2013-2014 Recipient Tabitha Rose

The Intimacy of Applications: The Materiality of social dating apps within the College Community

Tabitha Rose Anthropology 191

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

Table of Contents Introduction -------------------------------------------

2

Background and Literature Review -----------------------

5

Research Design ----------------------------------------

18

Methods -------------------------------------

19

Data and Analysis --------------------------------------

21

Conclusion ---------------------------------------------

33

References ---------------------------------------------

37

2

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

INTRODUCTION When walking around during any average day, contemporary life has a single constant.

Attached to the hand is a mobile device. This technology is becoming a necessary appendage.

The entire lives of the recent generation are placed within the small devices, giving it such great power, not only over the society and culture, but ourselves as well. The way to manage and organize these forces of automation in our lives is through applications. From cell phones to tablets, applications, or apps as they are abbreviated and commonly called, are abundant and flourishing. Each of these apps fall into categories, which range from gaming to social networking to even bank or credit card financing apps. One of the major trends, at the moment, is the lifestyle category apps, particularly social dating apps. This research considers the effects of social dating apps amongst the college community.

As an archaeology student, I am naturally intrigued by the material remains of past and ancient cultures. Archaeologists spend their lifetime trying to comprehend the physical objects discovered. These remains from civilizations, no matter what the forum, are called artifacts.

This term is derived from the Latin ars, skill or art, and factum, the deed or action, to establish the meaning as “any physical entity that is formed by human beings� (Caple 2006: 1).

Archaeologists go past the simple tangible to discover the theoretical, the unsubstantial ideas behind each and every artifact. Archaeologists try to create conceptual links between the culture and society and that of the object itself. There are numerous ways to analyze a single artifact.

There is the simple interior versus the exterior, the abstract versus the concrete, the appearance versus the essence, the substance versus the attributes, and then it can go farther to the concept versus fact, individual versus society, and even the body versus the mind (Shanks 1992: 120).

3

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

Even the structuring principles of a society can be seen within an artifact. Then there is the idea broadly known from Karl Marx’s writings of commodity fetishism. This idea, at its root, is simply the understanding of the objectivity versus the subjectivity of an object. An object, if by only its title as inclination, is an object. But what if it becomes the subject? What is an object has the power to do something or even the power over someone? Karl Marx believes that the subjectivity of an object is an illusion in itself, an idea pressed on by people and given life without any definitive power behind it (Fromm 1962: 50). This idea must be examined when looking at an artifact to learn the true meaning underneath the visible. The potential of an object, the creation by the hand of man to be used by man, versus the authority thrust upon it, the dependency for it and the dominance of it. The question posed by archaeologists is how the people innovate the object. How and why do they modify and transform the artifact? A simple object could become a mighty force in the hands of one who warrants it as such.

As a student within the field of archaeology looking at an object in my own contemporary time, compared to that of the ancient past, I am fascinated to see how these social dating apps, as artifacts, are used by my peers in the Hofstra University student community. As defined within anthropology, in which the subfield archaeology lies, “culture is based on communication and… artifacts embody and concretize various cultural values and achievements” (Berger 2009: 17). Therefore, what better contemporary artifact to study than one that employs communication that is indicative of this current society’s and generation’s culture?

At the start of my research, I had a conception of these digital applications, but it did not take me long to realize that the concept and use of the social dating apps have a much more complicated relationship between human and object. To uncover and understand the subconscious variable, the mystery needing subtle analysis between human and technology, of

4

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

the users and even the nonusers, one without a doubt has to be an archaeologist.

Though they could very well be a fleeting occurrence in these fast moving times, dating apps can be the stepping stones for future changes in intimate technological connections within the college world. This change in venues, from physical to digital to even mobile, and the way in which it may affect its users is an important phenomenon to document. Researches and studies have been done on dating sites throughout the century, but the century had just started. There is still much to be learned and documented in the intimate online world. Even still, anthropologists, sociologists, and other researchers cannot keep up with the fast sweeping trends as technology is advancing with unprecedented speed. Not much scholarly study has been done on the mobile dating apps. My goal is to add to all of the previous studies and learn how individuals, specifically college students, use and view the apps. The majority of those utilizing social dating apps are young adults. This age bracket defines the typical college student, and yet no research has targeted college students specifically.

