"The men in this town have a serious case of pussy affluenza"
August 9, 2015 11:24 PM   Subscribe

"I call it the Dating Apocalypse,” says a woman in New York, aged 29. “Guys view everything as a competition,” [Alex] elaborates with his deep, reassuring voice. “Who’s slept with the best, hottest girls?” With these dating apps, he says, “you’re always sort of prowling. You could talk to two or three girls at a bar and pick the best one, or you can swipe a couple hundred people a day—the sample size is so much larger. It’s setting up two or three Tinder dates a week and, chances are, sleeping with all of them, so you could rack up 100 girls you’ve slept with in a year.”
posted by modernnomad (148 comments total) 27 users marked this as a favorite


 
Obvious counterrevolution: In 2017 everyone will be announcing their refreshing celibacy or dedicated monogamy in a 100 obvious ways. The human misery index will remain unchanged worldwide.
posted by mrdaneri at 11:40 PM on August 9, 2015 [17 favorites]


And here I am, unable to keep Tinder on my phone because the thought of seeing the guy I like on it 'active x minutes ago' makes me physically ill.
posted by Quilford at 11:46 PM on August 9, 2015 [8 favorites]



At a booth in the back, three handsome twentysomething guys in button-downs are having beers. They are Dan, Alex, and Marty, budding investment bankers at the same financial firm, which recruited Alex and Marty straight from an Ivy League campus.
...
And what about unsolicited dick pics? “They want to see your dick,” insists Adam, 23, a male model in New York. “They get excited from it. They’re like, ‘Oh my God, you’re huge.’ ”


Another Vanity Fair article on dating habits with a lot of utility for the average person
posted by benzenedream at 11:47 PM on August 9, 2015 [70 favorites]


I'll admit to reading articles like this and automatically assuming that the author is just latching onto a small, hip subset of New York twenty-somethings and then projecting their behavior out onto the US as a whole.

“If I’m a guy and I’m going out and fucking a different girl every night, my friends are gonna give me high-fives and we’re gonna crack a beer and talk about it. Girls do the same, but they get judged. I don’t want it to be like that, but sometimes the world is the way it is and I can’t change it, so I just embrace it.”

And after reading a quote like that, I desperately hope I'm right.
posted by lunch at 11:48 PM on August 9, 2015 [33 favorites]


I did online dating in the pre-tinder era, and though now I am happily married I do kinda wish it had been around when I was doing the online thing. Though the people in this article all sound terrible, I would have been curious simply to experience what using it was like myself.
posted by modernnomad at 11:51 PM on August 9, 2015 [5 favorites]


Which is to say that it's incredibly disheartening that it seems straight men have gone from being completely oblivious to misogyny and double standards to having a vague recognition of them and simply not giving a shit.
posted by lunch at 11:53 PM on August 9, 2015 [124 favorites]


I'm a woman in nyc who until recently was single. (I did actually meet my boyfriend through okcupid. I'm as surprised as anybody.) Absolutely nothing in this article surprised me. One thing it didn't mention is "sport dating" in which men lie up a number of different dates for the same evening and then pick the best option and show up. Some men just enjoy knowing that several women are waiting for them, hoping for them to show up.

Also the article didn't talk about the male aggression you have to deal with if you have the temerity not to respond to someone. I've been called some pretty nasty things because I didn't respond to some dude I wasn't interested in.

As for dick pics, that bs that we say we hate it and when we actually love it makes me want to puke. My first okcupid date I met a guy in publishing. We had a WONDERFUL date. I couldn't believe how well we got along. He kissed me good night and five minutes later sent me a text message of his dick with the caption "Daddy wants to fuck you."

Also lumbersexual? Really?
posted by miss-lapin at 11:54 PM on August 9, 2015 [69 favorites]


I'm a guy and I've never used Tinder, so my perspective is limited, but I am a "millenial" and this previous essay seems truer to the way I hear my peers talking about these apps - i.e. a.) there are lots of creepy dudes, b.) the dudes in this article who say they are getting laid all the time with zero effort are full of shit.
posted by atoxyl at 11:57 PM on August 9, 2015 [18 favorites]


The article seems hyperbolic to me. I think there has always been a subset of the population for whom sex is a higher priority than romantic relationships. When marriage was the easiest way to get socially-approved sex on a regular basis, they did that. But marriage and relationships come with strings, a single partner won't always be in the mood, the sex may lack variety or "spice," etc. Better to Tinder than to get into a relationship and then cheat.

Doesn't mean there isn't still a subset of the population that is interested in building a romantic relationship and/or a family. It could be seen as a good thing that Tinder has made it easier for the two groups to keep to themselves.
posted by mantecol at 12:01 AM on August 10, 2015 [12 favorites]


I think Hookup Culture Is Wild And Out Of Control And Everybody Is Having A Shitload Of Crazy Meaningless Sex is one of those journalistic standards that every writer tries their hand at at some point in their career.

of all the dating apps/sites I've tried Tinder was the biggest wasteland. But I'm in the relative sticks, not NYC
posted by prize bull octorok at 12:05 AM on August 10, 2015 [63 favorites]


Followed closely by a breathless Everyone is staying home and masturbating, what is this, Japan? piece about 18 months later.
posted by mrdaneri at 12:09 AM on August 10, 2015 [63 favorites]


Okay, so when you look around, most people aren't actually that attractive, and certainly most of them aren't investment bankers or seniors at expensive private universities. Do ordinary young people do this or is it just another VF trend piece about the well-groomed children of the 0.5%?
posted by gingerest at 12:11 AM on August 10, 2015 [20 favorites]


I'll admit to reading articles like this and automatically assuming that the author is just latching onto a small, hip subset of New York twenty-somethings and then projecting their behavior out onto the US as a whole.

Scanning through - "budding investment bankers at the same financial firm, which recruited Alex and Marty straight from an Ivy League campus", "a Brooklyn photographer", "a marketing executive in New York"...

An extra subset is the kind of people available to speak to a Vanity Fair writer doing a piece on dating via Tinder and the like. There are surely lots more people using these apps who are not going to speak to a Vanity Fair person, ever, in their lives.

And there are definitely interesting things to be observed and said about how these apps are changing dating, but it would need to go beyond a few scattered quotes from researchers and professors and writers with a "kids these days!" overall subtext. Then again this is not a research paper...

But oh it’s so hilarious to read this as a parody of this kind of article... I mean, come on, how can you read this and keep a straight face, it makes me wonder if the parody effect is not intentional, really:

"Nick, with his lumbersexual beard and hipster clothes, as if plucked from the wardrobe closet of Girls, is, physically speaking, a modern male ideal. That he fulfills none of the requirements identified by evolutionary psychologists as what women supposedly look for in mates—he’s neither rich nor tall; he also lives with his mom—doesn’t seem to have any effect on his ability to get rampantly laid. "
posted by bitteschoen at 12:17 AM on August 10, 2015 [10 favorites]


Also, I imagine that when you're in the opinion-making business, as VF is, sex sells in a different way.

