I went on a date with someone who, midway through, told me that on the Larry David show, Larry David always stops midway through a date to ask: how do you think this date is going? So, he said, pausing for dramatic effect, how do you think this date is going? We were at a sports bar in the East Village. That was not where we had started the date, but we had ended up there because he disliked the cocktail bar in my neighborhood that I had chosen. It was the kind of sports bar where they were playing tennis on the screen and sad rock music over the loud speaker. I was too embarrassed to say I thought the date was going incredibly poorly so I told him I thought sometimes it took more than a couple drinks to get to know someone. When I asked him, he demurred. It seems to me that if you ask that kind of question, you have to be prepared to answer it, but I have not watched the Larry David show.
In a 2019 episode of Ologies with Allie Ward, she hosted Dr. Benjamin Karney to discuss the study of Matrimoniology (Marriage). When asked about if similarities (i.e. dating app compatibility) are what determines how people fall in love, he noted it's "the interaction between two people" that really does it. Specifically, that when people interact, are responsive, and make each other feel heard and understood, you'll feel interested and excited about what's going on between each other. Plus, these interactions are conditional to the context you are in: you cannot replicate that kind of interaction, and no dating profile can promise or replicate it either. It's sort of exciting to meet people, and when you enter with that goal, I imagine it is at least more fun! Even if you met people with identical profiles in identical locations, an infinite amount of variability will result in you feeling different each time. In Dr. Karney's words: "We don’t choose partners the way we choose furniture, because furniture doesn’t have to choose us back. But partners do, so it has to be an interaction; a give and take".
CJ Hauser wrote about their experience on dating apps, noting how conversations on Tinder were akin to being "in-book" in chess game: chess moves that are optimized for success, which only when diverged allow for more authentic play. Similarly, when Hauser spoke to one of the people on the app, he gestured to being "in-book" in Tinder (Small Talk Purgatory), allowing them to step out of the the same common algorithmic responses, giving them the floor to be more human and exploratory with each other. That attempt to get a review of the date like Larry David seemed like a faulty attempt to disrupt the "meta" of the dating process, and I think the thing missing is that he was afraid to actually respond in a vulnerable or sincere manner, which would actually open things up to be more organic. The give and take HAS to be risky on both sides. Otherwise, it's just polite conversation, and that isn't particularly intimate or connective.
It’s interesting. I met my current - and aspirating lifelong, partner on tinder in 2017, we didn’t commit to just each other for another year or so! Alls this to say, dating apps were so much more fun when no one knew how to use them, and we were all just trying to figure them out.
I’m not sure how I’d approach them now. Sometimes together me and him will make an account of my photos just to see what it’s become! I feel like you’d be hard pressed to find a date if your profile wasn’t curated perfectly, and if you weren’t beautiful.
My single friends can’t believe we met on Tinder in the current online dating scene landscape, honestly at a bit wild to me too! I think my secret (alongside the timing of dating apps being popularized), was my openness and excitement to just meet anyone who seemed interesting!
Most of my single friends don’t want to do that! Which I also understand in the current landscape, hinge with the so few swipes is weird, you can’t carefully choose your next potential life partner off a profile. There’s just not enough option or variety within that framework to grab coffee with anyone remotely interesting
There are these two references that come to mind:
In a 2019 episode of Ologies with Allie Ward, she hosted Dr. Benjamin Karney to discuss the study of Matrimoniology (Marriage). When asked about if similarities (i.e. dating app compatibility) are what determines how people fall in love, he noted it's "the interaction between two people" that really does it. Specifically, that when people interact, are responsive, and make each other feel heard and understood, you'll feel interested and excited about what's going on between each other. Plus, these interactions are conditional to the context you are in: you cannot replicate that kind of interaction, and no dating profile can promise or replicate it either. It's sort of exciting to meet people, and when you enter with that goal, I imagine it is at least more fun! Even if you met people with identical profiles in identical locations, an infinite amount of variability will result in you feeling different each time. In Dr. Karney's words: "We don’t choose partners the way we choose furniture, because furniture doesn’t have to choose us back. But partners do, so it has to be an interaction; a give and take".
CJ Hauser wrote about their experience on dating apps, noting how conversations on Tinder were akin to being "in-book" in chess game: chess moves that are optimized for success, which only when diverged allow for more authentic play. Similarly, when Hauser spoke to one of the people on the app, he gestured to being "in-book" in Tinder (Small Talk Purgatory), allowing them to step out of the the same common algorithmic responses, giving them the floor to be more human and exploratory with each other. That attempt to get a review of the date like Larry David seemed like a faulty attempt to disrupt the "meta" of the dating process, and I think the thing missing is that he was afraid to actually respond in a vulnerable or sincere manner, which would actually open things up to be more organic. The give and take HAS to be risky on both sides. Otherwise, it's just polite conversation, and that isn't particularly intimate or connective.
This is a really thoughtful and well-written essay -- kudos.
love this!
It’s interesting. I met my current - and aspirating lifelong, partner on tinder in 2017, we didn’t commit to just each other for another year or so! Alls this to say, dating apps were so much more fun when no one knew how to use them, and we were all just trying to figure them out.
I’m not sure how I’d approach them now. Sometimes together me and him will make an account of my photos just to see what it’s become! I feel like you’d be hard pressed to find a date if your profile wasn’t curated perfectly, and if you weren’t beautiful.
My single friends can’t believe we met on Tinder in the current online dating scene landscape, honestly at a bit wild to me too! I think my secret (alongside the timing of dating apps being popularized), was my openness and excitement to just meet anyone who seemed interesting!
Most of my single friends don’t want to do that! Which I also understand in the current landscape, hinge with the so few swipes is weird, you can’t carefully choose your next potential life partner off a profile. There’s just not enough option or variety within that framework to grab coffee with anyone remotely interesting
This is brilliant. I will have to sit with it for a while. Kinda reminds me of Lacan saying the sexual relationship doesn’t exist.