People keep telling me that dating today is a war zone, facing all kinds of challenges.
Dating apps don’t seem to be directly trying to help solve the problem as much as generate revenue. In fact, they are very directly motivated to not make great long term matches.
Some people seem think that just getting out there and hoping for the best is the answer. Maybe that’s true, but it’s still very random. I was wondering about a hypothetical alternative:
What if you could go to an agency of some kind get rated through a thorough evaluation process? Would that be helpful ? It’s not perfect, and many things are hard to measure. But maybe it’s a less random starting point and can escape the exclusively money driven approach of dating apps.
Go find some co-ed hobbies. Meet someone with similar interests.
Hobbies? In this economy?
Sure. You just need to find cheap hobbies, like hiking (depending on where you live).
So I can get murdered and have my body dumped in the woods?
Yeah, that would really ruin the dating outcome we’re kinda shooting for I feel.
If that’s your dream, I won’t stop you.
But there are groups that do hikes together. And typically murderers aren’t interested in audience participation.
When I was thinking through the challenge of entering dating, little did I realize that we’d soon be exchanging murderer dodging tips.
Valuable knowledge no doubt but damn 😂
Removed by mod
If you’re the only one in “your zone” then you’re gonna likely have a bad time. Going out to places where you can meet a partner with similar interests is how you get a good long term relationship, but you’re welcome to try finding one in “your zone”.
Dating / marriage agencies already exist. They predate the internet. But there are also some online ones that ask for interests, lifestyle, … and then do the matchmaking with some algorithms.
Though, I don’t know why you mention the money aspect… That’s a service that is offered to people for-profit. Usually quite expensive. On the flipside you can be pretty sure the person on the other side is taking it serious if they’re willing to pay that kind of money, and not some troll or there for short-term things or other purposes…
Except that you do not even know if the other person is real at all or just a bot or fake account made to get you to pay money.
Are there agencies who (still) do this? I’m pretty sure that’s fraud.
The only people I hear this sort of thing from IRL are also the ones who struggle to get out and make friends.
Lots of the free “third spaces” are gone. Churches are on the decline. The pandemic fucked everyone’s socialization up. This isn’t just a dating problem, it’s a relationship problem.
Paying for a matchmaking service is not a new idea. Someone with no friends and nothing to talk about besides work is still going to have a limited pool of people interested in dating them, even if they pay for matches.
I seriously think most (not all bc there are always special situations) would benefit from getting into some hobbies and maybe therapy rather than expensive matchmaking services.
Church itself was never my third place, but yea, I feel like third places in general need more love. Going to a physical third place is probably less common these days, yet something we need, both as individuals and as a society.
There’s hobbies places, kinda, but it’s a bit less varied in the people there and often less accessible than a traditional third place.
Online forums are more accessible, but lack other good characteristics of a third place, imho.It’s obviously not the case for everyone, and I don’t mean this as a generalization, but I’ve seen some people looking for dates who are also a bit too focused on their search, sinking their own ship.
I didn’t meet my wife by hunting for a wife.
I met her doing fun things with other fun people, in whom I had no romantic interest whatsoever, and we eventually met as friends of a friend and it snowballed from there.If you desire romantic companionship, start by making non-romantic friends?
I’m not saying that’s easy either, I know I’ve often been too drained from work to do much socializing.I didn’t meet my wife by hunting for a wife. I met her doing fun things with other fun people, in whom I had no romantic interest whatsoever
Been with my husband 23 years, married for 20. I met him when I had given up on romance and was just exploring new hobbies with friends.
Btw the hobby was swing dancing, and I recommend dance class to everybody. It’s fun, active, social, and gives you confidence at weddings and other parties. Finding a romantic partner is just bonus.
If you desire romantic companionship, start by making non-romantic friends?
I tend to agree. For me, an otherwise unfulfilled person looking for a fulfilling successful romantic relationship is kind of like a poor person trying to become a millionaire. You should take care of your basic needs before aiming for something that, probably, few people ever realistically get to have.
That said, overwhelmingly, what I want is friendship (love and understanding) but it’s much, much harder to find ways to meet people for friendship than a romantic relationship. There is no friendship app on the same level as the dating apps. People who want to get in my pants text back much more reliably than potential friends I meet even irl. I shouldn’t complain because having a lot of suitors is a pleasant problem to have but I work unsociable hours and on more days than I care to admit, the only human contact I get outside of work is on dating apps, which is not a happy situation for me.
Yea, it’s hard to organically meet new people these days.
A “third place” would be nice, but I don’t think I’ve really had one in my life for a while. A place that’s neither home nor work, where there’s no strings attached and random people hanging out.
I imagine that’s also frustrating to not be looking for the same thing as the few you do end up meeting.
Removed by mod
So I guess I deserve to be alone for that according to you?
I don’t think I’ve said that and I’m sorry if that’s how it came across.
I don’t think anyone deserves loneliness, but no one deserves companionship either. “Deserving” just has nothing to do with human partnerships.
No matter what we do, neither of us is ever entitled to anyone’s time, let alone their companionship. Potential partners are human beings like any of us and not something you can just get from a transaction or fulfilling a list of checkboxes.The first step is someone else wanting to spend some of their time with us instead of literally anything else they could be doing.
Something fun didn’t need to be fancy, in my case I volunteered to supervise a field trip.
While I did have fun doing it, it’s also kinda like work.