They offer the diagnosis on one page (you're not having enough sex!) and the prescription on the next (install Tinder and shroud yourself in the wares of their advertisers--clothing, scents, makeup, cars). You too can get laid like a 25-year-old investment banker!
posted by mantecol at 12:31 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


Ah, here's the real reason shit stories like this get published. Someone at Vanity Fair got pre-IPO shares?
posted by benzenedream at 12:41 AM on August 10, 2015 [29 favorites]


This is very nouveau American Psycho.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 12:45 AM on August 10, 2015 [38 favorites]


so you're saying
posted by mrdaneri at 12:47 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


benzenedream, whoa. We don't know if it's the case here, of course, (or just general ad friendliness or whatever) but I was thinking that the article is like a 6000-word Axe commercial.
posted by taz at 12:54 AM on August 10, 2015 [11 favorites]


The dating platforms are reducing the physical risk of new encounters – as there's a profile, interaction history, location data, etc.

In terms of who its empowering and disempowering, the American zeitgeist glorifies marriage for women a tremendous form of validation. The culture often continues to see female sexuality as something to be controlled (and exploited).

The article falls down in its breathless and shallow examination of people in their 20s coming to terms with sex. Tinder was conceived by a woman (and she's just launched Bumble which is a different take on Tinder).

Any innovation that makes a behaviour less risky, promotes the behaviour – especially something as fundamental as sex. In evolutionary terms, a market-economy for reproduction is infinitely superior for women to a situation of limited options. By reducing the risk of new encounters, Tinder is also giving women the opportunity to have sex with 100 people a year, with minimal risk (thanks to the big brother effects of the platforms).

The threat of physical violence has been a big threat for women, but now we're starting to develop behavioural tools like this that promote and enforce accountability. That's a huge win for women – and another blow to "masculinity", which is how this article really reads. The men sound like buffoons.
posted by nickrussell at 12:54 AM on August 10, 2015 [12 favorites]


Yeah, I really, really don't mind not being a part of this world. Too old, no smartphone, not conventially attractive enough, probably in the wrong location too. Fuck yeah!
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:55 AM on August 10, 2015 [10 favorites]


Twenty-Something trainee investment bankers sharing their thoughts on dating and gender with their Ivy League alumni?
I think they're not part of our world.
posted by fullerine at 12:58 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


Tinder was conceived by a woman

The only truly all-female conceived and created dating app is Lulu, which drove men insane with rage on its launch.
posted by colie at 1:03 AM on August 10, 2015 [19 favorites]


Pussy Affluenza was perhaps the most underrated Bond girl.
posted by acb at 1:05 AM on August 10, 2015 [93 favorites]


fullerine: I think they're not part of our world.

Who is this 'us' you are talking about?
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:08 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


And what about unsolicited dick pics? “They want to see your dick,” insists Adam, 23, a male model in New York. “They get excited from it. They’re like, ‘Oh my God, you’re huge.’ ”

Publishing this line is an act of aggression that is actively making the world a shittier place by creating more dick pics. I hope the editor feels bad for the rest of their fucking life.
posted by emptythought at 1:59 AM on August 10, 2015 [146 favorites]


Pussy Affluenza actually sounds like some sort of horrible disease.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:03 AM on August 10, 2015 [7 favorites]


It also literally sounds like a line taken directly from a PUA book that would go on to mention "betas" and other similar language.

What's the opposite of "pussy affluenza", being an "AFC"?
posted by emptythought at 2:08 AM on August 10, 2015 [9 favorites]


I've never used Tinder (and I've barely done any online dating at all), I'm married, and I live what feels like a world away from New York, so I'm not relating much to the people in the article. But I am reminded of the stories a friend told after doing her summer internship at a NYC publishing house in the 1990s of how openly sexually aggressive many men were -- there is an entitlement that the kind of men who get interviewed for a Vanity Fair article seem to acquire. There is a quote about this from Coontz in the article:

“Young women’s expectations of safety and entitlement to respect have perhaps risen faster than some young men’s willingness to respect them,” says Stephanie Coontz, who teaches history and family studies at the Evergreen State College and has written about the history of dating. “Exploitative and disrespectful men have always existed. There are many evolved men, but there may be something going on in hookup culture now that is making some more resistant to evolving.”

I'm also reminded of how even though the kind of person interviewed here might be having sex with a lot of people, they aren't necessarily having nearly as much sex as do people in steady relationships, or as high quality of sex. "According to multiple studies, women are more likely to have orgasms in the context of relationships than in uncommitted encounters. More than twice as likely, according to a study done by researchers at the Kinsey Institute and Binghamton University."
posted by Dip Flash at 2:22 AM on August 10, 2015 [8 favorites]


Ugh, that phrasing. At two times in this article, when quoting women who are in a group, the author does this thing: "The blonde named Reese" "the one with the bracelets" "the one with the Betty Boop voice" "the one who looks like a seventies movie star" "the one who looks like a Swedish tennis player". This voice is disturbingly dehumanizing and a lot like Tinder itself in making women into commodifiable types.
posted by alltomorrowsparties at 2:23 AM on August 10, 2015 [92 favorites]


This voice is disturbingly dehumanizing and a lot like Tinder itself in making women into commodifiable types.

Especially when contrasted with how almost all of the men are described in terms of their careers. Ugh.
posted by Dip Flash at 2:28 AM on August 10, 2015 [86 favorites]


So, here's the thing.

'Sex with a desirable stranger from the convenience of your phone!' is an obvious fantasy.

There's nothing wrong with fantasies. There's nothing wrong with even acting them out, safely, as consenting adults in consenting ways.

That process has literally zero intersectionality with a relationship. That it would end up in a Vanity Fair piece is not a surprise, nor is it surprising that a stratospheric VC round would be involved: fantasies have a nice margin, all things considered-- and great repeat business.
posted by mrdaneri at 2:32 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


Oh, is that the thing? What makes you feel that that is the thing here?
posted by Too-Ticky at 2:34 AM on August 10, 2015


Do I think needlessly atomicized selves are exploited by outside entities for gain in most circumstances....? Cynically, yes.
posted by mrdaneri at 2:42 AM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]



This voice is disturbingly dehumanizing and a lot like Tinder itself in making women into commodifiable types.


