Course:CSIS200/2024/Redefining Romance: Tinder and the Commodification of Love

From UBC Wiki

Key Definitions

Term Definition
Commodification Turning something into an item that can be bought and sold.
Cultural Artifact An object created by humans, which can provide insight into the society it was made in.
Ideology System of beliefs and ideas.
Interpersonal Scripts Socially constructed guidelines that influence how individuals are expected to interact with friends, family and strangers.
Misogyny Prejudice against women and/or hatred for women.
Ordinance A law, order, rule, or command.
Patriarchal Relating to the patriarchy, a system or society where men hold the power and women are largely excluded.
Sexual Scripts Socially constructed guidelines that influence how individuals are expected to behave in sexual or romantic contexts.
Slut-shaming Judgmental attitudes toward a person for their sexual behaviour. Can happen to anybody, but most often directed at women.
Thick Market Economic term used to describe a market with many buyers and sellers.
Thin Market Economic term used to describe a market with few buyers and sellers.

Introduction

Context

The popularization of the internet was a transformational time that changed how people connect and communicate entirely. Dating is one aspect of life that was irrevocably changed by this technological advance, as the internet facilitated an entirely new domain: online dating.[1] Match.com launched in 1995, and is considered to be the first ever dating website.[2] At the time of its release, there was a large social stigma surrounding the use of dating websites as they were often associated with desperation.[1] However, as technology became more intertwined in everyday life, and people increasingly knew of acquaintances who had success with online dating, societal attitudes toward these websites became more positive.[1]

Tinder

The Tinder app icon.

The advent of smartphones marked another pivotal shift for modern dating, as a new type of dating emerged in the form of dating apps.[1] A key element of dating apps was that, unlike dating websites, they allowed for immediate and location-based interactions due to the GPS capabilities of smartphones.[1] Tinder launched in 2012 and quickly became popular amongst college-age students.[2] The apps’ founders targeted party schools as their first users, as they wanted to recruit students looking for hook-ups, not long-term relationships, to the app.[2] Tinder was swiftly branded a ‘hook-up” app that facilitated quick, no strings attached, sexual encounters.[2] The app also popularized a gamified interface which displays profiles like a deck of cards, as well as the notorious "swipe" feature, where users swipe right on a profile to match, or left to pass.[2] Tinder has been downloaded over 600 million times since its release, solidifying its status as a cultural artifact.[3] On this wiki page, I will analyze the cultural artifact of Tinder in order to demonstrate how online dating commodifies romantic and sexual relationships by turning intimacy into a product to be consumed, reshapes the nature of modern dating by redefining sexual scripts, and alters users’ expectations of love and intimacy.

Tinder as a Sexual Marketplace

Romantic Partners as Commodities

Scholars have argued that online dating has created a digital sexual marketplace where users shop for sex or relationships.[4] [5] [6] [7] Dr. Marina Adshade, an economics professor at The University of British Columbia, uses economic theory to explore how sex can be understood as existing within a market economy.[4] In her book Dollars and Sex: How Economics Influences Sex and Love. Adshade looks at how online dating can be viewed as a market, where traits such as physical attractiveness are priced high, and each user is simultaneously a buyer and a seller.[4]

This image depicts a Tinder match alert, meaning both users swiped right on each other.

According to Adshade, physical attractiveness functions as the currency of this marketplace, although wealth can also play a role, particularly when women evaluate male users.[4] Each person develops a self-appraised, often inflated, value, which they then use to gauge their compatibility with potential matches.[4] The goal, she suggests, is to find the best possible match relative to one’s own perceived market value.[4] Adshade continues by arguing that the economic principle of supply and demand can help to explain the online dating market, as highly attractive users are scarce and therefore "expensive."[4] This means that only those with comparable or greater value in the marketplace can successfully afford to match with them. Adshade’s argument that Tinder functions as a market is supported by Laura Thompson in her article “‘I can be your Tinder nightmare’: Harassment and misogyny in the online sexual marketplace."[5] Thompson deepens this analysis in her article, by emphasizing that the that value is ascribed to women in the online sexual marketplace reduces their worth to how well they conform to conventional beauty standards.[5] This stems from patriarchal ideals that prioritize women’s physical appearance above all else, an ideology that is ultimately reinforced on Tinder.[5]

Applying Rationality to Love, Sex, and Dating

Dating apps present many potential partners. Adshade and Palmer suggest this leads users to filter out certain traits, and take a highly rationalized approach to finding a match.[4][6]

Adshade asserts that another characteristic of this sexual marketplace is how the overwhelming selection of potential partners drives individuals to narrow down their search.[4] They do this by filtering out large groups of people based on specific characteristics, such as age, height, or ethnicity.[4] This process means that many people are eliminated without ever being seen or considered by the user.[4] Her observation is echoed in the chapter "Dating in the Age of Tinder: Swiping for Love?" by Lauren Palmer, where she states that Tinder has turned dating into a repetitive, market-like process where partners are plentiful and therefore disposable.[6] According to Palmer, the surplus of potential matches on Tinder forces users to take a highly rationalized and detached approach to sorting through matches.[6] This shows how Tinder contributes to the commodification of love, as users evaluate potential partners with a cost-benefit analysis rather than considering more subjective and intangible qualities, such as chemistry. Instead of seeking a genuine connection, users prioritize finding someone whose profile aligns perfectly with their predetermined wishlist of traits.

Tinder's Response

Tinder does not try to hide how the app leads users to view potential matches as both plentiful and disposable, encouraging a focus on superficial traits rather than fostering true connections. This is made clear in the “Tinder Matchmaker ft. Coi Leray” video embedded below, which is an advertisement posted by Tinder in 2023.[8]

The ad shows Lauren sitting on a throne, while various male suitors approach her looking for a date. Lauren and her friends evaluate each suitor based on qualities such as how many streaming services they have, their appearance, and their small talk. Each suitor is whisked away at the flick of Lauren’s finger until a physically attractive man with strong cheekbones and a bed frame appears, and the two match. This advertisement exemplifies how Tinder shamelessly positions dating as a marketplace where individuals are commodified and judged on superficial qualities such as their appearance, income, and possessions. Adshade suggests that online dating allows users to filter out large groups of people without a second thought, and this is precisely what Tinder depicts in their advertisement.[4] Moreover, the ad dramatizes the swiping mechanism to depict how potential Tinder matches are disposable and eliminated in the blink of an eye, or more accurately, the swipe of a finger.

Gendered Sexual Scripts

Traditional Sexual Scripts Meet Hookup Culture

Women on Tinder face gendered double standards through the "hybrid hookup script."[7]

Sexual scripts are the socially constructed guidelines that influence how individuals are expected to behave in sexual or romantic context.[9] While traditional sexual scripts have slowly evolved throughout the decades, Tinder introduced a new dating landscape, which is accompanied by unique sexual scripts. MacKenzie Christensen, a university professor whose research focuses on digital technologies and gender inequality, argues that the governing sexual script on Tinder is a “hybrid hookup script”.[7] The hybrid hookup script reintroduces traditional dating scripts, which include clearly defined gender roles and a lack of female agency, to on-campus hook-ups, while simultaneously prescribing casual sexual relationships as the norm.[7]

Christensen examined the experiences of young women on Tinder through interviews with 25 female and nonbinary college-age individuals.[7] She found that the result of the hybrid hookup script is that female and non-binary users face a lose-lose situation. Participating in the hybrid hookup script often leads to them being labeled a "Tinderslut," which is a derogatory term for a woman who uses the app to sleep with men.[7] Conversely, expressing interest in a long-term relationship frequently results in being dismissed as needy or desperate.[7] This dynamic demonstrates how sexual scripts on Tinder are shaped by clear gender roles, which both reflect and reinforce gendered double standards.

Historical Sexual Norms

The sexual double-standards identified by Christensen can be better understood by examining historical sexual ethics and the religious ordinance of chastity, which played a key role in shaping societal expectations of women’s sexual behavior.[10] Situating Tinder within this historical context reveals where the app's norms and sexual scripts evolved from. Lisabeth During explains that women were historically tasked with upholding chaste relations due to the assumption that they naturally enjoyed sex less and were therefore less tempted by it.[10] The ideal woman was expected to be both pure and uninterested in sex, yet readily available for sex once married.[10] This contradictory expectation persists on Tinder, where, as Christensen points out, women face a double bind: they are expected not to actively seek out sex, yet they must also be available for hookups.[7] Understanding these historical dynamics offers deeper insight into the enduring sexual double standards Christensen identifies on Tinder. The consequences of these norms continue to shape women’s experiences on Tinder today, as women who use the app for sexual encounters are slut-shamed and labeled “Tindersluts,” while men engaging in the same behaviour are not subjected to the same treatment.[7]

A Different Perspective on Tinder's Sexual Scripts

In “Dating in the Age of Tinder: Swiping for Love?”, Lauren Palmer looks at how heterosexual young adults use Tinder through interviews with 10 participants.[6] Much like Christensen, she suggests that Tinder merges old sexual scripts, which she argues promote romance and long-term commitment, with new sexual scripts that promote “casual bonds” and separate love from sex.[6] However, unlike Christensen, Palmer argues that this duality leaves Tinder users’ fate within their own hands, as it creates opportunities for both casual sex as well as long-term romantic relationships.[6] While some participants felt that Tinder had made sex meaningless for them, others stated that the app’s impact depends on the user, arguing that Tinder is no more conducive to casual sex than a bar.[6] Ultimately, Palmer’s article suggests that Tinder experiences are highly individualized and depend on users individual interpretations and use of the app

The Role of Interpersonal Scripts

College students make up a large proportion of Tinder Users, with almost 40% of users being between ages 16-24.

Kenneth R. Hanson conducted interviews with 27 heterosexual college students who use Tinder in order to understand the sexual scripts that shape Tinder usage.[11] His study reveals that friends play a significant role in students' experiences on Tinder, as experiences on the app are not only shaped by sexual scripts, but also interpersonal scripts.[11] One aspect of these interpersonal scripts is the “ritual retelling” of Tinder encounters, where students share and reflect upon their Tinder messages, dates, and hook-ups with their friends.[11] Moreover, swiping on the app is often done in the presence of friends, highlighting the significant role that friends play in college students’ usage of Tinder.[11] This finding connects with the “Tinder Matchmaker ft. Coi Leray” ad, which promotes a new Tinder feature that allows users’ friends to participate in their matching process, further highlighting the collaborative nature of individuals' Tinder usage.[8]

Choice Overload

Choice Overload

Both Thomas et al. and Pronk and Denissen use the term “choice overload” to describe the dilemma users face on dating apps.[12][13] Choice overload occurs when individuals are presented with so many options that they become overwhelmed, struggling to make a decision or failing to choose altogether.[12] This concept is particularly relevant on Tinder, where users are confronted with a seemingly endless array of potential matches. Ironically, while users are initially drawn to dating apps by the infinite dating pool it provides, this same surplus often leaves them feeling paralyzed by indecision.[12] Choice overload can have serious effects, as research suggests that it can lead Tinder users to experience lower self-esteem, a heightened fear of being single, and a rejection mindset.[12]

Tinder's Impact on Psychological Well-being

Thomas et al., explored the impact that the perception of partner availability has on the mental well-being of online daters.[12] They conducted an experimental study, sorting participants into 3 groups: high, moderate, and low partner availability. Their study found that people who experienced high partner availability also experienced significant choice overload.[12] Moreover, those who perceived they had a high number of potential partners experienced an increased fear of being single.[12] This finding is especially significant, as researchers found that well-being is more influenced by a person’s fear of being single than by their relationship status.[12] Finally, Thomas et al., found that high partner availability and choice overload negatively impact dating app users’ self-esteem.[12] One possible explanation they provide for this finding is that when an individual has a seemingly infinite number of potential partners available to them on an app such as Tinder, they feel they have no valid excuse for not finding a partner.[12]

Rejection Mindset

The Tinder swipe interface, which allows users to view a seemingly endless deck of profiles.

Pronk and Denissen also explore the impact of choice overload on individuals who use online dating apps.[13] Their research further supports the idea that choice overload has adverse effects on online daters.[13] Pronk and Denissen tested the hypothesis that the limitless supply of potential partners on dating apps leads users to develop a rejection mindset, which refers to an increased tendency to reject matches and a pessimistic outlook on dating overall.[13] Their findings indicate that the abundance of choices does cause users to develop a rejection mindset, with participants becoming more rejecting toward potential matches the more profiles they were presented with.[13] Moreover, their research suggests that users often interpret this rejection as a sign of their own dating failure, which leads to increased pessimism about ever finding a match.[13] Interestingly, their study suggests that developing a rejection mindset is unique to online dating, as the same results did not occur when participants were presented with physical photos of potential partners to flip through, rather than using a digital app.[13]


The research by Thomas et al., and Pronk and Denissen suggests that online dating can have numerous negative impacts on users due to choice overload.[12][13] While Pronk and Denissen were unable to identify a specific “break-point” where choice overload began, Thomas et al., suggest that choice overload begins to set in after swiping through approximately 31 profiles.[13][12] They therefore suggest that dating app users take frequent breaks and view fewer than 31 profiles per session in order to maintain their self-esteem and avoid developing a fear of being single.[13]

Conclusion

With over 1 billion swipes per day, Tinder has established itself as more than just another dating app; it is an artifact that exemplifies technology's role in shaping modern relationships through online dating.[12] By commodifying intimacy and introducing new sexual scripts that merge traditional norms with hook-up culture, Tinder has transformed how people navigate love, sex, and dating in the modern era. Moreover, the rise of Tinder has illuminated the emotional costs of turning relationships into a market with seemingly infinite options, as research shows this abundance often leads to experiencing choice overload, a rejection mindset, and diminished self-esteem.[12] [13] Tinder’s influence demonstrates how deeply technology has intertwined with love, reshaping not only how relationships begin but also how they are experienced and valued.

Author's Bio

Charlotte is currently completing the final year of her bachelor’s degree in Sociology at The University of British Columbia. In addition to her passion for Sociology, Charlotte has enjoyed taking numerous courses within the Institute for Gender, Race, Sexuality and Social Justice over the past 4 years. Her research interests include examining pop culture and digital media through the lenses of gender, race, social justice, and sexuality. Outside of her studies, Charlotte enjoys reading, sewing, and travelling.

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Hamilton, N.F. (2016). Romantic relationships and online dating. In: A. Attrill & C. Fullwood (Eds), Applied cyberpsychology (pp. 144-160). Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137517036_9
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Velotta, N., & Schwartz , P. (2018). Online Dating: Changing Intimacy One Swipe at a Time? [Review of Online Dating: Changing Intimacy One Swipe at a Time?]. In J. Van Hook, V. King, & S. M. McHale (Eds.), Families and Technology (pp. 57–84). Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-95540-7
  3. ↑ "About Tinder". Tinder Newsroom. Retrieved November 28. Check date values in: |access-date= (help)
  4. ↑ 4.00 4.01 4.02 4.03 4.04 4.05 4.06 4.07 4.08 4.09 4.10 4.11 Adshade, Marina (2013). Dollars and Sex: How Economics Influences Sex and Love. Chronicle Books. Chronicle Books. pp. 57–82.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Thompson, Laura (2018). "I can be your Tinder nightmare: Harassment and misogyny in the online sexual marketplace". Feminism & Psychology. 28(1): 69–89 – via Sagepub. line feed character in |title= at position 23 (help)
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 Palmer, L. (2020). Dating in the Age of Tinder: Swiping for Love?. In: Carter, J., Arocha, L. (eds) Romantic Relationships in a Time of ‘Cold Intimacies’. Palgrave Macmillan Studies in Family and Intimate Life. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29256-0_7
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 Christensen, MacKenzie A. (2020). ""Tindersluts" and "Tinderellas": Examining the Digital Affordances Shaping the (Hetero)Sexual Scripts of Young Womxn on Tinder". Sociological Perspectives. 64(3): 432­ –449 – via Sage Journals. line feed character in |title= at position 33 (help); soft hyphen character in |pages= at position 4 (help)
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Tinder. (2023, October 23). Tinder Matchmaker ft. Coi Leray [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vx8FbRC7nHI
  9. ↑ Ward, L. Monique; Rosenscruggs, Danielle R.; Aguinaldo, Erick (2022). "A Scripted Sexuality: Media, Gendered Sexual Scripts, and Their Impact on Our Lives". Current Directions in Psychological Science. 31(4): 369–374 – via Sage Journals.
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 Lisabeth, During (November 30th, 2021). "The Chastity Plot". NOTCHES. Retrieved October 14th 2024. Check date values in: |access-date=, |date= (help)
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 Hanson, Kenneth R (2022). "Collective Exclusion: How White Heterosexual Dating App Norms Reproduce Status Quo Hookup Culture". Sociological Inquiry. 92: 894–918 – via Wiley. line feed character in |title= at position 56 (help)
  12. ↑ 12.00 12.01 12.02 12.03 12.04 12.05 12.06 12.07 12.08 12.09 12.10 12.11 12.12 12.13 Thomas, Marina F.; Binder, Alice; Matthes, Jörg (2022). "The agony of partner choice: The effect of excessive partner availability on fear of being single, self-esteem, and partner choice overload". Computers in Human Behavior – via ScienceDirect. line feed character in |title= at position 77 (help)
  13. ↑ 13.00 13.01 13.02 13.03 13.04 13.05 13.06 13.07 13.08 13.09 13.10 Pronk, Tila M.; Denissen, Jaap J. A. (2020). [journals.sagepub.com/home/spp "A Rejection Mind-Set: Choice Overload in Online Dating"] Check |url= value (help). Social Psychological and Personality Science. 11(3): 388–396 – via Sage Journals.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:CSIS200/2024/Redefining_Romance:_Tinder_and_the_Commodification_of_Love&oldid=851543"