Modern Romance

“After our interviews we examined whether this spoke to a larger trend. In 1932 a sociologist at the University of Pennsylvania named James Bossard looked through five thousand consecutive marriage licenses on file for people who lived in the city of Philadelphia. Whoa: One-third of the couples who got married had lived within a five-block radius of each other before they got married. One out of six had lived within the same block. Most amazingly, one of every eight married couples had lived in the same building before they got married.” 

When Ansari spoke to older generations about how they had met their future spouse, he was shocked to learn that many of them had met because of their proximity to one another. This is one of the starkest differences between older and younger generations: The dating pool for older generations was smaller because they had to date people that lived close by, whereas younger generations can meet people from all over the world on the Internet.

“As our technology becomes more prevalent in our lives, romantic behavior that seems strange or inappropriate to one generation can become the norm for people in the next one.” 

Older generations had to rely on in-person interactions or phone calls to ask each other out on a date, but statistics show that younger generations are using texting or other forms of messaging to ask each other out. This quote reveals how people adapt to the social norms of their time. Ansari points out that this is especially true regarding technology. Older generations would have viewed a man asking out a woman through text as being too informal, but because modern singles predominantly communicate through text and private messaging, being asked out through this medium feels natural. 

“When we did the large focus group we split the room by generation—kids on the left, parents on the right—a strange thing happened. Before the show started, we noticed that the parents’ side of the room was full of chatter. People were talking to one another and asking how they had ended up at the event and getting to know people. On the kids’ side, everyone was buried in their phones and not talking to anyone around them.” 

This example illustrates the ideological chasm that exists between older and younger generations. Technology hasn’t just changed how people communicate, it’s altered the way people view communication. The parents in the example above grew up without phones or Internet, and they learned how to socialize face-to-face. For many of today’s younger singles, they grew up learning how to communicate on screens. Sherry Turkle, a social psychologist at MIT, says that younger generations can’t have impromptu conversations because they’re too used to using texts to communicate. In a text, a person can map out exactly what they want to say, but in-person conversations force a person to speak spontaneously. These are two very different skill sets.  

“According to a study by the University of Chicago psychologist John Cacioppo […] between 2005 and 2012 more than one third of couples who got married in the United States met through an online dating site. Online dating was the single biggest way people met their spouses. Bigger than work, friends, and school combined.”

This study shows the profound effect that online dating sites have had on modern dating. While older generations predominantly met their future spouse from their neighborhoods, work, or a mutual friend group, today’s singles are meeting people from all over the world online. This ability to meet innumerous people online has had a negative affect on the modern psyche, however. Dating sites give the illusion that singles have access to potentially countless partners, so when a relationship gets difficult it’s easier for modern couples to think that there might be a better partner waiting just a click away.

“The kind of partner people said they were looking for didn’t match up with the kind of partner they were actually interested in.”

A huge problem with online dating is that people only have access to a picture and basic profile information when combing through hundreds of potential partners. People may say that they want a partner who follows a certain religion, enjoys specific hobbies, etc., but most people ignore that criteria based on the profile picture alone; in other words, if the person in the profile is attractive but doesn’t meet the seeker’s criteria, the seeker is more likely to choose them over an unattractive person who does meet the criteria.

“But by late 2014 people’s attitudes about Tinder were dramatically different, especially in big cities where it first got popular. People we spoke with in New York and Los Angeles were using Tinder as the go-to dating app. It wasn’t just a sex app. It wasn’t a game. People were using it to meet people for relationships and dating because it was quick, fun, and easy. The change in perception was startling.”

Tinder’s creators wanted the app to be fun and easy to use. Whereas dating sites like OkCupid require users to fill out time consuming profile information, Tinder is quick to set up and get started; all you need is a picture and minimal information. The ease of use and game-like structure—where people swipe left or right depending on whether they find a profile picture attractive—made it instantly popular. However, there was initially a stigma that Tinder was just for fun or sex. However, as the quote above demonstrates, over time people began to use it as a serious dating app. 

“By blending something old, the burka, with something new, the Internet, Qatari youth have created their own novel way to connect.”

In Qatar, most marriages are still arranged, and singles aren’t allowed to casually date, but young people have found a way around this: They send mass texts to their friends and agree to meet in a hotel, where they socialize freely. Texting and social media messaging have given singles in Qatar a sense of independence, but they still don’t use online dating sites or Instagram because they aren’t anonymous enough.

“At certain times, though, this ‘I need the best’ mentality can be debilitating. I wish I could just eat somewhere that looks good and be happy with my choice. But I can’t. The problem is that I know somewhere there is a perfect meal for me and I have to do however much research I can to find it.”