Love In The Time Of Neoliberalism.
posted by acb at 3:00 AM on August 10, 2015 [20 favorites]


Contest idea: take Candace Bushnell's early 1990s (pre-HBO) "Sex and the City" columns for the New York Observer and see how few words you need to change to make them effective 2015 moral panic stories founded on male structural advantage in the NYC dating market. I'd say winners will be under 1%.
posted by MattD at 3:47 AM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]


Re the idea that this is somehow liberating young women from the shackles of marriage, maybe it's worth reviewing some of the issues for women described in TA
- Increased body image anxiety, given a greater emphasis on looks
- Feeling devalued (being an "option, not a priority")
- Inequality in deciding when a relationship is serious
- Anxiety about making claims for emotional intimacy or security (in even long-term flings); anxiety about being labelled a not-good-enough feminist for admitting a need for that at all
- Double standard (still); judgement
- Bad sex (with men who admit they enjoy being selfish and are uninterested in the idea of the work and "stuff" of relationships)

My thoughts:
- Having sex with 100 men in a year may be delightful (if some of it is actually good sex), but it's not like it's devoid of risk. I.e. this may or may not be gynecologically sound for everyone (damned regressive plumbing)
- The institution of marriage may not reflect psychologically ideal relationship models for everyone, or even many, but it's pretty great for guaranteeing rights, not just "validation". It's not a terrible container for reproduction and child-rearing in a 2015 economy (not that that should drive commitments, but you know, it might be a somewhat relevant part of the story)
- Hookups are one thing (I am not opposed to these, personally, in principle or in fact); insta-web-hookup culture is quite a different (emotion and self and norm-shaping) thing.
posted by cotton dress sock at 4:20 AM on August 10, 2015 [44 favorites]


Cotton dress sock, I can only agree, which is why I wanted to state that monetary gain is a thing here, just not The Thing. Thank you for expressing all of this so clearly.
posted by Too-Ticky at 4:28 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


I have a spouse now (NYC) who I met through a community group, but I have to admit, the thought of ever dating here again terrifies me. For reasons articulated in this thread.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:38 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


Pussy affluenza is a real and troubling phenomenon- my cat is absolutely convinced he lives in a higher income bracket than he actually does, and insists that it shields him from the consequences of his actions.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 4:57 AM on August 10, 2015 [93 favorites]


I was never single with enough money to afford that kind of lifestyle but even if I had been the idea of three dates a week with different people sounds like some kind of hell. I'd be a shivering emotional wreck before half a month of that. I'd rather go on three job interviews a week.
posted by octothorpe at 5:07 AM on August 10, 2015 [31 favorites]


Oh god reading this article is like high school again - everyone is having lots of sex apart from you.

Although this is likely a lie again.
posted by Erberus at 5:10 AM on August 10, 2015 [12 favorites]


This is where some of the boys who graduate from the school where I teach end up. And why I said to the librarian a couple of months back, "Why aren't our graduates doing anything useful?"
posted by Peach at 5:23 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


I think this author is getting Margaret Mead-ed
posted by showbiz_liz at 5:28 AM on August 10, 2015 [15 favorites]


I just want to say the comments in this thread made me fall in love with MetaFilter all over again.
posted by whimsicalnymph at 5:29 AM on August 10, 2015 [13 favorites]


"Pussy/Dick is low quality and abundant."
posted by clvrmnky at 5:35 AM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]


Contest idea: take Candace Bushnell's early 1990s (pre-HBO) "Sex and the City" columns for the New York Observer and see how few words you need to change to make them effective 2015 moral panic stories founded on male structural advantage in the NYC dating market. I'd say winners will be under 1%.

You just have to Ctrl-F "Zima" and "-tini" and include more women who work in various ill-defined "galleries".
posted by Svejk at 5:38 AM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


This article is depressing the absolute bejesus out of me.
posted by palomar at 5:39 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


Yes, I think they have a serious sample bias.

The 20-somethings who are NOT engaging in the hook-up culture aren't hanging out at a bar playing on Tinder.

They are at home, possibly in flannel pajamas, reading Metafilter. Well, at least that's what I was doing. My friend down the hall was watching Buffy: The Vampire Slayer DVDs and occassionally chatting online with me about the girl he liked but was too shy to approach.

Nerds: just like the poor, they will always be among us.

That said: there are a fair number of hookups that occur at science fiction conventions ...
posted by jb at 5:57 AM on August 10, 2015 [15 favorites]


I'm so happy to be old!!! Happy happy happy!!
posted by JanetLand at 6:06 AM on August 10, 2015 [15 favorites]


the story is 100% made-up bullshit if it makes you feel any better
posted by Awful Peice of Crap at 6:15 AM on August 10, 2015 [19 favorites]


I'm an Old, and I remember not just Candace Bushnell's pre-SATC column, but Bret Easton Ellis and Jay McInerney's 1980's novels chronicling the sexual excesses of the Hollywood and New York rich. Before them, there was Jackie Collins and Judith Krantz, and Jacqueline Susann's "Valley of the Dolls" before that. And Sidney Sheldon (Bloodline, anyone?).

True, this is presented as "nonfiction" and not a novel, but "Lookie the decadent lives of the 1%! *cue self-righteous tut-tutting*" is absolutely nothing new and is not just about Kids These Days standing on your lawn.

It's also reminiscent about 1980's moral panic articles about the Man Shortage as chronicled in Susan Faludi's Backlash. Again, being an Old, I was there for that Newsweek cover.

Nothing new under the sun here, except for Tindr. (And I bet you my last dollar that if Charles II's Restoration court had smartphones, the dandies and fops would be Tindr'ing the hell out of the court ladies, and probably Grindr'ing each other as well.)
posted by Rosie M. Banks at 6:22 AM on August 10, 2015 [29 favorites]


Hey nothing sells ads in Vanity Fair like fears that you are inadequately attractive! In that sense, you can regard this maybe as an advertorial.

Most people don't live in New York. A whole lot of New Yorkers aren't investment-banking douchebros. Lots of normal dating is still going on, with all the attendant joy/sadness/confusion.

Right now, an average-looking couple that would never be interviewed for a lifestyle magazine and is not living any kind of luxurious life is snuggled together in bed under a cheap comforter, drinking coffee and reading or watching TV. They'll get old together, maybe raise a kid or two, develop deeply un-hip hobbies, have fights, make up, worry, laugh, and hold on to each other. They'll never be rich. Their lives will be entirely unremarked except for their small circle of friends and family. I'd rather read about them. But you can't easily use them to sell aspirational goods, so here we are.
posted by emjaybee at 6:44 AM on August 10, 2015 [90 favorites]


It's just the hook-up culture with apps. The apps help the Id run free, I guess.

Also, it just doesn't scan for me that somebody would squeal over a dic pick based on size. I mean, I'm totally old, but getting anonymously pounded by a donkey dick just sounds sad.
posted by angrycat at 6:55 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


the story is 100% made-up bullshit if it makes you feel any better

Not....completely? I have a lot of late-20's/early 30's friends who use Tinder. We absolutely have sat around at bars flipping through one of our (well, theirs, as I am married and just living vicariously) phones and judging profiles, swiping left and right, laughing and treating it like a video game.
posted by Windigo at 7:19 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


> Especially when contrasted with how almost all of the men are described in terms of their careers.

