This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.

***

The modern dating market has been so efficient at reducing romance to metrics that there’s a movie about it. Last year’s romantic drama hit, aptly titled Materialists, put a finer point on this trend, its characters navigating dating lives full of heights, salaries, and hairlines rattled off like baseball card statistics. Yet while the film centered on a New York highbrow matchmaker, the real culprit behind modern materialist dating is a far more popular way to meet: dating apps.

If the film’s portrayal of partners as portfolios feels exaggerated, it’s not by much. It resonated with audiences precisely because of how recognizable the shallowness has become. The characters routinely reference people’s “stats” and “market value,” taking the phrase “she can do better” to new and depressingly intricate levels of specificity. The problem, then, doesn’t lie in the fact that people have preferences. Unrequited love, yearning, and other frustrations with the imperfect romantic market have kept love from being too boring — or too easy — since presumably the fall of man. Instead, the change lies in modern dating systems, training us to see every one of our romantic interests as data.

The omnipresence of dating apps is hard to explain to those who were lucky enough to find a partner before they became mainstream. Even the email dating of the late ’90s à la You’ve Got Mail seems positively quaint in comparison, back when a single-digit percentage of couples were meeting online. Now, over 50% of couples meet online, primarily via dating apps, making them less of a whimsical plot device and more of a begrudging fact of romantic life for those seeking love.

It’s not working very well. Despite the ability to download a wide variety of digital matchmakers from the App Store, singles say the dating market is getting worse, not better. The majority of singles say their dating lives aren’t going well, and it’s difficult to find people to date; nearly half say they’ve noticed dating has gotten harder in the last decade. They aren’t crazy, either. As the average age of first marriages increases and marriage rates themselves reach historic lows, it’s hard to see what, exactly, we’ve achieved with the introduction of the apps. More choice has not produced better outcomes, and there’s a reason for that.

If dating apps were perfect reflections of the romantic market, they could be ruled out as a culprit, but a closer look at swipe apps shows how they directly engineer the consumerist mentality plaguing modern romance. Dating apps combine gambling mechanics, aimed at increasing the amount of time spent on them, with a “baseball card” style format consisting of a few carefully curated photos, a bio constrained to punchlines or slogans, and a handful of sortable traits such as height, job, education, or politics. The swiping mechanic then turns romantic interest into a binary decision, forcing snap judgments made in seconds.

This system rewards traits that result in positive first impressions — e.g., good looks — but have no correlation with long-term relationships, helping the apps avoid losing users, but hurting those users’ chances at wedding bells. With an endless supply of options and a casino-like momentum to “keep playing,” the resulting loop of people trying to optimize their prospective partner’s stats is a predictable, perhaps even intentional, outcome of the design.

Of course, millennials and Generation Z are hardly the first generations to want wealthy, attractive spouses. The desire for hypergamy, or “marrying up,” in all its forms, is as natural a human inclination as romance itself. Dating apps didn’t invent this instinct, but they directly and dramatically accelerated it by stripping away the real-world encounters that once kept it in check. In a more connected, less isolated culture, attraction often grew through proximity and familiarity: the boy next door, the coworker, or the friend of a friend. You learned who someone was before you learned what they earned.

The downstream effects of this shift extend far beyond bad first dates. With dating becoming more of an exercise in optimization, commitment is perpetually deferred, contributing directly to delayed marriage, declining birth rates, and a growing population of permanently single adults. At the same time, our current state of affairs fuels resentment and polarization between the sexes, causing men and women to view one another as adversaries competing for leverage rather than partners building a shared future. We are ending up with more than just broken dating: a feedback loop of loneliness, mistrust, and demographic decline that no amount of swiping efficiency can fix.

In an increasingly atomized society made more distant by technology, dating begins with résumés rather than relationships. When your introduction to someone is his job title, height, or income bracket, material considerations naturally take precedence over character, turning a universal human impulse into the dominant organizing principle of modern romance.

***

Alina Voss is a freelance writer based in Columbus, Ohio.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Menu

Dating Apps Turned Romance Into A Casino — And We’re All Losing