Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 332 posts

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#211

Post by jasode »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #171
chillacy wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's historically the case: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/sep/24/women-men-dn... The other implication of polygamy is that a lot of men simply didn't have a chance to pass on their genes at all.

I sometimes wonder if a big reason why monogamous marriage exists as a concept in human society is as a strategy for mitigating violent upheaval. By using cultural pressure to force single-partner relationships (at least on the surface), you no longer had a large group of sexually frustrated men with nothing to lose looking around and wondering how to get a piece of what the elite have that they don't.

>I sometimes wonder if a big reason why monogamous marriage exists as a concept in human society is as a strategy for mitigating violent upheaval.

Yes, many anthropologists have theorized the same idea. William Tucker (journalist) wrote a whole book about marriage being a social mechanism to reduce violence:

https://www.amazon.com/Marriage-Civilization-Monogamy-Made-H...

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#212

Post by wpietri »

JoshCole wrote: post #61
wpietri wrote: post #41

I don't even get this. If you don't have time to date, how would you have time for a relationship?

I think your confusion comes because online dating isn't dating. A date takes potentially a couple of hours at max. Online dating refers to the process of searching for someone to date via the internet. A date can take an hour or two. Looking for a date online can take hundreds of hours without any results save for a few catfish scams.

I think you've confused "going on date" with "dating". The process called "dating" has always included the initial part of sorting through possible prospects to go on a date with. Online dating is more efficient than what went before.

The process has also included getting-to-know-you conversation and trust-building, neither of which this impersonation accomplishes.

A date does take a couple of hours max. But if it works, it blossoms into a relationship, which takes significant time. And that same sort of significant time can be applied to dating.

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#213

Post by wpietri »

laurieg wrote: post #55
wpietri wrote: post #41

I don't even get this. If you don't have time to date, how would you have time for a relationship?

"I don't have time to do x" is almost always code for "I have other things that I want to do more than x" So it sounds like these people would make time to go on dates, or have a romantic partner, but they find online dating tedious so they pay to have someone do it for them.

I definitely agree the surface excuse is a lie.

But in this case, I think it's insane. It reduces to, "I don't want to spend getting to know a person I might spend the rest of my life with, so I'm going to jump right to paying somebody to lie to them." It's contradictory, at least for a real relationship. I think what it really means is, "I want a woman in the same way I want a new car: as enjoyable, status-enhancing property. But they insist on talking. So fuck that."

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#214

Post by emiliobumachar »

throwaway84742 wrote: post #89
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A couple where neither member can produce sperm is not at risk of accidental pregnancy.

A couple where both can produce sperm is unlikely to produce offspring either. Still don’t see what that has to do with anything.

I think the point is that the pregnancy risk issues you pointed out do not apply to lesbians, therefore do not help explain the lower promiscuity of lesbians compared to gay men.

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#215

Post by stronglikedan »

nikanj wrote: post #28
laurieg wrote: post #2

It is very informative to make a an online dating profile of the opposite gender. I'm a man, but when I made an account on tinder with a female friend's pictures I was blown away by just how radically different the experience was. Almost every person would match with me. Everyone would message me straight away. If I didn't reply most would message again in a few hours. A few would get very angry/upset that I didn't r…

Bumble is an interesting platform. The promise is that women have to message first, luring in men who are frustrated with lack of replies, and women who are frustrated with endless spam. From what I’ve heard from my friends, 99% of first messages on Bumble are ”hi” or a single emoji, kicking the ball straight back on the men’s side of the field. I wish dating as a research subject wasn’t so wrapped in weird MRA activ…

Anecdotally, I have a real problem striking up conversations with strangers, but even a simple "hi" really seems to put me at ease. I think they're onto something for a subset of the population with my problem, and that's why I prefer Bumble to Tinder.

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#216

Post by nojvek »

watwut wrote: post #199
maroonblazer wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the parent but it's definitely descriptive. Should it be that way? The answer likely depends on whether you're a man or a woman. From the male's POV changing the game benefits us since there's less work to do. If you're a woman then it's the opposite and a net negative. This sexual dynamic evolved for a reason, so changing it seems like the epitome of an uphill battle.

The one making the choice is more likely to end up with preferred partner. The one accepting/rejecting existing proposal has less chance to end up with most preferred partner.

Women can make choices too. It’s just that it’s frowned upon when a woman makes the first move. That’s your downside.

Men can brag Baku their sexual lives and even exaggerate it. Women have to do the opposite and be very secretive.

Perhaps it ties to the dynamic. Women are buyers. Men are sellers. Easy to spend $1000 to buy things, hard to earn $1000 to sell something.

Western dating is a totally different beast than other countries.

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#217

Post by CiPHPerCoder »

maroonblazer wrote: post #190
CiPHPerCoder wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the man's job to try, and it's the woman's job to choose. Is that a descriptive or prescriptive statement? Or put another way: Are you observing and remarking on cultural norms, or stating "This is how things should be?" I only ask because when someone says "It's X's job to [whatever]" the connotation is "X should [whatever]" but the context surrounding this made it ambiguous.

Not the parent but it's definitely descriptive. Should it be that way? The answer likely depends on whether you're a man or a woman. From the male's POV changing the game benefits us since there's less work to do. If you're a woman then it's the opposite and a net negative. This sexual dynamic evolved for a reason, so changing it seems like the epitome of an uphill battle.

> The answer likely depends on whether you're a man or a woman. From the male's POV changing the game benefits us since there's less work to do. If you're a woman then it's the opposite and a net negative.

I don't have a horse in that race, but I do have an ethical concern.

If you tell men that they're supposed to try, then it's likely that a lack of success will be met with trying harder.

What does this result in, practically speaking? Being more forward? Being more touchy? Being more in their face putting in the effort?

a.k.a. creepy, stalkerish behavior and possibly an increase in the incidence of sexual assault and/or harassment.

That's the concern I have with the "should" position.

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#218

Post by nojvek »

nkrisc wrote: post #194
cm2187 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Particularly given that in the current environment any form of flirting can be treated as sexual harassment and have dire consequences for the party taking the initiative.

If you think that flirting can be mistaken as sexual harassment then that tells me you have no idea how to flirt.

Any sort of flirting in a workplace can backfire on your face. Just takes one person to take it the wrong way and you’re shown the door.

That’s why there is a famous saying “Don’t shit where you eat”. Workplace relationships seldom end well.

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#219

Post by pwinnski »

Double_a_92 wrote: post #107
aphextron wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked for $large_dating_site for a number of years. The real genius of Tinder was giving women the power. We came to the same realization as well: that no matter how bad you make the user experience for men, they will use the app endlessly if real women are there. Online dating business models are exclusively based around enticing men with sex, and giving women the power to choose precisely who they want.

> they will use the app endlessly if real women are there Do they actually? I've spoken to many men and those apps don't seem to work at all. Usually gets deleted after a few days of usage. Like what's the point of being there if absolutely noone wants to write?

An individual man will not continue to use something they don't perceive as providing access to women.

Men in aggregate will crawl across an interface made of broken glass if they perceive it as providing access to women.

I know men in both categories.

Re: Impersonators who are paid to flirt on dating apps

#220

Post by [deleted] »

walrus01 wrote: post #168

If you really want to see something weird (from an American perspective) take a look at "matrimonial" websites such as shaadi.com , and Indian dating apps. The selection criteria for ethnic groups and religions! In the North American melting pot it's crude and racist to put blunt preferences in a dating ad, in India (and Pakistan, and Bangaldesh) apparently it's the norm.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN