6 ms·

Something so basic such as finding a partner has been reduced to the same mechanic we use to order food or pick out clothing. We treat each another like commod

Something so basic such as finding a partner has been reduced to the same mechanic we use to order food or pick out clothing. We treat each another like commodities because the channels for communication are controlled by companies trying to monetize human interaction. Pay a little more and see the “stand outs” in your search radius. Dating apps are an awful new phase for our world.

twelve40 4y ago
well it beats going to a frigging bar or weirding random people out in public transport, like the good ol days. But of course that's just a personal preference.
- kneebonian 4y ago
  ~~well it beats going to a frigging bar or weirding random people out in public transport, like the good ol days~~ Learning to socialize with other human beings, and building casual connection and conversation with new people. Fixed that for you.
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    > Learning to socialize with other human beings, You mean in totally artificial contexts? Yeah, that was great
    - em-bee 4y ago
      in natural groups like hobby activities
  - credit_guy 4y ago
    I don't think that's the fix, to be honest. In the "good old times" people were relying on network of friends. I did not meet my wife at a random bar or in the public transportation. We were moving in the same circles, had lots of common friends, we were both already "vetted" by mutual acquaintances when we started dating. I believe this was the pattern for thousands of years.
    - wrycoder 4y ago
      I met my wife in a completely random way, no bars etc. involved. We've been happily married for over fifty years. We ran across each other and just started talking.
      - thrill 4y ago
        Same. I was standing outside my dorm room on the phone with my shirt off (back when that would garner more than a few long glances from some), and my future wife was breaking school regs and shortcutting unescorted through the males-only dorm (we still had those). As she went by she kept a looong glance going... we met again randomly at an event a couple of days later and laughed about it. Nearing 50 years later we still laugh about it.
        drewcoo 4y ago
        There's missing some context. > on the phone . . . Nearing 50 years later Did you have a really long cord? Was it in the hallway or out the window?
        thrill 4y ago
        Yeah, I'd replaced the cord with one that could reach anywhere in the room or outside into the hall.
- atonse 4y ago
  How about going to a place together with a group of friends and meeting new people that way? That was always common too.
- ipnon 4y ago
  I don’t think young people appreciate how talking to strangers in public went from common and acceptable to creepy and taboo in the last 15 years. They seem to think things have always been like this (they have not). Before 2000 most people met their spouse at work (!) followed by restaurants (!) followed by bars (!). All of these would be borderline harassment now but it’s how your grandparents met, and they most likely had rosy memories of the occasion.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > how talking to strangers in public went from common and acceptable to creepy and taboo in the last 15 years This is strongly linked to class. The kids of rich friends have no problem striking up conversations with strangers, because they’ve been doing it at cocktail parties and restaurants since they were young. My less well-off friends’ kids have more screen time, much less opportunity for spontaneous conversation with unknown adults (they’re not taken out to eat) and spend more public time in unsafe spaces where there is legitimate concern about others’ willingness to hurt them.
    - ryandrake 4y ago