As a college student at Hofstra University myself, I am in a unique position that many anthropologists and researchers lack. Being a fellow peer of my subjects gives me an “in.� This distinct perspective will allow me to relate with the community I wish to review, making my peers to feel more comfortable during my research and data retrieval. This enables me to gather more information, as well as more in depth and accurate data as a fellow student. Furthermore, I am an archaeology student. In this paper, I will address this problem far past that of defining how the social dating apps are used, but present the relationship between college students and the apps as a critical component amongst the campus community. I am going far past the simple touches of the mobile screens. This research will show that something as trending as social apps is not what they seem.

Archaeologists study the remains of great civilizations, but it can also be used to analyze our own contemporary artifacts. Do we even understand the objects we hold today? Can we really understand reality? The answer just may surprise you.

5

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW: THE RISE OF THE SOCIAL DATING APPLICATIONS

Since the dawn of computers and the internet, studies exist to understand this new environment. The World Wide Web has created a new setting in which anthropologists, typically studying the physical connections and cultures of mankind, must now take into account. These researches, though growing just as the internet is growing, lack in this current state. As technological breakthroughs increase and change the lives of the common man, the trends are in constant flux and researchers are not able to keep up with them all before technology has moved into the next modern advancement to become a commonality for all capitalist citizens. Much of the official scholarly research thus far has aimed towards the virtual world, but not many have focused on the mobile virtual community. That is where I hope to come in while putting an archaeological spin on things. In order to do this, I look into the social dating apps as objects, our modern artifacts, which need to be further understood.

In the start of the new millennium, articles take note on the growth of the virtual in the daily lives of the common family. From the rise of the internet in the 1960s, which was created primarily for the use of the military in communication for the defense of the nation, it took only twenty years for it to evolve and become available to be commonplace within American homes.

In a survey done in 1998, sixty one percent of American households had at least one personal computer that had a connection to the internet (Merkle and Richardson 2000). At this start, only

6

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

communication opportunities are present, due to the limitations of the technology of the time.

Contemporary internet has surpassed those limitations. Starting from emailing, the spectrum of messaging to information gathering has increased. The internet environment provides and forms a setting where people gather, in a sense, and form communities and groupings. This establishes a growing culture unique in itself. In more current articles, views of the internet become much more established. Within just 2010, the average of internet users, ages three and up, in the United States alone reached seventy two percent. Breaking down the statistics, over half of American couples with children have more than two computers in their households. Nearly ninety percent have more than a single cell phone, some of which use the mobile device in place of a landline, with as much as sixty percent of these being children between seven and seventeen (Hertlein 2012). This shows the growth, from just over ten years, to the great expanse of users on multiple platforms. The demographic has slowly evolved to encompass the next generation that is born into the technologically savvy world, referred to as “Generation Y” and “Millennials,” defined particularly as those born around 1980 to 1994, the recent college group (Albright and Simmens 2014). Coincidentally, as recently mentioned, this is around the start of common applications of the internet. But now the internet has advanced in applications, jumping from devices, just as the internet became wireless and open to reach those devices. Now the communication forms increased to include, but is not limited to, email, instant messaging, text messaging, chat rooms, bulletin boards, blogs, social networking utilities, video sharing, photo sharing, massive multiplayer online computer games, and other virtual worlds (Sybrahmanyam and Greenfield 2008). All of these options are similar at their cores, but range in functions from simple type and send to public conversations to public profiles. This leads to the future of internet applications, the apps for mobile devices. If the internet can encompass many different

7

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

platforms, then so too can all these forms of communication. These communication forms allow for a community to develop within itself, a virtual one. Within these online indigenous societies, communities formed within a single forum, relationships can be launched and then dissipated just as quickly as the simple messages or statuses.

