Denver, Colo., Jun 23, 2017 / 03:22 am (CNA/EWTN News).- If a recent Vanity Fair issue is to be believed, there’s some disheartening news for single people: the “dating apocalypse,” brought on by wildly popular dating apps like “Tinder,” is upon us.
Young singles are too busy swiping left and right on their phones making shallow, transient connections, rather than finding real love with real people. Romance is dead, proposes author Nancy Jo Sales, in the September 2015 issue of the publication.
What sets Tinder apart from most other dating app or online dating experiences is speed and brevity. Based on a photo, first name, and age alone, users decide whether to swipe left (to pass) or right (to like). With GPS tracking, the app also tells users exactly how far away potential matches may be, making life even easier for those just looking for a quick hook-up.
Shallowest dating app ever?
The biggest criticism of Tinder? It’s a seriously shallow app that turns people into quickly-judged commodities on a screen.
In a 2013 article by The Guardian, “Tinder: the shallowest dating app ever?” author Pete Cashmore explains the ick-factor, yet addictiveness, of Tinder when compared to another dating app called Twine.
“Of the two apps, though, Tinder sounded worse, just because it seemed so contemptuously superficial. There are hundreds upon thousands of women, about whom you know almost nothing, and you snap-appraise them with a single swipe. It’s a finger-flicking hymn to the instant gratification of the smartphone age. It’s addictive.”
Matt Fradd is a Catholic speaker and author and founder of The Porn Effect, a website with a mission to “expose the reality behind the fantasy of pornography and to equip individuals to find freedom from it.” In his ministry, he’s heard a lot of stories from young people about their struggle to overcome objectifying people through porn.
Fradd had some harsh words for Tinder.
“Tinder exists for those who would rather not purchase a prostitute,” he told CNA.
“I would imagine most people who use that app aren’t there because they’re looking for a chaste relationship,” he added.
And indeed, quite a bit of colloquial evidence backs him up. Alex in the Vanity Fair article said dating apps have turned romance into a competition of “Who’s slept with the best, hottest girls?”
“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,” he said. “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.”
But Tinder doesn’t always have to be that way, users argue. It is possible to find people on the app who want to go on some good old-fashioned dates.
Tinder users speak
Ross is a twenty-something Nebraska-to-New York City transplant and a cradle Catholic who’s used his fair share of both dating apps and sites. When signing up for Tinder, Ross said, probably the most important factor in whether someone will find potential dates or hook-ups is location, location, location.
“Your region matters so much,” he told CNA in an e-mail interview. “In Nebraska, women date on Tinder. They really do… In New York, (most) want a distraction, attention, and/or a hook up. Not emotion or connections.”
Holly, a twenty-something devout Catholic living in Kansas City, said she has had success finding a date – and a pretty decent one at that – on the app.
“I went on a great Tinder date. Granted it was the only Tinder date, but we even went out a few times before things ended. At the time Tinder sort of freaked me out, but I decided to jump in head first and it was an enjoyable experience over all,” she said.
Many young people who’ve used Tinder also argue that the “shallow” critique is a bit overblown, considering that dating always takes into account whether or not a potential mate is physically attractive.
“How is me swiping right on a guy that I find attractive, and swiping left (on those) that I’m not that into any different than someone approaching a guy that I find attractive in a bar? We make snap judgements all the time. Why is it suddenly so much worse if I’m doing it online?” asked Michelle, a twenty-something practicing Catholic who lives in Chicago.
While she’s definitely experienced the creepier side of Tinder – with guys sending her “rankings” on a scale of 1 to 10 and other, um, less-than-endearing messages, she said she found the app could be used as a way to maybe meet some new people in person and to get recommendations of things to do in the city.
“I think to immediately classify Tinder or any other dating app as a ‘hook-up’ app or as a very bad thing goes against the idea that things are morally neutral,” Michelle said. “Just like alcohol is not inherently bad but can be used for evil, I don’t think Tinder is inherently evil as well. I definitely think you can use Tinder if you’re using it to meet people – not to hook up with people.”