      So glad I'm out of the dating market and no longer have to worry about this. Creepiness is entirely in the mind of the beholder. Two people A and B striking up the same conversation with the same recipient. Same actions, same words, same attention. Person A could be considered creepy and person B could be considered flirting, and it's purely based on whether the recipient wanted attention from A or B. So it's a huge risk--how are your actions going to be received?
      - Nextgrid 4y ago
        This is very much a problem due to social media and witch hunts. Creepiness was always a thing, but the worst that could happen back in the day is a rejection if things don't work out. Nowadays however, it can very well escalate into worldwide public ridicule and/or a witch hunt on social media, with potentially career-ending consequences. You are only really safe if you're either extremely attractive (both to initially reduce the risk of a rejection, and to garner sympathy from would-be witch hunters), are rich enough to not worry about career consequences (or your employer isn't vulnerable to public opinion), or can spin the witch hunt for your own benefit if your entire brand is already based on being against the mainstream (think Andrew Tate for example). No wonder it's not worth the risk for the vast majority of people.
- version_five 4y ago
  I doubt many real relationships get started in those ways either. I only have anecdotal evidence about how people meet and begin a relationship, but for me it's always been though some shared experience where you see someone regularly and strengthen a relationship over time. And apps can't replace that - creating a common experience.
- paxys 4y ago
  Neither of those has ever been a real way to meet long term partners. Historically (and by that I mean before dating apps), people mostly found significant others at work, at church, through family introductions, friend-of-friend connections, or even professional matchmakers. Encounters at bars were always meant for random hookups. And everything else (like spilling your drink on someone in the elevator and eventually getting married to them) is a hollywood storyline, not something that actually happened to a large number of people.
xwdv 4y ago
I wish it was that simple. If it truly was like ordering a meal or picking some clothes I’d easily just swipe through profiles, pick a woman that meets all my criteria and have her delivered to my door so we can get to know each other and start our life together, raising kids and living a rich life of luxury funded by tech money. Instead it’s more like ordering food, except the restaurant never makes it, or the door dasher eats your meal, or the order was wrong, or you get food poisoning and spend the night hugging a toilet vomiting your guts out. And when you go to write your review, it’s flagged and deleted. So you decide to just cook at home.
- wahern 4y ago
  > I wish it was that simple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shidduch#Shadchan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shidduch#Shadchan
  - djbusby 4y ago
    Then that became JDate
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- shagie 4y ago
  News Radio - Negotiation https://youtu.be/y-yGUSRdNG4 https://youtu.be/y-yGUSRdNG4
- paxys 4y ago
  > pick a woman that meets all my criteria and have her delivered to my door Well they have services for that as well
  - owlglass 4y ago
    Coming to a city near you, WaaS
rnk 4y ago
I think that's a pretty naive view of the world, even if it has a little truth. There have always been matchmakers who got paid for making a match. If you paid more, you got a better one maybe. They matched you with another human, like it was a commodity too.
- thfuran 4y ago
  But that's not really the business model of dating sites, is it? If they find matches that are too good, they take people out of their market. They want people to keep paying them to find new potential dates.
- rdiddly 4y ago
  I think that part was included just to illustrate the more baroque manifestations of commercializing relationships. The main point that I took away was that commerce itself (commodity-based, transactional, impersonal/disconnected) is a lousy model for dealing with human relationships, which are personal, unquantifiable, and literally connections.

