower, the more non-promiscuous people are options for them. Which is true - if only promiscuous people are looking to have sex with you, then every sex act is more risky. But the risk for those non-promiscuous people goes up the more sex they have. STDs exist that are like vampires in modern entertainment - once you become one, you are one forever, and you have a chance of turning others into one as well. Vampirism therefore spreads without limit, and so do STDs, if enough people have sex, for STDs that are incurable are not entirely preventable by condoms. If people are having a lot more sex due to Tinder, as the anecdotes suggest in this article, there is no doubt that we will see a surge in STDs.
Torgo 11y ago
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2035585 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2035585 "Internet’s Dirty Secret: Assessing the Impact of Online Intermediaries on HIV Transmission" http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/26/technology/rhode-island-tinder-stds/ http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/26/technology/rhode-island-tind... "Tinder and hookup apps blamed for rise in STDs"