Careers... or earnings potential?
posted by Sunburnt at 7:23 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


question: why is it 'sad' that people are pursuing non-monogamous, short-term relationships? why is this hook-up culture 'depressing?'

okay, maybe the cognitive dissonance is a little mortifying. people who think they are operating on that traditional monogamy to marriage narrative who then end up participating in hook-up culture are probably a mess of pathetic ambitions but I doubt that's the source of the pathos presented in this thread

is the VF sample biased? as a twenty-something who uses dating apps, I think I can easily, with bias of course, confirm their sample. middle-class aspirational yuppies who follow contemporary grooming/clothing trends, sports, regional hobbies make up about 80% of the profiles on Tinder. presumably they also make up a large proportion of the normal population

is it unfair for women? the narrative of slut vs player, yes. the fact that they are using it to meet their sexual needs, no. the dual control model that rose out of 90's research into sex drives seems to indicate that there's far more overlap in the desire for sex than there are differences

are most of the nerds not using dating apps? could be. but I also know that there's a thriving, if minority, community of poly/open/nerd/etc types on Tinder and OKCupid who use it less for hook-ups than for meeting new people. some of the most interesting friends that I've made in my city I met through dating apps. some of the most aggressively progressive folks I've met in this city, too. the primary difference between this group (my group) and the representative sample of Tinder/OKCupid seems to be that we don't frontload sex/dating/monogamy into our meet and greets. the rule that I've learned is flexibility. a date might not be a date. a date might lead to sex. a date might also lead to board games or a fetlife munch or etc. will VF write a profile about me and mine? probably not but, then again, I don't subscribe to VF and I don't really intend to do so anytime in the near future

which leads me back to my first question: is non-monogamy 'sad?' I don't know. my deep affection for my primary partner is great and we've built ourselves a good thing over the past half a decade. we've been through a lot. does this mean that every other single person on this planet must also experience this comfortable happiness that I possess and if they don't they are sad? I don't know. it's a strange question that I don't think I'd ever ask
posted by runt at 7:29 AM on August 10, 2015 [10 favorites]


I have no insights about Tinder or hookup culture, but if I were going to write an article that demonstrated the worst aspects of young men, I would definitely want to interview unmarried yuppies who work in the highly competitive world of New York high finance.
posted by Nevin at 7:31 AM on August 10, 2015 [5 favorites]


it's not non-monogamy that's sad to me, it's the commodification of women, the attitude in the article of "if i go out and bang a bunch of chicks i get high fives, if a chick does that she gets called a slut, sucks but what can you do, i personally embrace it" that makes me sad. that dudes know there's a double standard and they use it to their advantage. that they talk about women like they are literally objects, just holes to be fucked and thrown aside in favor of a new hole.
posted by palomar at 7:33 AM on August 10, 2015 [28 favorites]


Non monogamy isn't sad. Thinking that you'll be monogamous later in life when you find an ideal partner that won't sleep with you on a first date, while taking out women and sleeping with them on first dates, makes you an asshole.
posted by corb at 7:44 AM on August 10, 2015 [33 favorites]


yeah, the guys they profiled are bravado-spewing fuckboys who are sexist to a default. they are a representative norm of society and society sucks. would it be possible to move on from this point of non-contention?
posted by runt at 7:48 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


I did a fair amount of online dating in New York within the past 15 years (yes, 15. My first online date was through hotornot.com when I was a freshman in college, and my friends were so worried about the idea of my meeting a person from the internet that they shadowed us to the restaurant, which was a Thai place that I think no longer exists on west 3rd street--they had no reason to be worried; the sir was a complete gentleman). I have never experienced anything even approaching what this article describes.

Granted, by the time Tinder was a thing, I was no longer going on dates with strangers, so I can't speak to how that affected the situation, but I met a lot of guys through nerve.com (early-mid 2000s), myspace (someone should write an article about how, on myspace, it was somehow okay to write strangers and ask them on a date, but on facebook that was not okay), howaboutwe, and okcupid (which is how I met manmillipede). I definitely met people I didn't click with, and I even met some people who I actively disliked, but never once did anything like this appear.

This article has to be suffering from sample bias.

Either that or I seemed SO VERY UNLIKELY to be up for something casual that I never even came into the orbit of the kind of person who wants this sort of life. Maybe these were the guys that wrote bad messages! Maybe that's it: I only responded to truly excellent messages.
posted by millipede at 7:53 AM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


Manhattan is first a theme park for the wealthy, second a tourist destination and has been for years.
posted by jeff-o-matic at 8:02 AM on August 10, 2015 [5 favorites]


I've definitely seen the kind of behaviour described on dating sites and I've never been to New York and I'm decidedly not part of the 1% .
posted by peppermind at 8:06 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


Well, I'm old, but I believe this story has aspects of correctness.

I got married five years ago to someone I met on OKCupid (so far so good!) But OKCupid was exceptionally easy to meet women on. I was always looking for a long-term relationship, but young girls would show up and have their way with you and leave - and honestly, it was hard to complain. There's something about reducing the time between impulse and execution that reduces people's selectiveness.

So I'm quite sure that lots of people are swipe-dating, and getting laid by someone new every weekend - it's the logical progression of the technology.
posted by lupus_yonderboy at 8:13 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


"...a sort of all-day, every-day, handheld singles club..."

Masturbation has certainly changed since I was 15.
posted by crazylegs at 8:22 AM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]


I'm quite sure a lot of people are dry swallowing while a voice in their head intones thisisnotwhatiwantthisisnotwhatiwant
posted by mrdaneri at 8:24 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


if I were going to write an article that demonstrated the worst aspects of young men, I would definitely want to interview unmarried yuppies who work in the highly competitive world of New York high finance.

Tom Wolfe! A horny nation turns its eyes to you!
posted by octobersurprise at 8:25 AM on August 10, 2015 [14 favorites]


yeah, the guys they profiled are bravado-spewing fuckboys who are sexist to a default. they are a representative norm of society and society sucks. would it be possible to move on from this point of non-contention?


you wanted to know why hookup culture as portrayed in this article is depressing, this is why

a lot of men work really hard to ruin casual sex : what's new
posted by internet fraud detective squad, station number 9 at 8:27 AM on August 10, 2015 [36 favorites]


crazylegs: Masturbation has certainly changed since I was 15

There's an app for that too: WANKR.
posted by dr_dank at 8:30 AM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


This article is much better if you read the descriptions in David Attenborough-voice.
posted by nathan_teske at 8:52 AM on August 10, 2015 [6 favorites]


While I confess to being a little jealous on some levels - where was this tsunami of casual sex when I was single? - some of the quotes from the guys in that article make me want to take a boiling hot shower. What terminally icky people.
posted by ColdOfTheIsleOfMan at 9:01 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


Yeah I'm really enjoying both sides of "why this is depressing" in the comments.
posted by deathmaven at 9:06 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


I love Metafilter because sometimes something will pop up here in a FPP and I'll have read it somewhere else and had all these bad feelings and disgust about it but not really have been able to verbalize everything that rubbed me wrong, then I come here and find that a bunch of people far more eloquent than me have already dissected it for my scientific observation and confirmation of former mixed feelings.

So thanks.
posted by allkindsoftime at 9:10 AM on August 10, 2015 [23 favorites]


A reminder on the context of that dick pic quote: Here it is with the paragraph that follows it.
And what about unsolicited dick pics? “They want to see your dick,” insists Adam, 23, a male model in New York. “They get excited from it. They’re like, ‘Oh my God, you’re huge.’ ”

No woman I talked to said she had ever asked for one. And yet, “If you’re a girl who’s trying to date, it’s normal to get dick pics all the time,” said Olivia, 24, a Brandeis graduate. “It’s like we have dicks flying at us.”
Adam is full of shit.
posted by maryr at 9:13 AM on August 10, 2015 [28 favorites]


This article is much better if you read the descriptions in David Attenborough-voice.

Now try Werner Herzog.
posted by mudpuppie at 9:14 AM on August 10, 2015 [10 favorites]


Siri?
posted by maryr at 9:18 AM on August 10, 2015


Rich young people have always had more sex than the rest of us. Back when sex made babies, the aristocratic young people who were having more sex would hire wet nurses and nannies to deal with the inconvenient outcome.

On the plus side, the advent of birth control means that these aristocratic young people are no longer stealing the milk of poor babies in order to fill the world with their aristocratic spawn. So there's that.
posted by clawsoon at 9:19 AM on August 10, 2015 [15 favorites]


This is what you warn your kids about. They then tell you retirement communities are hotbeds of sexual profligacy. Then you recall the Suro Baths, though the affront to the human immune system is not as acute, it is a much broader phenomenon. The digital kids are set up for the surrogate intimacy of strangers.
posted by Oyéah at 9:29 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


This is so foreign to me that reading about it is like reading an anthropological report on an alien species
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:36 AM on August 10, 2015 [5 favorites]


Rich young people have always had more sex than the rest of us. Back when sex made babies, the aristocratic young people who were having more sex would hire wet nurses and nannies to deal with the inconvenient outcome.

Ha! No. I mean, yes, but not to the "more" part. Peasants screw(ed) a lot too. That's why there were (are) so many more of them. More mouths to feed is worth it to have more hands to work. You do get twice as many hands, after all.
posted by Sys Rq at 9:45 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


[A few comments deleted. If you wish the article were about something else, probably best to just pass the thread by. If you wish the thread were talking about some other aspect, go ahead and talk about the thing you think is important rather than complaining that other people aren't talking about it for you.]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:07 AM on August 10, 2015 [5 favorites]


In evolutionary terms, a market-economy for reproduction is infinitely superior for women to a situation of limited options.

Thank god EvoPsych has come up with a Just So story to explain the free market.
posted by OmieWise at 10:07 AM on August 10, 2015 [14 favorites]


They talk about how it’s not uncommon for their hookups to lose their erections. It’s a curious medical phenomenon, the increased erectile dysfunction in young males...

According to multiple studies, women are more likely to have orgasms in the context of relationships than in uncommitted encounters. More than twice as likely, according to a study done by researchers at the Kinsey Institute and Binghamton University.
There's an obvious line to be drawn that the author seems to have missed: Maybe men are also more likely to have orgasms in the context of a relationship.

It would certainly explain all the "'limp dicks coming at me...'"
posted by clawsoon at 10:25 AM on August 10, 2015 [6 favorites]


Question: people always ask for naked pictures. I don't have any. Why would i? I always say i'm old fat and hairy and don't like sex, but people still want photos. It seems to be taken as rude that i don't supply. How to explain that i really don't have any? That i'm not sure why i would? I barely have any photos of my family and friends, which maybe should change, why would i have photos of my naked body? (since clearly seduction isn't me). Is it rude not to have any? My arms aren't that long, anyway, and i don't own a mirror, so half my stomach is the max i can do. So far i have resorted to using stolen photos of another woman breastfeeding - an orangutan
posted by maiamaia at 10:27 AM on August 10, 2015 [7 favorites]


Is it rude not to have any?

Presumably you have access to a camera? One takes them, using mirrors or whatever.
posted by jayder at 10:30 AM on August 10, 2015


You could maybe send a picture of your sexy, sexy naked feet.
posted by Too-Ticky at 10:32 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


So far i have resorted to using stolen photos of another woman breastfeeding - an orangutan

This clearly shows that you're a super-hot woman with a great sense of humor who's just trying to brush me off because you think I don't have game. Clearly I need to be more persistent and annoying, because I will not be denied!

see also: Poe's law
posted by clawsoon at 10:38 AM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


This is so foreign to me that reading about it is like reading an anthropological report on an alien species.

After this comment and the David Attenborough-voice suggestion, I have nothing to add. But I can't figure out how the next tab over from this article had a perfect companion / complementary piece: A Millennial’s Guide to Kissing. (Yes, it's another NYT Modern Love column. That's what makes it a perfect complement.)

And in a rare exception to the rule, one of the reader's pick comments actually explains things well:

I think I see the problem. If you look very closely at the illustration, you can see that their heads are not connected to their bodies.
posted by RedOrGreen at 10:47 AM on August 10, 2015


The belief by a certain subset of males that women are just dying to see their junk is a baffling one. And let's face it; there's some variation, but not that much. They all pretty much work/look the same. I mean, if that's all a woman cared about, why bother with a man at all? They sell excellent battery-operated ones these days, in any size/shape/vibrating speed a person might want. Presumably a woman going to the trouble of dating a person is looking for something besides just that.

Although the more you read pieces like this, the more you wonder why she bothers.
posted by emjaybee at 10:50 AM on August 10, 2015 [7 favorites]


I'm a sex-positive, feminist, polyamorist trans guy, and I view sexual relationships just like nonsexual relationships: they come in all flavors, from lifelong bonds to a chance crossing of paths. I'm firmly in the camp of those who value casual sexual relationships as part of a full life's experience. But it should go without saying (and yet this article makes me feel I have to say it) that a hookup should be an encounter that is enjoyable and affirming for each party involved.

I'm sadly unsurprised by the attitude of the wealthy, apparently white jerkbros in this Vanity Fair piece. It's straight out of MIchael Kimmel's Guyland. There is a substantial subset of privileged cishet white men who go to fancy colleges and who adhere to a fratboy culture of misogyny for whom hookups are a game, a competition of belt-notching with their circle of bros, well beyond college. They treat women like objects to consume.