Here, Ansari explains how he does painstaking research for even the simplest of purchases or food options because he wants to make sure that he’s getting the best. Because he can research nearly every possible choice online by looking at reviews and comparing, it’s difficult for him to just choose something without the research. He connects this to the complications that the Internet has brought to dating. People used to meet someone interesting in person and take the time to get to know them. Now, when people meet someone online, there’s always that temptation to keep looking because there could be a better option. 

“Look at my dad: He had an arranged marriage and he seems totally happy. I looked into it and this is not uncommon. People in arranged marriages start off lukewarm, but over time they really invest in each other and in general have more successful relationships. They are more invested in the deep commitment to the relationship, rather than being personally invested in finding a soul mate, which can tend to lead to the ‘Is there something better out there for me?’ mentality.” 

Here, Ansari explains the different ideologies between arranged marriages versus traditional marriages. In an arranged marriage, the union is usually about bringing two families together; the marriage is bigger than the two people getting married, and therefore there’s a larger goal in mind than just being in love together. Ansari speculates that people in arranged marriages stay together through difficult times because they know it’s not just about them and how well they get along. However, with modern marriages, where people are hoping to marry their soul mate, there’s often nothing larger at stake other than each person’s happiness. When that happiness is tested, people can’t help but think there’s a better partner out there beyond the marriage. 

“Initially, we are attracted to people by their physical appearances and traits we can quickly recognize. But the things that really make us fall for someone are their deeper, more unique qualities, and usually those only come out during sustained interactions.”

Online dating can often lead to lots of looking and multiple first dates, as people become addicted to the thrill of the search. As the above quote suggests, people grow fonder with each other over time, as a person’s unique qualities begin to surface. A person’s unique qualities, like their sense of humor, favorite things, or cute quirks, are things that build a lasting attraction. 

“When you combine the economic decline, men’s infantilization by their mothers, their fear of rejection, and the lack of contact with the opposite sex throughout their lives, the herbivore man starts making a lot of sense.”

The herbivore man is a Japanese phenomenon that is likely the result of the above-mentioned factors, and it’s having a significant impact on the country. Japan’s birth rates are dropping at an alarming rate, so much so that the government is offering financial incentives for people to get married and have children. Even online dating hasn’t helped because many men aren’t forward enough to ask the women out on a date.

“Why do people sext? The main reasons we discovered are to share intimacy with a partner, to build sexual attraction, to appease a partner, and, in some cases, to maintain intimacy over long distances.”

Sexting is a term comprised of “sex” and “texting” that describes when people send sexually explicit texts or messages to one another. Although it is a new word only made possible by the affordances of smart phones and the Internet, Ansari says that people have been doing it for centuries (previously is was done through letters). Sexting can have benefits on a relationship, allowing two people to express themselves sexually and foster anticipation, but it can also have dangers—most notably, sexting can leave people vulnerable and can create a space for cheating.

“What fascinates me most, though, is that this is something that simply could not have happened thirty years ago. Sure, he might have still wanted to sexually stray from his relationship, but the privacy of Facebook, the ease of access to potential people to cheat with, and the ability to flirt with caution via the medium of chat—that perfect storm for temptation is undeniably a new development.”

Before this moment, Ansari shared the private messages between Anthony Weiner and his mistress. Ansari notes that this kind of affair would have been impossible before the Internet, but now it’s all too easy. The ability to cheat has become easier with the Internet, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that people are more likely to cheat. When Ansari interviewed people, some said that seemingly innocent messages had quickly turned into cheating; they blamed the ease of access for their affairs. Others were firm in their belief that they wouldn’t cheat despite the easier access to do so.

“During our interviews and focus groups, most of the French people I met said it’s natural, if not inevitable, to seek sexual novelty and excitement. They’d still get angry about cheating, but not in the same way we do in the States. They don’t judge the transgression so harshly.”

Many questions are raised about whether technology makes people more likely to cheat on their partners, but this exploration of how France views cheating demonstrates that it’s a deeper moral and ideological issue. France has the most lenient views regarding cheating, believing that it’s an inevitable outcome of any committed relationship. While people in America said that they would end a relationship if they found out their partner cheated, people in France expect it.

“The second danger point is when passionate love starts wearing off. This is when you start coming down off of that initial high and you start worrying about whether this is really the right person. A couple weeks ago you were giddy and obsessed. All the new quirks and facts you learned about your lover felt like wonderful little surprises, like coming home and finding a chocolate on your pillow. Now you’re like, Okay, I get it. You like sewing historically accurate Civil War uniforms!!” 

Here, Ansari explains the fragile moment when the passionate phase of a relationship begins to wane into companionate love. Technology has had a major impact on this turning point. With dating sites and social media, people often believe that there are better options outside the relationship. When things get difficult, modern daters are more likely to leave the relationship for someone else rather than work through the difficulties.