The morality of Tinder
It’s admittedly a bit difficult to find someone who can speak with moral authority specifically to dating apps in the Catholic world. Because of the very recent explosion of smartphones, followed by the subsequent explosion of dating apps, or because of vows of celibacy, many clergy and moral experts have actually never used dating apps themselves.
Fr. Gregory Plow, T.O.R., falls into that category. Even though he’s a young priest and friar who’s never used Tinder, Fr. Plow works with hundreds of young people every day as the director of Households at Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio (kind of like Greek houses, but faith-based).
Fr. Plow said when Catholics determine the morality of any act or tool, like Tinder, three things must be considered.
“Whenever discerning the morality of an act not explicitly defined by Church teaching, we must examine the object, the intention, and the circumstances,” he said, referencing paragraph 1757 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
“Regarding the ‘object,’ apps – in general, as an invention – are not bad in and of themselves. Like most other technologies, they are morally neutral in and of themselves,” he said. “Apps do, however, possess a certainly quality of being transitory that can factor in to the other two components (intention and circumstances) that factor in to judging the morality of an act.”
The transitory, cursory nature of swiping based on one picture in Tinder can be morally dangerous if that same mentality transfers to relationships with people, he said. Instead of pausing and taking the time to form real relationships, some people may decide to move on to the next best thing because they have so many options.
“Therefore, in as much dating apps are impersonal and transitory, or are used with the intention for receiving gratification and pleasure, they are immoral,” he said. “If, however, online dating apps or services assisting people in leading them to find another person to share the love of God with in the uniqueness of a dating relationship or marriage, it can be (morally) good.”
Mary Beth Bonacci, a Catholic speaker and author on John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, said what’s concerning about Tinder when compared to online dating sites such as CatholicMatch is the rapidity with which people can be turned into objects.
“The entire realm of dating is full of opportunities to turn a human person into a commodity. We get so wrapped up in thinking about what we want for ourselves that we forget we are dealing with another human person – and image and likeness of God. It’s always been a temptation,” she said.
“But the rapid-fire nature of Tinder’s ‘scan and swipe’ makes it easy to turn many, many human persons into commodities in a short period of time. That is what is scariest to me.”
Bonacci said while it’s possible to find someone who’s interested in a virtuous dating relationship through apps like Tinder, the chances of that happening are probably pretty low when compared with online dating sites that have more extensive profiles.
Meeting someone in person as soon as possible is also key, she said, in determining whether or not a match made online or in an app has a chance of turning into a dating relationship. But apps like Tinder aren’t exactly helping breathe new life into romance, she said.
“Everything is instant. The nearly-anonymous sex is of course the antithesis of anything romantic or respectful. In the old days of the ‘meat market’ singles’ bar, a person had to get dressed up, leave the house, buy a few drinks and at least pretend to have some real interest in the other person.”
The Church has a duty, she said, to offer young people better alternatives in the dating world than the instant gratification that they find in the current culture.
“The Vanity Fair article reminded me once again that we have to offer teens and young adults an alternative to the degrading, hook up world that surrounds them. We can’t scare them out of it. They need to be inspired, to fall in love with the real beauty of the Christian vision of human sexual morality,” she said.
“They need to see their own dignity, their own importance, and how respecting their bodies and the beautiful language of human sexuality is the only way to finding real love. We have to. We can’t allow another generation of kids to fall into this cesspool.”
This article was originally published on CNA Sept. 13, 2015.
[…]
My preferred pronouns are”your majesty” and “his majesty.”
All my fellow CWR commenters be advised, you need to use my preferred pronouns or face the consequences.
His majesty has spoken! Could your majesty opine on the situation in ND? His majesty’s comments are always here.
John!
Yes, of course! As you may suspect, I am always happy to opine, thank you!
I find it terribly disturbing that this mad, reality-denying abrogation of God’s role as Creator has spread so far into formerly sane and rational middle America as North Dakota.