What I wonder about is why any woman would hook up with them. The only sensible circumstance to my mind would be if the woman was also looking for a sexual partner who would speak as little as possible and leave immediately after she's enjoyed herself. But the women quoted in the Vanity Fair article say they rarely or never experience orgasms in their hookups. And that makes my mind boggle.

We have no idea how representative these women (presented creepily as "the one who looks like a 70s movie star" and other appearance-based types) are, and I'm betting they are not. The article linked by atoxyl above is written by a woman whose Tinder-using principle is to find "men who care more about women’s realities than their own fantasies" for mutual funtimes. Clearly at least some women find Tinder to be a source of mutually-satisfying, respectful encounters.

Still, however unrepresentative, there are clearly twenty-something women out there with all sorts of social privileges going for them--white, conventionally beautiful, cis, into guys, well-employed, from fancy Ivy League backgrounds--who are engaging in hookups they don't enjoy. Why are they doing that?

There are conventional explanations that don't satisfy me. The idea that these women are hooking up via Tinder just for a pre-sex meal ("Tinder food stamps") doesn't make sense given their privileged status. That just sounds like a misogynist trope, with a weird sort of implication that women are somehow exploiting men by wringing a meal out of them.

The mainstream socially conservative understanding is encapsulated in the book Unhooked by Laura Sessions Stepp. Stepp basically argues that casual sex is damaging to young women. Men want no-strings-attached sex, women want love and marriage; young women presume hooking up is the only way to get a mate today so they do it; most wind up emotionally damaged as a result. This is presented as innate and eternal, rather than the product of social gender inequality. That's annoying and gender-regressive, and it ignores two things: one, that 80% of straight American men today do choose to get married (and are not dragged down the aisle in chains); and two, that women actually have sexual agency and enjoy sex for pleasure (see Third Wave feminism).

The women in the Vanity Fair article are not described as hooking up just to find a husband. They're presented as wanting to meet men who treat them as human beings, and maybe have sex with them. They're also presented as instead meeting with men who treat them as one-use consumer goods in unenjoyable sexual encounters--and then going out and doing it again and again, based on the idea that 10% of the men they meet on Tinder might actually treat them respectfully. And that's really hard to comprehend. Could it really be that young privileged 20-somethings as a group feel unable to assert self-respect? Are the expectations of young women regarding sex with men so low that anything other than rape is considered a good deal? It the explanation that we are talking about the 0.01% here, and men in that class are basically all polished assholes, who get everything they want, including unlimited sex, because people will accept anything from them in exchange for the possibility of an ongoing contact with wealth?

Or is this just a contrived story that paints a picture of a world in which beautiful women make themselves endlessly available to any guy with a nice job or a nice beard?
posted by DrMew at 10:51 AM on August 10, 2015 [32 favorites]


Metafilter: there's some variation, but not that much.
posted by Melismata at 10:51 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


'Rate my dick' threads are absolutely constant on 4chan. Any response (or lack of it) doesn't matter - the point is just getting your erect dick connected to the world somehow. It's just a tech and demographic update to what was called 'flashing' when I was a kid.

Basically, the average mainstream young man is now as depressed and messed-up sexually as were once a tiny group of men who used to be 'flashers'.
posted by colie at 10:57 AM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


Depends on the person. I could easily see the point for some men being getting over the insecurity that one's body is weird or abnormal or inferior somehow.
posted by Zalzidrax at 11:04 AM on August 10, 2015


go ahead and talk about the thing you think is important

I think it's important that Tom Wolfe drag his 84 year old (84! I feel old but Tom Wolfe is practically antediluvian!) self to his keyboard and GET THE STORY! I would pay a little (not 112$, mind you, but probably 4.95$) to know what The Man In White thinks about Tindr and swiping left and right and about ... THE LIFE that these YOUNG PRINCES are living as they sample the lissome and favourous charms of The Girl Who Looks Like A Seventies Movie Star and the Girl With The Betty Boop Voice and The Girl With The Bracelets.

Now try Werner Herzog.
"And what haunts me, is that in all the faces of all the swipers I interviewed, I discover no kinship, no understanding, no mercy. I see only the overwhelming indifference of nature. To me, there is no such thing as a secret world of the swipers. And this blank stare speaks only of a half-bored interest in sex."
Ok! Now do Gomer Pyle!
posted by octobersurprise at 11:05 AM on August 10, 2015 [24 favorites]


Heh. Every time I tried to get in on that hookup culture that was nominally my milieu, I ended up in a longterm relationship. But the last time was almost 15 years ago, when I met my now-wife. From watching my friends who stayed single longer, it seems like even guys who don't want real boyfriend/girlfriend stuff, if they're at least moderately good at treating women like humans, they end up with regular hookups that don't require apps — they just keep hooking up with the same women, or with her friends, or whatever.

"Or is this just a contrived story that paints a picture of a world in which beautiful women make themselves endlessly available to any guy with a nice job or a nice beard?"

To be fair, I have had a really nice beard that entire time.

"Ok! Now do Gomer Pyle!"

"I swiped left, Andy, and it was all garsh, sha-zam, goll-ee!"
posted by klangklangston at 11:12 AM on August 10, 2015 [8 favorites]


"Ok! Now do Gomer Pyle!"

"I swiped left, Andy, and it was all garsh, sha-zam, goll-ee!"

Does one swipe left on Grindr?
posted by MikeMc at 11:15 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


Depends on the person. I could easily see the point for some men being getting over the insecurity that one's body is weird or abnormal or inferior somehow.

And ... the internet ...would... *fix* this insecurity?

If this is true than nothing has ever highlighted the deep, entrenched, vile misogyny of online life for me moreso than this.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 11:17 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


I call clickbait shenanigans. This is not the dating apocalypse. For one thing, NYC is its own animal, with a skewed gender ratio that favors straight men slightly. For another, millennials have lifetime fewer partners than other recent generations. For another, who gives a crap who is sleeping with who over what apps unless you have a shaming agenda?
posted by Skwirl at 11:27 AM on August 10, 2015 [1 favorite]


It just occurred to me that Manhattan has a very (relatively) high F/M ratio and the SF Bay (where I live) pretty low. That goes a long way to explain why "pussy affluenza" sounds so bullshit to me.
posted by atoxyl at 11:28 AM on August 10, 2015


the point for some men being getting over the insecurity that one's body is weird or abnormal

There's another side to the hideous endless assault of dick pics which this thread and those (comparatively) polite 4chan threads suggest to me: if you're a young man and someone somewhere, anyone, says 'your dick is OK' then you have actually succeeded as a male and can rest for 30 seconds.
posted by colie at 11:28 AM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]


I keep thinking of some guy on Tinder who asked me "What are you looking for on here?" I thought it was such a weird question. I didn't tell him my real answer, which was something like, "I want to get laid, and also get married and have babies, depending on who I meet."

I don't know. I've been online dating on and off for years. It's another way to meet people and I really appreciate the clarity of meeting someone for a drink and it's already clear that you're there to see if you want to sleep together. There's none of that ambiguity that comes with people you know asking you to "hang out."

I've never gotten a dick pic and I feel a little sad about it, anthropologically.

Everyone in this article seems so sad, and really still figuring out how to navigate sexual relationships and what they want out of them.

Being over 30 makes me officially an Old, I'm pretty sure, but I met my (completely awesome) partner on Tinder, against all odds and defying all logic. But I know some other people who met their partners on Tinder, too. Even in New York.
posted by jeweled accumulation at 11:30 AM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]


Oh, jinx Skwirl!

Of course I'm in my mid-20s, a couple years into a relationship with someone who - like me - is not even on Facebook. So what do I know?
posted by atoxyl at 11:31 AM on August 10, 2015


Well look at that. Young, rich, entitled, white, well-educated singles in NYC? There's an app for that!
posted by bonje at 11:34 AM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


There is definitely a culture of being Ultra Casual about things, though, and I've noticed that it's really trained me into being really reticent about being sincere in relationships. It's the absolute worst thing about dating, and being a product of this generation I really couldn't say if this is a "kids these days" thing or just the way people are. I give a lot of pep talks, though, to both girl and guy friends about not putting up with that bullshit if it's not what you want. Opting out and wanting a real relationship with someone who puts in some effort is actually okay. Admitting that seems like a big step sometimes.
posted by jeweled accumulation at 11:36 AM on August 10, 2015 [6 favorites]


the point is just getting your erect dick connected to the world somehow.

Heaven help them if they discover light sockets.
posted by octobersurprise at 12:03 PM on August 10, 2015 [8 favorites]


Now I'm thinking of my new disrupting startup: JunkAssure. Send me a picture, and for a fee our junk assessors (actually bots, but we'll pretend they're all attractive young men and women) will tell you all the ways in which your junk is absolutely, completely normal, totally ok, and someone else will want to touch it someday, if you want them to.

For another fee, you can get an actual medical doctor to affirm the statements of our junk assessors. Or to send you a private message of "get to a doctor immediately, that does not look good."
posted by emjaybee at 12:16 PM on August 10, 2015 [10 favorites]


For yet another fee, your on-staff experts will do a horoscope for said genitals
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:20 PM on August 10, 2015 [11 favorites]


ColdOfTheIsleOfMan: "While I confess to being a little jealous on some levels - where was this tsunami of casual sex when I was single? - some of the quotes from the guys in that article make me want to take a boiling hot shower. What terminally icky people."

Or now that I am single and haven't had any for over a lustrum.
posted by Samizdata at 12:26 PM on August 10, 2015


Ok so like I said, I'm not against NSA sex (like actively not), and I've only gone as far as filling out the quizzes on OKC for various reasons related to being a luddite. Also, I'm an old. But if anything in the article is representative, it does seem that these platforms package people and flatten them out in ways that might be systematically asymmetrical, and maybe accelerate the pace and volume of hook-ups beyond people's capacity to make sense of these experiences. People do talk about feeling like they're shopping on there, that's a thing, right?

I don't know - personally, I'm attached to the old-school hookup, where you meet people when you're already having a good time, and use your gut to make micro-level decisions about whether you basically like each other, feel safe, respected, etc. Maybe you're more open to people who fall outside of your preconceived ideas about your preferences in a way you might not when using an algorithm or flipping through streams of pics. (This works out perfectly every time, of course, and no, my gut has never worn beer goggles. Right I will shut up now)
posted by cotton dress sock at 12:45 PM on August 10, 2015 [6 favorites]


"Does one swipe left on Grindr?"

TBF, he was bangin' Rock Hudson, so obvs. Nabors didn't need an app to pull.
posted by klangklangston at 12:49 PM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


Most of the women I see on Tinder say that they're not looking for hookups. Maybe it's because I'm a Gen-Xer and am looking at older women?
posted by persona au gratin at 12:57 PM on August 10, 2015


some of the quotes from the guys in that article make me want to take a boiling hot shower

I immediately flashed on the mental image of Ethan Hawke desperately scrubbing his skin with a rock in Gattaca, but yes, much the same reaction. Uuuuuuuuuuuuugh.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 1:07 PM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


Is it rude not to have any?

oh lord no, of course not. and anyone who insists that it IS rude of you to say no is a garbage loser trashbag you can safely forever ignore.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:21 PM on August 10, 2015 [6 favorites]




On Tinder? You might as well be a piece of meat.

'If you want a vision of the dating future, imagine a mechanized flesh beef flap swiping right on a human face - forever.'
posted by snuffleupagus at 2:11 PM on August 10, 2015 [8 favorites]


You guys are being too harsh on the poor young investment bankers. They're actually zombies being controlled by their wasp overlords. They need to breed often, and quickly, before the wasp larvae grows and devours their brains.
posted by kanewai at 2:37 PM on August 10, 2015 [5 favorites]


@persona au gratin

"Not looking for a hookup" is code for "I am looking for a hookup", hth.
posted by FakeFreyja at 2:52 PM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


Self-reported rates much? I wonder what the "Margaret Mead in Samoa" effect is doing here. I know that if I were a Wall Street douchebro getting laid maybe once every two weeks on Tinder, I'd swear it's actually three times a week, and I'm swatting the girls away the rest of the time, etc.
posted by kandinski at 3:09 PM on August 10, 2015 [3 favorites]


This party just took a turn...for the douche.
posted by ostranenie at 3:41 PM on August 10, 2015 [6 favorites]


I wonder if shit pics will become a thing. Can someone write a bro article promoting this concept? Drop this in there:

“They want to see your poo,” insists Adam, 23, a male model in New York. “They get excited from it. They’re like, ‘Oh my God, it's huge.’ ”
posted by ignignokt at 3:50 PM on August 10, 2015 [22 favorites]


That would be Divine.
posted by octobersurprise at 5:31 PM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]


I always swipe *down* on metafilter, you sexy beasts.
posted by clvrmnky at 5:45 PM on August 10, 2015 [4 favorites]


The belief by a certain subset of males that women are just dying to see their junk is a baffling one. And let's face it; there's some variation, but not that much.

I've been with my partner for 15 years. I'm not 100% sure I could pick him out of a (dick) line-up.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:52 PM on August 10, 2015 [10 favorites]


I wonder if shit pics will become a thing.

I know of a guy who does this-- but mostly he sends the pics to other dudes.

Also, apparently, if you invite him to your house for a party, there is at least a 25% chance that he will crap somewhere other than the toilet bowl.