“As Eric wrote in his book Going Solo, we are living in a time of incredible experimentation with different ways of settling down. Long-term cohabitation with a romantic partner is on the rise, especially in Europe. Living alone has skyrocketed almost everywhere, and in many major cities—from Paris to Tokyo, Washington, D.C., to Berlin—nearly half of all households have just one resident.” 

This quote demonstrates one of the main ideological shifts that have happened between older and younger generations. Marriage was once the staple of society, and it was considered the first step into adulthood. Today, less and less people are getting married; instead, they’re dating around, living with a significant other, or staying single. Many factors have contributed to this change, but perhaps most notable is the way gender roles have been redefined. For older generations, women were expected to keep the house and care for the children while the men worked. Today, many women work outside the home and have careers of their own, meaning that they don’t need a husband to support them like in the past.

“Sometimes both parties are equally into creating an open arrangement—at least in theory. In practice, though, they soon discover that sleeping with other people can be a messy affair.”

Some people, like Dan Savage, think that monogamy is an unobtainable ideal. To combat this, some couples have turned to open-relationships, where they stay committed to one another but have sex with other people. Some of these couples find a way to make open-relationships work; however, many couples realize that it’s better in theory than in practice. There are always unforeseen ramifications to an open-relationship, and many of the people that Ansari interviewed found that even though they were willing to try it out, their relationships eventually fell apart. 

“The model ultimately seems built to address the fact that passionate love cannot last long-term, and that the foundation of a strong relationship is not perpetual excitement and intensity but a deep, hard-earned bond that intensifies over time. In other words, companionate love.” 

Here, Ansari is describing why couples might turn to an open-relationship: They feel comfortable in the companionate love phase and like the stability and friendship that comes with it, but they also still want the passion. For some couples, open-relationships are a way to have their cake and eat it too.

“Many women we met said if their boyfriend asked if they were willing to have a more open relationship, they’d start to doubt how serious he was. ‘At that point, why even be with someone?’ one woman asked, with apparent disdain for the monogamish idea. ‘If you don’t want to be committed, just go jerk off.’” 

This woman’s sentiment echoes the way most Americans feel about open-relationships. Open-relationships and polyamory are still taboo in the United States, with many people looking at them as being less committed and less serious than a traditional relationship. Rather than being open, most couples either break up to seek other people or attempt secret affairs; this demonstrates that although most people claim that they don’t want open-relationships, they may still act on their desire to have sex with people besides their partner. 

“I wrote this book because I wanted to better understand all the conundrums that come up in modern romance. So, after teaming up with an eminent sociologist, interviewing hundreds of people, consulting the world’s foremost experts on romance and relationships, conducting fieldwork in five countries, and reading a mountain of studies and books and news articles and academic papers, what exactly have I learned? A lot, actually.” 

Here, Ansari explains why he originally wanted to write the book and how he approached the topic. The result is a compilation of statistical data, real-life interviews, and humor that paints a portrait of the modern dating scene. Throughout the book, Ansari compares today’s dating scene with that of generations past to demonstrate how technology has changed the way singles approach dating. 

“A soul mate isn’t just someone we love. As for our grandparents, there are probably lots of people out there whom we could settle down with and, in the fullness of time, grow to love. But we want more than love. We want a lifelong wingman/wingwoman who completes us and can handle the truth, to mix metaphors from three different Tom Cruise movies.” 

This passage explains the main difference between the way previous generations approached marriage and the way singles approach dating today. Older generations sought people close by who would be good marriage material—that is, people who would fulfill their gender role within the marriage. Today’s singles aren’t worried about getting married. Instead, they’re interested in searching out the perfect person that will complete them. 

“We have two selves: a real-world self and a phone self, and the nonsense our phone selves do can make our real-world selves look like idiots. Our real-world selves and our phone selves go hand in hand. Act like a dummy with your phone self and send some thoughtless message full of spelling errors, and the real-world self will pay the price. The person on the other end sees no difference between your two selves.” 

Technology—especially texts, social media, and dating apps—have changed the way people act with one another. When men are seeking women online, they all too often act sexually aggressive or generically toward them because they hide behind the artifice of the screen. The men wouldn’t behave this way in person, but the women don’t differentiate between the men’s online or in-person self. This is one of the pitfalls of online dating. If a person messes up the first impression online, which can be easy to do when things like tone or language can be misinterpreted, there often isn’t a second chance in person.

“The key is to get off the screen and meet these people. Don’t spend your nights in endless exchanges with strangers. Communicate with people you have some chance of liking, then, after a few messages—enough to figure out if there’s something really, really wrong with them—just ask them out.”

Ansari reiterates that online dating should instead be called online introductions, because the dating should happen in-person. More people spend too much time online looking for the perfect person, meaning that they are in front of a screen more than in front of people. By looking at online dating sites as a space for dating, it gives the illusion of connection. If dating sites are instead viewed as an initial meeting space, this can force people to meet each other in person rather than endlessly messaging back and forth.