I was doing my thing, met some people, made a friend or two and was later introduced to someone else who later happened to become my partner.
I obviously don’t deserve my partner for doing whatever led to this chain of events, but it would never have happened if I didn’t.Removed by mod
I’ve been with my GF for 2 years next January but we met in college we hit it off as really good friends and frankly I wasn’t expecting anything to come of it and here we are
We’re just two weirdos being weird with half our conversation being inside joke gibberish
I forgot what I was gonna say so there’s my anecdote
My current wife and I met in our local trap house.
We knew we lived close and had common interests and it’s been amazing!
Aww SatansMaggotyCumFart, that’s so sweet and romantic 😊
Is that a house that just blasts trap music all day?
It usually means that it’s the kind of house where you go shoot heroin and pass out on a dirty mattress next to a complete stranger.
I remember hearing about groups on the radio where you go on adventures with other single people looking for someone that seems like a cool way to do it
Dating is completely fucked for introverts and poor people. I heard the same “tips” all the time but those aren’t applicable for many people, myself included.
5 years ago I met my wife on Tinder. I swiped with a paid “super like” to get to the front of the line. It worked. I would imagine tinder is still your best bet as far as getting to actually meet someone, but anything more than a bungled meetup is dependent on you not being a shit show, having a little charm, not being completely broke or devoid of motivation, etc. everyone’s mileage is gonna vary.
+1, if I might math so.
Dating is what prostitution would be like if it was developed by EA. Take the same tired PvP mechanics, carve out even more of the core experience to sell as DLC, add gambling mechanics and a monthly subscription and for some reason people still play it.
What you describe at least was the entire selling point if the dating site eHarmony. I have a few family members that found their spouse through it, over 20 years ago at this point, for whatever that’s worth.
What if you could go to an agency of some kind get rated through a thorough evaluation process?
Those agencies exist, but they all use some algorithms as well, nobody is doing matchmaking by hand. Usually they charge quite a fee to throw your name into the ring, so there’s a bit of a (positive) selection bias in the sense that you don’t have too many bottom feeders in the pool, but that doesn’t make the dating experience any less exhausting.
I’m still thinking that interest-based hobby groups are the best way to find someone like-minded. At least you know from the onset that the person has one thing in common with you…
If you don’t have income, dating apps are completely useless.
What if you could go to an agency of some kind get rated through a thorough evaluation process? Would that be helpful ? It’s not perfect, and many things are hard to measure. But maybe it’s a less random starting point and can escape the exclusively money driven approach of dating apps.
Matchmaking agencies are actually still a real thing. You can pay them to have an actual person look at your file and set you up with other people who apply to the agency. Its expensive but can absolutely be worth it depending on how good the matchmaker is.
Love is not a logical thing and applying such rigidity is not a statistically very effective approach. It’s a social thing, dating, and you kinda need to play the game. The upside is that it’s a fun game if you play it right. It is random, and that’s just part of it. I would argue that the randomness is actually one of the main reasons it can be so enjoyable.
Many of the people who might call it a “warzone” are frustrated men, who are mad that women are putting up with less bullshit these days, and those same women who are dealing with a large amount of those entitled, aforementioned men.
The problem is not the how. The problem is that your agency is a company driven by profit. How do you make an agency that’s not driven by profit in a capitalist and consumerist society?
Easy. You either set it up as a nonprofit (still not great in terms of incentives) or, better, as a consumers (or members) cooperative.
Alternatively, you don’t - you modify the incentives. Agency sets a one time, lifetime membership fee. Every failed match they set you up with refunds you a percentage of the balance.
Detailed example:
Let’s assume it’s a $1000 membership, 5% refund.
First match works out? They keep the $1000 First match fails? You get $50 back. Second fails? You get another $47.50 (2% of the remaining $950) By match #45, you’ve been refunded 90% and they’re still holding less than $100.
Why it works:
This strongly incentivizes the agency to make the best possible match as quickly as possible. Users aren’t incentivized to join fraudulently because they’ll never get more out than they put in. The agency has no reason to create fake profiles, since a bad match costs them money.
Where it (arguably) fails:
-
This incentive structure is designed for long-term, monamorous relationships. It fails to account for poly relationships. People using it for short term hook-ups would settle over time into #2 below.
-
After a certain number of bad matches, it’s not worth it to the agency to put any effort into making a good match. Since they make the most money on early matches, their incentive is to connect the most “desirable” candidates with new members. People with more failed matches will most likely be connected to … other people with more failed matches.
Arguably, this is a feature not a bug. For new members, it means they don’t get spammed by long-time members that are hard to get along with or not actually looking for a long term relationship. For the ones that the early match algorithms didn’t work put for, it means they’ll at least get exposed to different groups of people over time - including others that failed to match for similar reasons as themselves.
- Even if the user never makes a successful match and gives up, the agency still gets paid. An alternate strategy for the agency could be to make the worst possible matches so members give up early and they keep more of the membership fee.
This would not do wonders for their reputation and is probably not a good long term strategy for them - at least on the early matches. After a certain number of failures though, it might be an effective way to cut losses.
Indeed. I’d add that you need the application open source and respectful of people’s data and privacy.
Then there is another problem : you need people to adopt your application and use it. Because regardless of the qualities, the most important thing is the number of people using the service. That’s why Facebook is still not dead for example.
-