This guy is straight and has a girlfriend, who is not known to share his, ehm, interests. The emotional labor involved in being with him must be staggering. Not to mention the physical labor. And the Lysol bills.
posted by palmcorder_yajna at 6:41 PM on August 10, 2015 [5 favorites]


That flapping meat machine is actually a really great listener.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:53 PM on August 10, 2015 [10 favorites]


okcupid (which is how I met manmillipede)

Now I'm waiting for the breathless VF piece about apps to bring together hot young were-arthropods for LTRs; also gaahhhh
posted by gingerest at 11:41 PM on August 10, 2015 [2 favorites]


As an Old, all I can think is: Can you not just go out to the bar and pick up a slightly drunken person to whom you are attracted?

It worked well enough for me, and now I'm married to her.
posted by drfu at 12:23 AM on August 11, 2015 [2 favorites]


Also, apparently, if you invite him to your house for a party, there is at least a 25% chance that he will crap somewhere other than the toilet bowl.

Whoa, I hope you are talking about a dog couple.
posted by ignignokt at 5:39 AM on August 11, 2015


Seriously, why would anyone want a dick pic? Dicks do NOT photograph well whatsoever.* People aren't even really into them unless the dick is enclosed in something, making magic happen. Ladies especially don't give a shit about meeting your dick until it's live and in person, doing something useful.

* I watched some lame porn movie in college that was nothing but a thousand photos of dicks, all of which pretty much looked like they had leprosy or something.

posted by jenfullmoon at 7:30 AM on August 11, 2015 [2 favorites]


Critique My Dick Pic actually contains some educational examples of decently erotic dick pics, but the vast majority of them out there in the world are about as sexy as an extreme close-up of half an areola
posted by showbiz_liz at 8:10 AM on August 11, 2015 [2 favorites]


Ray Walston,Luck Dragon: For yet another fee, your on-staff experts will do a horoscope for said genitals

Aquarius: You will have the desire to make a big move after living next to two nuts and an asshole for so long.

Gemini: Extra awareness in the coming days. Rosie Palm and her five sisters may attack you until you throw up.

Scorpio: You will come into money soon. Unfortunately, you'll be asked to leave the bank.
posted by dr_dank at 8:26 AM on August 11, 2015 [3 favorites]


I don't know - personally, I'm attached to the old-school hookup, where you meet people when you're already having a good time, and use your gut to make micro-level decisions about whether you basically like each other, feel safe, respected, etc.

Reading this is like hearing an Ivy Leaguer talk about their college experience. I recognize the general structure and there's a lot of commonality with how it was me at a state uni but it sounds way more rarified and cultured than how I ever perceived it.
posted by phearlez at 8:27 AM on August 11, 2015


"Seriously, why would anyone want a dick pic? Dicks do NOT photograph well whatsoever."

Some heterosexual women and (likely more) gay dudes do like seeing them. But it's one of those things where the way to know if someone wants a picture of your dick is that they'll be pretty clear about wanting to see a picture of your dick. The girls I dated who were into dick pics were not shy about asking for them. And if you're not sure, you can always ask 'em if they've ever sexted or if they're into it. Or do the youth not ask each other what they're into anymore?
posted by klangklangston at 12:02 PM on August 11, 2015 [2 favorites]


Moral of the story, don't be Guess Culture when it comes to Dick Pics.
posted by Justinian at 1:03 PM on August 11, 2015 [4 favorites]


Reading this is like hearing an Ivy Leaguer talk about their college experience. I recognize the general structure and there's a lot of commonality with how it was me at a state uni but it sounds way more rarified and cultured than how I ever perceived it.

Hunh? I was just thinking through why I prefer the random hookup to the idea of online dating, where you'd be relying on some maybe misleading idea of what your preferences are, and filtering out possibly good connections. Which you could use your biology and horse sense to suss out more efficiently at your local dive bar.
posted by cotton dress sock at 1:34 PM on August 11, 2015


The problem with horse sense is that 3 drinks in it starts to skew oddly.
posted by clvrmnky at 1:47 PM on August 11, 2015


10,000 hr rule
posted by cotton dress sock at 2:56 PM on August 11, 2015


(Am an old, don't forget)
posted by cotton dress sock at 2:58 PM on August 11, 2015


I knew the article had a vague ring of familiarity. Not that I'm questioning VF's and the author's journalistic integrity.
posted by morspin at 4:01 PM on August 11, 2015 [1 favorite]


I guess Tinder didn't like the story...

But also wow is some of that rhetoric kind of creepy: “The Tinder Generation is real.” OUR BREEDING PROGRAM IS SUCCESSFUL. SOON: THE REAPING.

Further proof that Jupiter Ascending is a documentary?
posted by sparkletone at 6:31 PM on August 11, 2015 [3 favorites]


Archived version of Tinder's reaction to the story.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 7:45 PM on August 11, 2015 [1 favorite]


Tinder is having a total hissyfit this article, and people are noticing. Buzzfeed. Wired.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 10:10 PM on August 11, 2015


Eh. Their reaction doesn't seem particularly over the top.
posted by zarq at 5:35 AM on August 12, 2015






oh, just reading that article posted immediately above
Twenge told me that when she spoke with Sales, the journalist seemed to have arrived with some preconceived notions of what the real story was here, and was therefore very skeptical of Twenge’s data. “She said, ‘Well, I’ve gone around the country talking to college students and adults and all I’m hearing is about the hooking up and so on. I don’t believe what you’ve found,’” said Twenge. “I said, ‘Well, there’s a really big difference between going around and talking to people and a nationally representative survey,’ and I must have repeated that five or six times, and it was clear she was not really hearing me.’” Twenge made it sound like a classic case of journalistic and social-scientific culture clashing: “Suffice to say that this reporter had her conclusion and then just didn’t want to believe anything I told her about her analysis,” Twenge explained.
Millennials are less judgmental about sex, but not constantly having sex themselves? Millennials are getting married without having lots of sex first? DOES NOT COMPUTE.

Damon Linker: Love and sex in the age of Tinder, The Week
But I'm more interested in the reaction to this development among older mainstream liberals: those who have always favored the sexual revolution but whose own lives have remained relatively conventional, including exclusive dating, marriage, and childrearing, possibly a divorce and remarriage, with the ideal of lifelong companionship still active in their minds and imaginations.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 3:12 PM on August 13, 2015




This blog post in The Pool* is the nicest response I’ve read to this Vanity Fair piece, it’s short, matter of fact, funny and for a change from a journalist who actually does use Tinder. It’s from a British perspective, so that may be a completely different Tinder experience, but I bet even in the US a lot of people are using dating apps like that, in a very mundane, ordinary way, having very pleasant ordinary dates, probably too boring and not worthy of attention for a Vanity Fair writer looking for a sensationalistic angle.
(*More info on who’s behind The Pool here, I just discovered it via Twitter and liked what I read so far).
posted by bitteschoen at 2:38 PM on August 14, 2015


« Older White God   |   Why would a tiny dose of estrogen derivative cause... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments