On a Scale of 1 to Shallow

It's no secret that the digital age has completely turned the dating world upside down. The number of ways to open your web and find new people are basically endless, and I doubt I could name more than about one friend who hasn't experimented with this new technology. When my parents asked how I met my current boyfriend and I told them Tinder, they had no clue what I was talking about. After I explained, they, as always, went on a rant about how "no one meets the old-fashioned way" and how everyone in this generation is so shallow, "matching" with a person based on their good looks. I never thought of Tinder as shallow until this conversation, but I then realized it literally is based on looks: swipe right if you think they're hot, swipe left if no. This realization was conveniently followed by a New York Times article I found on Tinder, basically discussing how looks are everything on this app. The article went into the differences between most dating sites and Tinder-you put next to know information about yourself other than one or two brief sentences. Matches are made solely through judging appearances, which at face value sounds pretty bad on this generation's behalf. 

However, the reason I liked this article was that it wasn't "hating" on Tinder for being this way. I personally think the person who created it is a genius. Tinder gets straight to the point; it's basically "Hey, do you find this person attractive? They found you attractive too, now talk to each other." People who match are able to start a conversation afterward, and that's where personalities, interests, etc. can come through-pretty similar to meeting someone in real life. If you think about it, the in-person dating scene is just like Tinder. As discussed in class, appearances give a huge first impression. As much as we would all hate to admit it, finding someone attractive or not is probably a huge deciding factor in whether we want to pursue them. Just like on Tinder, in real life, we would rather strike up a conversation with someone we find attractive rather than someone that just doesn't do it for us. What's on the inside is ultimately what counts, but attraction does play a huge part in any relationships. People are just as "shallow" in real life when it comes to appearances as they are on dating websites-why else would dating websites require a photo? Whether it's on Tinder or in person, after you begin a conversation and start getting to know a person, their attraction may not matter so more if their personality isn't what you were looking for. There's no embarrassing rejection, either; if someone who swiped right for you but you weren't interested and swiped left for them, they'll never know. 

To me, Tinder is a huge positive for the dating world. It's just an easier way to meet people close to you, and the "shallowness" fades away once you get to know the people and judge them on what really matters. If the two decide they want to meet in real life, that coveted old-fashioned way comes back. I don't think the old-fashioned way really even went away; we're just putting a more convenient twist on it. The article mentioned couples who met through Tinder who are engaged, and I can't even count on one hand the number of couples I know personally who met through it. The older generation may think we're crazy, but I think they'll think differently when they attend or hear of weddings between two people who met on a shallow dating app.

Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/25/fashion/on-a-phone-app-called-tinder-looks-are-everything.html?_r=0