Finding a Partner: A Universally Accepted Quest

Dr. Nanu Elena Doința

Regardless of the motivation, the expectations we have when searching for a partner – whether we do it for a romantic relationship, sexual connection, socializing, or other reasons – stem from a fundamental human need: we are inherently social beings. 

The general profile of those who used the personals or the matrimonial agencies in the past is not significantly different from that of current dating app users. While the motivations may vary in some ways, in the past (especially after the war), financial considerations played a more prominent role. Moreover, after the establishment of the communist regime, social status and societal pressure (with stereotypes like “keeping up appearances”, “old maid/bachelor” and the stigma of being single which was seen as a sign that something was wrong with the individual (being divorced was often preferable to being single) became significant factors.

Despite the dramatic evolution of technology in the last century – such as the invention of computers and the takeover of the internet – human beings have not evolved as rapidly. These technological developments have enhanced the comfort of human beings. People’s behavior has become more and more robotic, leaning towards easier choices and time has become a more valuable resource that influences our overall behavior.

In the past, someone using personals or matrimonial agencies would typically include in their profile details such as address, age, height, occupation, hair and eye color, financial and professional status, health condition, hobbies, a photo of themselves and a description of the desired partner — age, height, financial and professional status, qualities, and interests.

Nowadays, the dating apps users tend to focus on different aspects regarding their desired partner’s profile such as physical appearance, age, sense of humor, hobbies, geographical proximity, followed by occupation/profession, clothing style and zodiac sign. 

It’s noticeable that financial and professional status, which used to be prioritized over qualities and interests in the past, have become less important than the sense of humor and hobbies of one’s ideal partner. Oftentimes, geographical proximity matters more than financial status for dating app users (possibly as a result of women gaining financial independence).

Creating a profile (by today’s dating app users or those who used personals/matrimonial agencies in the past – often boils down to stating their physical traits and interests) may not fully represent the person behind the profile (many people may not have a deep psychological understanding of themselves or may not be fully aware of their real expectations as oftentimes happens in offline interactions), thus leading the users to choose partners unconsciously.

According to the 1990s’ magazine Femeia, the “psychological” profile of those who used personals was often characterized by anxiety, dependency on their family and immaturity.

Stepping out of one’s comfort zone in order to build a genuine partnership requires significant resources (particularly energy). Scientific studies indicate that “successful” relationships are more likely to be built on complementarity rather than similarity. Additionally, a real relationship requires proximity, physical and emotional attraction, authentic communication (sincerity), and emotional involvement.

In today’s relationship landscape, the internet has become a complex database and a rapid alternative for meeting potential virtual partners, with minimal emotional and time investment. Using dating apps has become a remarkably convenient alternative for connecting with new individuals. However, when using such platforms, particularly with the intention of finding a partner, it is imperative to understand the advantages, the risks and the disadvantages that come our way with this form of interaction.

Advantages:

  1. Quick selection process (we choose by quantity, influenced by the idea that “there’s plenty of fish in the sea”).  However, this can frequently lead to disappointment in terms of quality. As one user observed, “In Bucharest, everything was very hasty. Once you received a like, you could send a message, and there was roughly a 70% chance of getting a reply, often within the same day, or even more rapidly.”
  1. Emotionally Secure Environment: From behind a screen, users often feel emotionally safe. The absence of direct visual or physical contact and the lack of real-time dialogue allow us to feel more emotionally secure (it’s easier to conceal emotions, preventing the other person from perceiving moments of “vulnerability”), and give us the opportunity to present ourselves in a more favorable light (different from reality).
  1. Reduced Physical Distance: The internet enables interactions with individuals from different cultures, countries and with diverse life experiences – things that would be far more challenging to access in the physical world.
  1. Mystery and Intrigue which can be especially enticing for women.

