Interesting excerpt from article

[Batya33]

The author of this article (article from a newspaper posted on my Facebook) had this opinion about dating apps (she is in her 20s and fell for a guy she met on Bumble but he was apprehensive about monogamy)

 

"They tempt you to keep swiping, and as you whiz through tens, hundreds or even thousands of profiles, you can only infer the obvious. Out of all these people, there’s got to be someone better than the person I’m seeing right now.

 

Which means that monogamy requires more sacrifice than ever. If offered free travel, why would anyone settle for one place when it’s possible to tour the entire world?"

 

I am posting this because this makes an important point for me. I could not disagree more with this opinion. Certainly in the real "olden times" you knew if you wanted to marry either your parents arranged it or you picked someone from a nearby farm or in your small town, for example. So maybe that made a difference.

 

But I don't think technology changed anything for people who want commitment or for people who were not sure they wanted commitment but met the right person anyway. When that happens -when you make that choice -you know for sure that there may be many people who are "better" - maybe even people who you have even more in common with and are hotter/richer -whatever floats your boat. But even though you know that technically (because you haven't met/dated every available person on the planet) it is irrelevant when you make that choice with your heart and typically -hopefully- your head too. Someone can show you all your potential matches and how easy it is to swipe or click or whatever and you acknowledge that that is true and know that it doesn't matter. At all. We're not blind -we notice good looking people, we might enjoy bantering -even harmless flirting -with someone at a party or even a long time friend - but deep down to the core is that commitment and it's stronger than the desire to see what else is out there.

 

Even if it's soooo easy to "see" what else is out there. As Meg Ryan said in "You've got Mail" breaking up with her great on paper long term boyfriend -there was no one else, just the dream of someone else. If you're not with the right person it doesn't have to be right in front of your face or easily accessible -the dreams will tell you. If you are with the right person it doesn't take more to resist to swipe because it's irrelevant in the first place. So I wouldn't blame technology for making it easier to stray or avoid commitment, or for making commitment a harder choice - technology just makes it easier to act on the desire to stray or see what else is out there - but when you're committed the desire isn't there or is an occasional blip on the radar when your spouse or partner forgets to take out the garbage, etc...

 

Thoughts welcome. I was on online dating sites for about 5 years, did personal ads for about 5 years. Maybe I've written nothing new under the sun. Just tired of "on line dating" being given a bad rep and being blamed for hindering commitment.

[Clio]

I agree with you partially. Imo, when it comes to commitment, there is a spectrum - not just three categories - and what online technology has done is facilitating the people who lean towards the "less willing/less apt/less ready to commit" side to keep looking, when previously the logistics/more limited dating pool made them settle sooner. I don't know if it's good or bad. One could argue that it drives people who are "susceptible" to a form of dating "gluttony". Like cheap junk food leading to an increase in global obesity. Another could argue that it could keep non monogamous people from marrying/settling down, hence bringing things out in the open and preventing people from commitment when they were not ready to begin with. On another note, I feel that online dating facilitates cheaters and sociopaths on casting a wider net and can be used as a dysfunctional way to avoid self-development, offering for some an easy way out when "the going gets tough" but that's another story. At the end of the day, it's a tool and I believe in personal accountability.

[Clio]

P.S. I think that those of us who were born in an era before the emergence of ICT, where Inernet did not exist, sometimes fail to appreciate its impact on the human brain. I remember reading the other day a story about a former high Facebook executive warning people how its features such as"likes" mess with people's brain chemicals/natural endorphins leading to social conditioning, like lab rats being conditioned by being rewarded with food pellets when pushing a certain button. I find plausible that "swiping" may have a similar reward effect for certain people. Sometimes I think about the movie "the Matrix" and when I draw parallels to the WWW and the amount of time most people from developed countries spend in it, it boggles my mind. There are people who live their lives for and through social media. I think the impact of online apps on people's brain should not be underestimated.

[Batya33]

P.S. I think that those of us who were born in an era before the emergence of ICT, where Inernet did not exist, sometimes fail to appreciate its impact on the human brain. I remember reading the other day a story about a former high Facebook executive warning people how its features such as"likes" mess with people's brain chemicals/natural endorphins leading to social conditioning, like lab rats being conditioned by being offered food pellets when pushing a certain button. I find plausible that "swiping" may have a similar effect for certain people. Sometimes I think about the movie "the Matrix" and when I draw parallels to the www and the amount of time most people from developed countries spend in it, it boggles my mind. There are people who live their lives for and through social media. I think the impact of online apps on people's brain should not be underestimated.

 

I really enjoyed reading your points and perspective! I don't think people "settled" more in the sense where settling means sacrificing your own wants/needs/values - but I do think expectations of what a marriage should be like may have been different so people were satisfied with choices that might look different today ranging from sexual expectations/division of labor/etc.

[SherrySher]

Clio, I absolutely agree. Technology is most definitely changing peoples brains and not all for the good. It is actually scary in some ways. I would go on about my thoughts about FB but I will save that as this post is not about that.

 

When that happens -when you make that choice -you know for sure that there may be many people who are "better" - maybe even people who you have even more in common with and are hotter/richer -whatever floats your boat. But even though you know that technically (because you haven't met/dated every available person on the planet) it is irrelevant when you make that choice with your heart and typically -hopefully- your head too. Someone can show you all your potential matches and how easy it is to swipe or click or whatever and you acknowledge that that is true and know that it doesn't matter. At all.

So true! But it's difficult to not add in the other factors such as people messing about due to low self esteem, needing validation from strangers, ego boosted even if they are in relationships and so on.

But aside from all of that it really is true that if you've found the right one, no amount of other choices should matter. And if you're a decent human being you remain loyal and through the good and bad no matter what.

It takes a fair amount to have a relationship remain long term and complete loyalty and always striving for it to work. And it's not easy to find, which is why ENA exists.

But it is possible. Fingers crossed for us all.

[DancingFool]

There were no good old days. There have always been cheaters, liars, personality disorders, non-monogamous people, etc., etc., etc. The only difference is that all those people were forced into marriage and there was a whole lot more hell and suffering behind closed doors, mutually so. What we enjoy now as a society is the ability to leave the situation or not to get married or involved in the first place if that's not your cup of tea.

 

On the flip side and as pertains to the writer of that article, she did what many do, met someone she likes and is not able to accept that he simply doesn't want what she wants, so she is looking for things to blame. Must be the choices, the dating apps, the internet, anything other than accepting rejection at face value and moving on to find an actual right person.

[j.man]

While not without sympathy, I'm much quicker to place responsibility on the user rather than the tool.

 

As what some consider a "late stage millennial," my formative years included both pre and post internet, dating included. I appreciate aspects of both, hence why I only ever supplemented my dating life with online dating. I never depended on it. The biggest reason I used it at all was to increase my numbers. And that's pretty much it. I think it's because I never took the concept beyond its face value that I never had an opportunity to become jaded by it.

 

The biggest illusion I think OLD provides is that a picture and a profile puts someone even a baby step above a complete and absolute stranger they'd meet on the street. The sense of "could be" when you've seen their attractive photo or read their funny profile should only ever be used as a search criteria. In fact, there's even less social stake in meeting someone online rather than on the street. At least then, there's a chance you two might share the same regular walking path. Meeting someone online is meeting someone who's as strange to you as a stranger gets, and, while still not excusable, it should come as no surprise that there'd be a good chunk of people who are naturally enabled to be flakier by it.

 

Additionally, I never once had any illusions that one, two, three, even four or five dates in, they weren't still exploring other options. That's the entire point. To stress, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being a monogamous dater. But I can't think of anything more counter-intuitive than being that kind of person and then using what's probably the most numbers-based dating mechanism.

 

In short, yes, technology changes dynamics for better or for worse. But the issue isn't the technology itself or even that people have adapted in a way that reflects poorly on their character, but that those so adversely affected by such people have failed to adapt for the better themselves.

 

And I have to say that I cannot agree enough with DF's message of there never having been a golden age. Admittedly, I do think the numbers OLD provides give the illusion that we can, with any sort of emotional efficiency, find that absolutely perfect person, and that's a balance still largely being worked out, but if I had to choose between an era of people being too picky, even non-committal as a result, and an era of people unhappily settling, I'd take the former any day of the week.

 

This has been an official rambling by j.man.

[Batya33]

My experience with dating sites was a bit different because of the major city and community in which I dated. I happened to know of a number of the men who contacted me and who I contacted - sometimes only one degree of separation but even if it was more it made people more accountable when they knew you both knew people in common. I realize major city seems inconsistent with that type of experience but in my particular case it was not. I still treated it as meeting a stranger but not as "strange" as in your post.

 

I do fight against how technology/social media impacts our brains but I have a good example. Yesterday someone on my mom's group posted the question -how did you tell your parents you were expecting your first child. I'm 50, I announced my pregnancy when I was 41, and I had no idea that what she meant (she was way younger than me) was how did we make the announcement splashy/exciting, etc. And I realized her question is coming from this whole trend of publicizing every event on social media, splashier the better, and not only having baby showers but now also "gender reveal" parties. So my response was honest -I wrote that I called my mother as soon as we saw the positive test. I never thought of whether to send her something in the mail, plan an event, drop hints, etc. I simply wanted my mother to know ASAP that I'd won the lottery and my dream had come true. At least 50 women responded replete with photos, videos, details - and yes I now "get" how access to all these media/technology has changed some people's views of how to share big news and what the priorities are on sharing big news. I imagine that if I went on dating sites today (it's been at least 10 years since I even looked at a site for any reason) it would be similarly splashy/advertising, etc. That certainly was true to an extent 10 plus years ago but I bet it's even more prevalent now. And it would annoy me.