This is the rise of the dating sites. “Romance, love, and sex are big business,� and corporations like to take advantage of this business granted with the advancements in technology (Churchill and Goodman 2008). Virtual or online matchmaking makes about a profit of five hundred million dollars each year in the United States, nearly half of the total amount for the industry itself, both online and offline. There are different types of dating and matchmaking sites. One type is based on a search, sort, and match type of system. It allows searches to be specific to different classifications, such as attributes and characteristics that are clarified by the user. The next form is a system based on your own profile and questions answered where there is control set by the parameters you select in order to find the other user that best matches or fits your own profile. Lastly, there are the groupings of sites providing matches that are considered for the user based on a social networking system. This is a system in which the focus is on social circles, connecting to those you would or could know (Albright and Simmens 2014, 282). In general, these sites have been used by nearly sixteen million Americans by as early as 2006.; twenty five million of which temporarily used or visited such sites. From about 1980 there was a steady increase in couples meeting on dating sites reaching to about five percent in the nineteen years. Then, in the 1999 to 2003 period, there was a nearly ten percent increase (Finkel and Eastwick et al. 2012). This shows the correlation between the advancements in online applications and the sudden rush in demand. From 2004 to 2006, it increases sharply again, by almost ten percent, with a slight increase from 2007 to 2009 (Finkel and Eastwick et al. 2012).

8

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

This shows the effects of a trend found in the dating sites and their popularity. As they began to form, many flocked to the dating sites as they sprouted like weeds in a field. Then, just like a trend, each fell out of favor or lost their consumer base, a decline in growth present for in these dating services (Churchill and Goodman 2008). Connections were drawn between the creators and the users of the dating sites. This could mark the change in the online dating scene in itself.

The dating sites began to morph to cater to a different or more focused demographic. This can be seen as “niches” that sites aim for, such as limiting to a location, sexual orientation, ethnicity, sex, the desirable end result, and other categories (Albright and Simmens 2012, 292). Social networking provides available placements for advertisements which are a strong point in taking advantage of the digital scene and connecting with possible consumer bases. Online dating transitions from being able to connect with endless available men and women in the world to the satellite global positioning system (GPS) technology employed by dating apps, in which there is a bringing back the concept of “loving-the-one-you’re near” that existed pre-online dating (Quiroz 2013: 181). Not only could the purposes for the dating sites have changed, such as the end game, but dating apps in themselves could have sprung up for this need to connect with a larger user base and keep them hooked.

Starting with the social dating app that brought all the apps of its kind into the spotlight, Tinder, just a year old, is a perfect example of a corporation using the digital dating drama to get into the romance market. The average age of users lies within the range of eighteen to late twenties and contain the same amount of male and female users. The app is simple to use and set up. Firstly, you create a profile, which can be as simple as just logging into Facebook, making the small textbox where you can put in whatever information you see fit only an option. Then, you are able to adjust the age range and proximity to your current GPS position. This provides 9

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

you with your candidates, those that fit your simple two parameters of age and location. These other users are displayed in the style of a stack of cards, a picture of the person, their name, age, and any similarities to your Facebook profile, such as mutual friends or similar interests (liking the same pages as you do on Facebook). You swipe left if you do not like the person, right if you do. You get a match only if both parties had swiped right, stating that you could either “send message” or “keep playing.” And thus the game begins. The app itself is based off of its predecessor, Grindr, the gay dating app of the same style for ages eighteen and up released in 2009 (Quiroz 2013: 182). This swiping motion is very important. Laura Stampler is a journalist who has written many articles on the current social dating app trend. Willing to go deep to the source, Stampler questions the creators of the apps, Tinder in particular, in order to try to understand the use, popularity, and the ideas behind the apps. Sean Rad, the co-founder of Tinder, stated to Stampler that the form of the stacked card appearance of the profiles was chosen for the instinctual impulse to “‘interact with it,’” supporting the idea that, like other gaming apps, the whole reason for it is to create an addiction. ‘“We always saw Tinder, the interface, as a game; what you’re doing, the motion, the reaction”’ (Stampler 2014, “Inside Tinder”: 1). Sean Rad even uses the app to hire employees (Stampler 2014, “Inside Tinder”: 1). The organization behind Tinder refuses to give the number of users, but Justin Mateen, co-founder of Tinder, muses that his app has increased in users by one million in just sixty days within the United States alone, with roughly five hundred million swipes occurring each day (Stampler 2014, “The New Dating Game”). This shows that not only do these dating apps grow in consumers, but is able to keep them as well, solving the previous issue of losing the users after they have been “successful.”