Disadvantages and Risks:

  1. Absence of Nonverbal Communication (can hinder effective communication and the process of truly getting to know the other person). Through facial expressions, gestures, tone and posture we can convey information, sometimes unconsciously, that is crucial in understanding one another. Additionally, hiding behind a screen can convey information that may not align with one’s actual emotional state or thoughts.
  1. Not giving enough time to get to know the partner: Truly getting to know someone is an active process that requires time, interest and energy. The virtual space is flexible and convenient (depending on our needs and the time we are willing to invest in it).
  1. No Authenticity: to protect their identity, some individuals may adopt false personas, which undermines the foundation for establishing a genuine relationship. It is much easier to manipulate reality in a virtual setting, presenting oneself in a way that aligns with the expectations and desires of the person on the other side of the screen.
  1. Dependence on Virtual Space. Social interactions or searching for a partner through digital platforms can become an alternative way to spend your free time, regardless of the amount of time allocated, and at the same time, a way to escape from reality.

The most popular dating apps, both in Romania and internationally, are Tinder, Bumble, and Facebook Dating. Bumble and Tinder are well-known for helping users find potential partners. If you’re looking for a heterosexual relationship and would like the woman to take the first step, Bumble might be a good choice. On the other hand, if you’re single, heterosexual, and prefer to make the first move yourself, Tinder might be a more suitable choice, according to Forbes Health.

For LGBTQ+ individuals looking for a relationship, Tinder might be a better option – a study conducted by the Pew Research Center states that 60% of lesbian, gay, and bisexual women, and 42% of gay and bisexual men, have used Tinder in the past. Since so many LGBTQ+ people use this platform “you’re less likely to run out of prospective dates”, says Adam D. Blum, a licensed marriage and family therapist and founder of the Gay Therapy Center in San Francisco. He also notes that Bumble has fewer gay users, even in big cities like San Francisco.

(https://www.forbes.com/health/dating/bumble-vs-tinder/)

Some user remarks include: “It seems to me that many women on Tinder and Bumble are quite inexperienced when comes to dating… Some of them have unrealistic expectations, such as needing a partner to be at least 1.80 meters tall, a gym enthusiast or earning a big salary. Yet, they often have just one blurry photo or a picture with a dog on their profile… I wished they weren’t seeking a serious relationship because their profile already suggests a lack of the emotional maturity required for such commitments… they want attention, fun or a rich man… I’d appreciate if they’d have unfiltered photos, honesty and transparency.” Other needs expressed by users include “stability, affection, attention, and someone to share both frustrations and happy moments with… Having a relationship requires a lot of work, both on yourself and with your partner, a rare thing in today’s world. This work may include navigating through the challenges of Tinder, which demands patience and resilience against inconsiderate individuals who will inevitably come your way… When using apps like Tinder or Bumble, you most likely have an idea of what you’re searching for, or at least a rough sense of your desires. And, as with many aspects of life, knowing what you don’t want is just as crucial.”

 (https://www.vice.com/ro/article/z3xbex/oameni-pe-tinder-în-relatii).

“Would you like to see some photos? If you’re interested in meeting someone, you have the option to either meet them face to face or engage directly with them via Facetime of something. To me, social media feels like a space for keeping in touch with people you know, even if it’s just online. Personally, I don’t really like the idea of befriending people I’ve only met once or had a small conversation with.” … “Being part of Generation Z, dating apps are quite popular among my friends and acquaintances. Before these apps took over, meeting people relied on physical proximity or specific circumstances, often beginning with an initial conversation that eventually led to dating… But now, it seems that the apps have stripped people away of the pleasure of foreplay? The irony is that, many people I’ve encountered expect commitment from the first date.”

(https://www.varcultural.eu/proiecte/matched-society/)

A man does not seek a particular type woman, but rather the Feminine Principle, which is best expressed through a specific woman. A woman does not seek a particular type of man, but rather a specific Masculine Principle, which can only be truly reflected by a man. (Anima and Animus – energetic models that make us believe there is a he or a she just for us, according to analytical psychology by Carl Jung).

What happens when a woman is drawn to a man or when a man is drawn to a woman? But where does this attraction come from? (We do not strictly refer to erotic attraction). The key lies in the polarity between the two principles. The greater the disparity in polarity, the stronger the attraction (high polarization = stronger attraction). Each individual (regardless of gender) seeks the opposite pole to achieve unity and a sense of wholeness. This connection is often fleeting and ephemeral especially when the balance of principles is unstable, but it becomes profound and long-lasting once equilibrium is established (A. Nuță, 2005).