twelve40 4y ago

well it beats going to a frigging bar or weirding random people out in public transport, like the good ol days. But of course that's just a personal preference.

kneebonian 4y ago
~~well it beats going to a frigging bar or weirding random people out in public transport, like the good ol days~~ Learning to socialize with other human beings, and building casual connection and conversation with new people. Fixed that for you.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  > Learning to socialize with other human beings, You mean in totally artificial contexts? Yeah, that was great
  - em-bee 4y ago
    in natural groups like hobby activities
- credit_guy 4y ago
  I don't think that's the fix, to be honest. In the "good old times" people were relying on network of friends. I did not meet my wife at a random bar or in the public transportation. We were moving in the same circles, had lots of common friends, we were both already "vetted" by mutual acquaintances when we started dating. I believe this was the pattern for thousands of years.
  - wrycoder 4y ago
    I met my wife in a completely random way, no bars etc. involved. We've been happily married for over fifty years. We ran across each other and just started talking.
    - thrill 4y ago
      Same. I was standing outside my dorm room on the phone with my shirt off (back when that would garner more than a few long glances from some), and my future wife was breaking school regs and shortcutting unescorted through the males-only dorm (we still had those). As she went by she kept a looong glance going... we met again randomly at an event a couple of days later and laughed about it. Nearing 50 years later we still laugh about it.
      - drewcoo 4y ago
        There's missing some context. > on the phone . . . Nearing 50 years later Did you have a really long cord? Was it in the hallway or out the window?
        thrill 4y ago
        Yeah, I'd replaced the cord with one that could reach anywhere in the room or outside into the hall.
atonse 4y ago
How about going to a place together with a group of friends and meeting new people that way? That was always common too.
ipnon 4y ago
I don’t think young people appreciate how talking to strangers in public went from common and acceptable to creepy and taboo in the last 15 years. They seem to think things have always been like this (they have not). Before 2000 most people met their spouse at work (!) followed by restaurants (!) followed by bars (!). All of these would be borderline harassment now but it’s how your grandparents met, and they most likely had rosy memories of the occasion.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > how talking to strangers in public went from common and acceptable to creepy and taboo in the last 15 years This is strongly linked to class. The kids of rich friends have no problem striking up conversations with strangers, because they’ve been doing it at cocktail parties and restaurants since they were young. My less well-off friends’ kids have more screen time, much less opportunity for spontaneous conversation with unknown adults (they’re not taken out to eat) and spend more public time in unsafe spaces where there is legitimate concern about others’ willingness to hurt them.
  - ryandrake 4y ago
    So glad I'm out of the dating market and no longer have to worry about this. Creepiness is entirely in the mind of the beholder. Two people A and B striking up the same conversation with the same recipient. Same actions, same words, same attention. Person A could be considered creepy and person B could be considered flirting, and it's purely based on whether the recipient wanted attention from A or B. So it's a huge risk--how are your actions going to be received?
    - Nextgrid 4y ago
      This is very much a problem due to social media and witch hunts. Creepiness was always a thing, but the worst that could happen back in the day is a rejection if things don't work out. Nowadays however, it can very well escalate into worldwide public ridicule and/or a witch hunt on social media, with potentially career-ending consequences. You are only really safe if you're either extremely attractive (both to initially reduce the risk of a rejection, and to garner sympathy from would-be witch hunters), are rich enough to not worry about career consequences (or your employer isn't vulnerable to public opinion), or can spin the witch hunt for your own benefit if your entire brand is already based on being against the mainstream (think Andrew Tate for example). No wonder it's not worth the risk for the vast majority of people.
version_five 4y ago
I doubt many real relationships get started in those ways either. I only have anecdotal evidence about how people meet and begin a relationship, but for me it's always been though some shared experience where you see someone regularly and strengthen a relationship over time. And apps can't replace that - creating a common experience.
paxys 4y ago
Neither of those has ever been a real way to meet long term partners. Historically (and by that I mean before dating apps), people mostly found significant others at work, at church, through family introductions, friend-of-friend connections, or even professional matchmakers. Encounters at bars were always meant for random hookups. And everything else (like spilling your drink on someone in the elevator and eventually getting married to them) is a hollywood storyline, not something that actually happened to a large number of people.

xwdv 4y ago

I wish it was that simple. If it truly was like ordering a meal or picking some clothes I’d easily just swipe through profiles, pick a woman that meets all my criteria and have her delivered to my door so we can get to know each other and start our life together, raising kids and living a rich life of luxury funded by tech money. Instead it’s more like ordering food, except the restaurant never makes it, or the door dasher eats your meal, or the order was wrong, or you get food poisoning and spend the night hugging a toilet vomiting your guts out. And when you go to write your review, it’s flagged and deleted. So you decide to just cook at home.

wahern 4y ago
> I wish it was that simple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shidduch#Shadchan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shidduch#Shadchan
- djbusby 4y ago
  Then that became JDate
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
shagie 4y ago
News Radio - Negotiation https://youtu.be/y-yGUSRdNG4 https://youtu.be/y-yGUSRdNG4
paxys 4y ago
> pick a woman that meets all my criteria and have her delivered to my door Well they have services for that as well
- owlglass 4y ago
  Coming to a city near you, WaaS

rnk 4y ago

I think that's a pretty naive view of the world, even if it has a little truth. There have always been matchmakers who got paid for making a match. If you paid more, you got a better one maybe. They matched you with another human, like it was a commodity too.

thfuran 4y ago
But that's not really the business model of dating sites, is it? If they find matches that are too good, they take people out of their market. They want people to keep paying them to find new potential dates.
rdiddly 4y ago
I think that part was included just to illustrate the more baroque manifestations of commercializing relationships. The main point that I took away was that commerce itself (commodity-based, transactional, impersonal/disconnected) is a lousy model for dealing with human relationships, which are personal, unquantifiable, and literally connections.