I also cannot imagine that — between this insanity, plus the killing of scores of millions of innocent children around the world each year, plus the generalized turning away from God in the Western world, plus so much more — we will not be soon feeling a swift, hard, painful corrective from our Creator.
(And thank you, John, for using my preferred pronouns!)
(For some reason, few — not even my wife — do.)
How sad that woke ideology has penetrated as far as the wilds on North Dakota. I would suggest folks take their excess tuition cash and go to school someplace else where rationality prevails. When you attempt to FORCE people to speak in a certain way, and accept an unreality which is not real, this is what dictatorships do and it should be vigorously opposed in any way possible. The biggest question always is,if you cooperate with this, what accommodation will they expect next, or what civil right will they attempt to expunge? I hope alumni of the school are paying attention and also withhold their money.The time to oppose this nonsense is NOW.
Uncle Andy has spoken (see Wikipedia) and now we can understand why the Air Force Academy went woke.
I will never indulge in a mentally ill person’s fantasies on self by using their LARP-ing name.
When god made humanity god made man and woman and in the animal kingdom god made male and female. May i ask all the dumb clucks the idots is it difficult to understand this simple
difference between persons. the bottom line there can only be two genders MALE AND FEMALE
and to be crass rude and vulgar a man has a penis and woman has a vagina and for those who choose to live a life of debauchery the bum entrance of a man for a vagina because humanity has degraded itself to the times of sodom and gonorrhea. all this gender issues are a whole load of hog wash. i call on all of humanity to get to their senses and live like human beings MALE AND FEMALE
So . . . be inclusive or be excluded?
Good point – people of this ilk are known to be severely irony-deficient.
Insanity – absolute insanity.
The University of North Dakota obviously does not support the LGBTQ members or transgender and nonbinary members, because that support should be to “will the good of the other,” according to St. Thomas Aquinas. Willing their good would not be supporting their delusional view of immutable characteristics given by God. Reinforcing the confusion of any individual by going along with their confusion is unhealthy and destructive. Instead, they should be directed toward counseling that will help them sort their confusion and come to the realization that we are all what God made us to be.
The only “ideology” I see in this is common courtesy. If a person wishes to be referred to in a particular way, why argue and fuss about it? A new pastor once came to my church. He preferred the reference Father (last name) rather than Father (first name) as the previous priest preferred. I suppose I could have argued his Christian name was more appropriate than his family name, but instead, I invited him for dinner, spoke with him after Mass, and when talking about him with other people, referred to Father (last name).
As for pronouns, there are a lot of them. If it gets confusing, don’t use pronouns. If you care about the person, call them by whatever they tell you. Why act like a jerk about it?
You seem to miss the point that these institutions are trying to CRIMINALIZE and penalize people who use the PROPER pronouns. People should not have to jump through hoops or tip-toe around this nonsense. Not too long ago people who paraded around pretending to be someone or something else were deemed in need of mental assistance. Now, they are trying to force everyone else to play their games. People who do not want to participate in their games. Like the baker taken to court multiple times for declining their business. Etc. This is NOT harmless and I would suggest the people who decline to participate in these crazed fantasies are NOT the “jerks”. I prefer the dont ask, dont tell approach. I am not interested in anyone else’s sexuality and I dont want it thrown in my face. Do your own thing but leave me out of it. With the use of “drag Queen story times” they are trying to indoctrinate small children as well. This is NOT the same issue as calling a priest by his first or last name , by a long-shot.
Only legislatures can make criminal law. Any business can develop policy which, admittedly, can lead to serious consequences such as a loss of a job, or the denial of consumer services. And yes, this can end up being totally arbitrary.
The truth is that young people are prone to bullying and being bullied. I saw it years ago in the Catholic prep school I attended. An otherwise good learning and religious environment was frequently spoiled by knuckle-headed behavior. “Boys will be boys” was the common cited quote. Humbug.
Consider: I’m approaching a food vendor on the street to buy lunch, and the person says, “Nice sunny day,” as it rains. I’m there to buy a taco or a hot dog. I’m not going to get into a discussion on meteorology. For all I k now the person got a business loan or got engaged, and to them it is a sunny day. I nod, pay for my food, and move along.
The people who insist on their own terminology, names, and labels for people they don’t otherwise know are indeed being jerks. I don’t think they will go to prison. But a professor must be above reproach in dealing with young people. Likewise staff at learning institutions.
Between you and me, I’d hope that students would be encouraged to stand up to jerks personally, and not be intimidated or rely overly much on institution-dished punishments. But I don’t know how bad it has been at UND. Maybe a little more investigation would tell us the level of discourtesy.
It’s a state university, so it’s bound by law to the first amendment. A state university cannot legally try to control language, thought, or freedom of association. It’s not a private business, so your argument is a straw man.
I have just retired from teaching Health/Sex Education for 36 years in the public school system. The bullying of our childhood has been replaced with indoctrinated tolerance of all behaviors- to the point where students hesitate to intervene on anything- even if they perceive it personally as wrong. As far as the choice of pronouns, I saw many young girls decide overnight they were changing their gender in order to join an ever growing group of friends. Teachers were told to adopt the pronouns or face HIB ( harassment, bullying, intimidation) charges. In my state, students can change gender without parent knowledge- and if we tell parents, we are disciplined. The LGBT groups weld much power in the college/ educational communities and are supported by powerful forces- rather then support a “live and let live” philosophy, they often seek to extinguish groups and persons who disagree with their lifestyle choices by labeling such groups (often Christian/Catholic) as bigoted.
As a retired public school teacher of 36 years, I will say that the bullying we remember from our youth has been replaced with an indoctrinated tolerance of all behaviors. Students hesitate to intervene in any situation even when they perceive it as wrong. I did not see the LGBT students as being bullied and in fact most are quite popular. I did observe many students who overnight decided that they wanted to change their gender to join an ever growing group of friends. We were instructed as teachers to use their new pronouns or face HIB charges (harassment intimidation bullying). Also, in my state, a minor can change their gender without parents being informed- and if a teacher tells a parent, they can be disciplined. The LGBT groups have a lot of pull in these educational settings and are supported by powerful organizations. Rather then promoting a “live and let live” philosophy, they often seek to cancel groups and individuals whose views differ (Christian/Catholic groups) by labeling such groups/individuals as bigoted.
Let’s hope this University get’s a lot smarter and finds out what makes a University great.
We don’t get to choose our parents—-we don’t get to choose our relatives—-we don’t get to choose our gender
I wonder if the president of UND might reconsider his position if he received thousands of emails from CWR readers and other concerned citizens? Let’s put our money where our mouths are and speak real truth to power! Especially since it’s a state university.
Here’s a manufactured pronoun that covers a fair amount of territory: “s/he/it.” It can be pronounced with either a short “i” or a long “e” sound according to the preference of the user. It includes both female and male, of course, and the “it” includes everyone else.
The suggestion of “s/h/it” as a third-person common-gender pronoun does have several advantages: it is comprehensive in its coverage, pronounceable, and recognizable as an English word. Even so, however, it fails to recognize cultural diversity sufficiently. One of the great accomplishments of Russian, Prussian, and Austro-Hungarian imperialism would be to require the peoples occupied by those powers to cease using their own language in school and in public. Suppose the North American continent were conquered by the original European powers. What is now the Eastern seaboard would be administered from Montreal with all public speech required in French. The Midwest and Southwest would be required to speak Spanish by the central power in Mexico City. And North Dakota would be governed from Sitka,Alaska and required to use Russian. Unlike Spanish and French, which recognize only two genders (masculine and feminine), Russian recognizes three–including a neuter. There is even a language that does not distinguish gender in the third person singular, and one of my students claimed that introducing such a requirement would raise the status of women in the United States. The student grew angry when I expressed skepticism that introducing the pronoun “Oo”. For that is the pronoun still used in the Islamic Republic of Iran for the third person singular. Perhaps the people of the Dakotas would like to switch to Farsi? Frankly, I doubt it. Even marshal law would provoke resistance.