We never love a man or a woman for their qualities. These only represent the outer layer of a human being through which the archetypal essence comes to light. What a person is constantly seeking is the complementary part of themselves – the opposite principle that lies dormant within them but is only brought to life in someone else – in order to become complete. 

The myths of love – true love conquers everything, love is immediately recognized at first sight (deep, genuine love grows over time), there’s only one person meant for you (soulmates who are perfectly complementary), the ideal partner will meet all your needs (leading to disappointment and resentment), and strong sexual attraction equals true love (risk – you may become trapped in an unhealthy relationship) – prevent a proper response to each partner’s needs (such as feeling appreciated, validated, recognized, respected, valued, accepted, supported, encouraged, comforted, stimulated, having autonomy, closeness, communication, or tactile-kinesthetic needs).

Based on our interviews and survey results, it seems that respondents had high expectations in their dating life and ended up feeling disappointed (over 50% of individuals report having unsuccessful experiences on dating apps, possibly because they haven’t accepted or realized the myths about love are just myths/falsehoods).

Relationships (especially romantic ones) require a lot of work, starting with work on one’s sef, and involve commitment, seriousness, responsibility, trust, communication, respect, dedication, patience, and listening among other things. Each partner comes with their own emotional wounds that they may (unconsciously) hope to heal. Being in love is a “modified state of consciousness”, and projection often plays a role in it – we project onto our partner the positive qualities of our parents or the image of other significant figures who took care of us when we were young (like our grandparents). This determines us to view our partner as a potential healer of our own emotional wounds, making us feel secure, euphoric and hopeful. Physiologically, serotonin levels rise and sexual desire increases. Psychologically, we see our partner as a magical being who seems to know exactly what we want at every moment, shares our feelings and allows us to relive our childhood with a renewed energy.

What everybody wants is to experience that “falling in love” sensation, which, at its peak, evolves into a euphoric state of living (falling asleep thinking about the other person, waking up with them on your mind and wanting to be with them every minute of your life). It’s a fundamental human need to go beyond your limits and merge with something greater than yourself, to transcend the feeling of being a separate entity and connect with another person in a state of bliss or fulfillment. Suddenly, the person we love becomes an ideal, their flaws and shortcomings become a source of admiration. Our family and friends’ opinions, if not outright ridiculous, are often tainted by various forms of envy, selfishness or misunderstanding. At times, this can even jeopardize the network of interpersonal relationships.

The experience of falling in love with someone reverberates, much like an echo, the early experience of merging with the maternal figure, a memory long since forgotten. In this context, the reawakening of a sense of omnipotence which is reminiscent of one’s first months of life as a baby, is far from coincidental. When in the presence of a beloved partner, no obstacles seem insurmountable; everything seems possible and challenges lose their significance and weight. Once immersed in a relationship to the complete exclusion of your friends and family, problems dissipate, the future appears bright and potential opponents retreat. The analogy between the illusory nature of these emotions/expectations and the illusory sense of omnipotence experienced by a one-year-old child, who genuinely sees themselves as the supreme ruler of the world, is both clear and striking.

This attitude can be easily explained as it follows: for the one in love, evolution has ended. The beloved one is perceived as inherently perfect, they have reached the highest level of sublimity, beyond which there is nothing more. Concepts of evolution, progress or development become irrelevant. Any perceived imperfections or weaknesses are seen merely as “charming little quirks”, insignificant blemishes in an otherwise flawless whole. When someone is in love, there is nothing left to alter. The happiness is so strong that one desires for time to stand still and for things to remain precisely as they are.

Within two years, reality sets in for everyone. The once-reserved and self-confident person becomes distant and unengaged. They lose their exuberance and liveliness. They become rather superficial. They open their eyes, they listen more carefully and the information they stumble upon is offensive to their “in-love” self. The quirks that once seemed endearing or unimportant become intolerable faults. It’s a new reality where dishes remain unwashed in the sink, socks are scattered around the house, clothes pile up on chairs and books refuse to stay in order on the shelves. What has become of the thrill of falling in love? What has become of romantic and symbiotic love? One self’s boundaries are firmly established, and each individual realizes they have their own identity, personal preferences, expectations, tastes, desires and even prejudices. This is the point where the electric excitement of being in love comes to an end.

But what makes falling in love such a uniquely intense experience is its predominant erotic component (the ultimate goal being our species reproduction). Falling in love is fueled by a very strong sexual drive. Apart from that, it is also important to note that it is something beyond our control; we can’t decide whether or not we fall in love.

Other potential scenarios include: falling in love with someone who is not well-suited for you, while the person you respect and admire fails to spark any excitement inside you; developing a passion for someone who will inevitably complicate your life and the lives of those significant to you on a social or professional level; not being stimulated by the person who would best support your personal growth. 

Oftentimes, the early stages of a relationship reveal critical information – either explicitly or implicitly – about the nature of future conflicts and the potential for either a successful continuation of the relationship or a breakup.

The most paradoxical aspect associated with this level of integration is the partners’ capacity to COEXIST COMFORTABLY despite their differences, even when these differences involve deep-rooted beliefs and values. For instance, partners might have different religious views (Orthodox v. Catholic, Jewish v. Protestant) without adversely affecting the relationship. This requires each partner to acknowledge the other as being a DISTINCT INDIVIDUAL, entitled to express themselves in their own way. However, mere acknowledgment is not enough. Accepting the other person (without harbouring frustration), AS THEY ARE, is just as crucial. Accumulating frustrations doesn’t mean genuine acceptance but rather playing a role (which consumes considerable energy). Eventually, one may become exhausted from continuing to play that role.

Moreover, being able to accept the other person is only preceded by one’s own self-acceptance. Individuals who exhibit high levels of differentiation and psychological integration also tend to demonstrate high levels of SELF-ACCEPTANCE. Self-acceptance is not about yielding to irrational impulses (which is mere impulsiveness!), but allowing one’s mental contents to reach consciousness. Once these thoughts, needs, and emotional experiences are accessible at this level of one’s being, they can be differentiated. Subsequently, the conscious self can determine a specific course of action. (A. Nuta, 2006).

Hollywood culture teaches us to automatically like the concept of a serious relationship but often overlooks the necessary elements required to sustain it, such as sacrifices, patience, open communication and active listening. Honesty is the foundation of every successful relationship; in an ideal scenario, if something is unsatisfactory, both women and men should be able to address it openly with no problem.  “I find the lack of maturity of many individuals to be the most off-putting aspect, and I’m sure that they perceive it the same way.”

(https://www.vice.com/ro/article/z3xbex/oameni-pe-tinder-în-relatii).

Works cited:

  1. Nuță, Despre iubirea nonposesivă și exuberantă, Ed. SPER, București, 2006
  2. Nuță , Psihologia cuplului, Ed. SPER, București, 2006

https://varcult.typeform.com/to/EzVJ4Nv1

https://www.forbes.com/health/dating/bumble-vs-tinder/

https://www.vice.com/ro/article/z3xbex/oameni-pe-tinder-în-relatii

Algorithmic Love

Mihai S. Rusu

What is love? has remained a question without a definitive answer, just like many other profound philosophical inquiries concerning existence. The extensive literary tradition, which poetically and narratively encapsulates the experience of love, illustrates that individuals are generally more skilled at experiencing love than at providing an analytical explanation of it. Social sciences are no exception: interpersonal love has not traditionally been a major focus within psychology and sociology, disciplines particularly suited to exploring such social phenomena. Only in recent decades have psychologists (particularly those specializing in social psychology) developed theoretical frameworks of love, such as Robert Sternberg’s triangular theory, and sociologists have begun to examine love as a socio-culturally constructed experience.

If we don’t know for sure “what” love is, sociology and the social sciences can indicate “how” love manifests. Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman wrote a book in which he talked about “liquid love” (Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds, Cambridge: Polity, 2003). This is specific to the late modernity of our postmodern era shaped by a consumerist ethos, emotional indifference (adiaphora) and sexualized hedonistic individualism. It radically differs from the “solid” forms of romantic love prevalent in modern society, prior to the cultural and sexual revolutions of 1968: love that forms the basis of marriage, love infused with the myth of eternity and the doctrine of soulmates. This “until-death-do-us-part” kind of love has been replaced in postmodern society by liquid love: transient and mercurial, often reduced to flings and one-night stands. A liquefied form of love, dissociated from marriage, revealing the fragility of human relationships within the framework of neoliberal postmodernity.

Zygmunt Bauman’s theory of “liquid love” reaches its peak in the algorithmic love facilitated by digital platforms. Following Tinder, which launched in the fall of 2012, dating apps have gained worldwide popularity in recent years. These apps have diversified along never-ending patterns: we have standard apps (Bumble), apps for married people (Ashley Madison) and single parents (Stir – Single Parent Dating), for seniors (eharmony & SilverSingles), for Christians (ChristianMingle), for Jews (Jswipe), for Muslims (Salams & Muzz), for Latino and African-American communities (Latiner & BlackCupid), for LGBTQ+ users (Grindr & HER), as well as apps for elites (EliteSingles) and intellectuals (MeetMindful).

On these dating apps, flirting and the unpredictability of social interactions are technologically replaced by the predetermined work of algorithms. What once occurred organically in the flow of everyday life – the magic of daily encounters – now transpires as a consequence of algorithmic programming. After creating an account and setting their preferences, users are left with the task of meticulously selecting other profiles that have passed the app’s filters. Flirting, exchanged glances and the emotional tension of interacting with a potential romantic partner in physical spaces are all replaced by two simple actions: “swipe right” if you’re interested, “swipe left” if you’re not. From there, we wait for the technological magic of the algorithmic black box. And after that we engage in fleeting encounters where we both consume and are consumed in a never-ending process.

As instruments for interpersonal connection, online dating apps such as Tinder can be seen as functional equivalents of the traditional matrimonial ads in print media. However, there is a significant distinction: while matrimonial ads – as the name suggests – were primarily intended to facilitate marital arrangements, dating apps obstruct the institution of marriage, being mostly used for exploring a broader spectrum of romantic partners. While matrimonial ads operate within the framework of a “marriage market”, dating apps serve as digital tools helping users to navigate through a far more dynamic socio-sexual marketplace of interpersonal relationships.

Immediately after they were introduced to the public, dating apps were welcomed by certain segments of society (particularly by those who place their faith in the idea that technology can solve humanity’s greatest challenges) as a techno-digital solution to the intricate problem of love. They thought that postmodern society had finally acquired a platform suited to the digital era: fast, efficient and without too many moral obligations, if any at all. However, the Tinder revolution and the platformization of the dating culture institutionalized by it have led to the commercialization of intimacy and the commodification of the self. People “sell” themselves as products on the erotic-romantic marketplace created by these apps. Rather than offering a technological solution to the problem of love in postmodernity, dating apps have been criticized for creating a “hookup culture” where the primary concern is the optimization of encounters for the purpose of fleeting sexual engagements.

Research in the social sciences on dating apps have highlighted two additional aspects associated with this digital “hookup culture”: the commodification of the self and the objectification of others. The first aspect refers to the strategies employed by users to craft and sell their own images as being socio-erotically desirable on dating platforms. The main criticism is that dating apps, even more so than other social media networks like Facebook and Instagram, encourage users to pump up their digital personas on platforms like Tinder in order to be admired, selected and ultimately consumed. The self and particularly its digital projection, become a commodity whose value is determined only by its quality of being desirable on the dating app marketplace.

Users who commodify their selves become “romantic entrepreneurs” on digital apps. Objectification goes hand in hand with the commodification of the self. It reduces others to mere objects of desire that can be selected (or not) with a single “swipe”. There’s no mistake that among academic papers written on the subject of dating apps, the term “relation-shopping” has surfaced. This term metaphorically describes how users enter these apps and navigate a virtual “mall” of relationships, choosing potential partners similarly to how one might select products from the store shelves.

In a digitalized world, the nature of love (What is love?) is no longer a matter of great importance and the very possibility of love becomes the most relevant inquiry: Is love – whatever its definition might be – possible in an environment dominated by digital intimacies and algorithmic matchmaking? In such a world, love is no longer in the air; it rather becomes something that can be algorithmically programmed within the digital infrastructure of a digital platform.