The physical and virtual worlds differ greatly and are yet very similar. The personal and 10

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

physical interactions between two individuals allow for visual attraction, in attitude, body language, and arousing interest, in order for further initiation of a relationship. The physical beauty is often observed in both worlds, virtual and reality, as a crucial element to decide if further interaction is wanted or merited. Relations are first initiated through discussion and debate, the opposite sequence to that of reality interacting (Merkle and Richardson 2000). The virtual world then enters reality with face-to-face meetings, bringing it to the end where an offline relationship would have started. This is where many researches hypothesize leads to the dissolving of the relationship or sexual encounters (Merkle and Richardson 2000; Albright and Simmens 2014). The fantasy is shattered with disappointment. Furthermore, there is the possibility of the view of a virtual relationship to not be considered a relationship at all, due in no small part to requiring less of a commitment or an effort from either party in the relationship. A group of researchers propose a nine step process for these sites, which may transcribe to the social dating apps (Finkel and Eastwick et al. 2012). First there is to look for information about an online dating site, putting in time and effort to find one. Second, register and set up for one, or more; third, creation and forming of a profile. Next is to casually look through the database at other users. Then one can initiate contact. Step six is to actually receive contact. This step can sometimes come directly after three. Reciprocating contact is the next step, followed by a physical meeting that could lead to the final, ninth, step, a romance offline (Finkel and Eastwick et al. 2012).

These researches and studies are all attempting to understand the apps, but they rarely understand the point of the apps: the users. Stampler (2014) points out that this new generation is now marrying later than the previous and apps such as these are taking advantage of that. She makes a line, “Old Game, New Rules,� because that is what this is, we are still seeking love, but 11

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

it is only through the parameters set up by the dating apps. Stampler herself had used the apps and felt the experience of such. She felt a rush when she got her first mutual “Like” on Tinder, already feeling like she has won, which is quite different from previous dating sites where the outcome of “winning” only occurred if a relationship had formed from two users coming together, with an “avoidance of outright rejection” due to the users never knowing if someone said no or just has simply not seen their profile yet (Stampler 2014, “The New Dating Game”; Roberts 2013). This gives rise to the notion that the romance and love origins are starting to dissolve away. Though some users may actually have a faint hope, whether they admit it or not, of finding someone they connect with, many seem to take on a different aspect. The apps can be used for other purposes, such as placing bets, like competing to see who can hook up first with someone on Tinder, or another relating dating app. Some users make fun of or point out users that are funny to friends, and some even have drinking games when a profile picture or detail fits a certain topic. Stampler observed a woman who kept swiping at Tinder even after she had found a match, with her boyfriend right there. Stampler expresses that the boyfriend revealed that he does not care because “she’s simply playing a game” (Stampler 2014, “The New Dating Game”). How did these reactions form from the original uses of the apps and dating sites?

Tinder has become known as the “‘hookup’ app.” Other than Tinder, there have been many more to follow and spring forth with apps that fill a specific niche, such as Bang with Friends, directed for simple sex, Coffee Meets Bagel, a coffee or lunch date app, a primarily picture profile focused app called Kisstagram, as well as Scruff, a gay dating app aimed for hairy men. In a focus on Tinder, the co-founder and CEO for Tinder states that it is not a dating app, nor will it ever be a dating app. The main goal, in his words, is “to use Tinder to find new people for any purpose” (Roberts 2013: 1). Even so, Tinder is widely seen as not very serious and a 12

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

place for finding close hookups. But the CEO defends his app, stating that it is merely how the users intend to use it. The app is successful in the fact that it is allowing people to meet new people, but what they do from there is their own choice. “All we do is open up a chat box,” the CEO states matter-of-factly (Roberts 2013: 1). When looking at the Tinder app in the store, iTunes for the Apple iOS users or Google Play for Android users, it has a four star customer rating. The iTunes store described it in the following, “Tinder finds out who likes you nearby and connects you with them if you're also interested. It's the new way to meet people around you,” and then follows with two bullet points elaborating each part (“Tinder” 2013). Instead of instantly listing customer reviews, it immediately follows with quotes from news articles: "It's a rare feat for any app to mirror real-life, but the app does just that."

- Fast Company "The application is clearly addictive."

- The New York Times "'Tinder' is a verb. It has become so popular that the name of the application is an action."

- The Huffington Post "Everyone I know is suddenly talking about it."

- New York Magazine "Tinder is essentially a postmodern nod to a most primitive form of liberal dating."

- The Man Repeller Looking at these media reviews, all are being ambiguous in the real meaning of the app and understanding what it is, only shedding light on the rising popularity of the app. The customer reviews, at the bottom of the page, show two four stars as well as a two star, but the three all state that they use the app “serious[ly]” and it is successful (“Tinder” 2013). In other forms of mass media, this app in particular is propagandized. An example of such can be seen in the monologues of the popular evening show host Jimmy Fallon, as he introduces the app as the “popular dating app Tinder” and in a later episode stating that “Tinder, that’s the way to do it, man; everyone’s into that now,” followed by the guest explaining how it is used, putting 13

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

emphasis on the swiping. Aside from this, the popular YouTube channel for the younger generation, CollegeHumor, also created a short video called “Tinderella: A Modern Fairy Tale” where the app is used in a Cinderella circumstance, ending with the main male and female, the prince and princess, meeting, having casual sex, and then parting ways to never meet again. Not only is mass media promoting Tinder as a hookup app, far different from that even of a dating app, it is presenting ideas of the app to this new generation, primarily college students, that are not parallel to the intended use of the app as directed by the CEO. Looking further into this, the app is rated as twelve and over with “Infrequent/Mild Sexual Content and Nudity,” “Infrequent/Mild Profanity or Crude Humor,” and “Infrequent/Mild Mature/Suggestive Themes (“Tinder” 2013). Not only is the app attempting to rate a public domain space where the users personally choose to say or show the above warnings, it is also setting the age level to as low as twelve years old. So who are these customers? Who are the people targeted by these social dating apps?

Adolescents have a tendency to use the internet a great deal, living parts of their lives in blogs, virtual gaming (of such a subscription must be paid and terms and conditions must be accepted, thus protecting the gamers and users), and other communities, heavily in the social network world. There are good things granted by the networks in the virtual-verse, such as stress release and on hand information, but then there are bad effects, such as predation and overload of information. Touching on the control necessary for protecting one’s children, even though there are parental blockers to the internet, many do not use such products. The new generation is far more tech savvy than their parents and thus can get around or frolic in a grander virtual field than adults would imagine. Yet, in the case of MySpace in an examination of about nine thousand users, most adolescents do not actually disclose information. Most adolescents make use of the

14

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

protections on social networking sites and set their own restrictions. This can be seen in the same survey of MySpace where forty percent were set to private profiles, under ten percent actual gave their name, instant messaging was revealed for only four percent, a single percent gave their email, and, finally, barely just 0.3 percent had telephone numbers (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield 2008). I believe this is very different from contemporary uses of similar, more prominent and connected social networking sites, like Facebook. During this time, there is the rising tide that is cell phones, as well as other portable devices, including the applications within the devices. Researchers, noticing this, look to see the effect of portable technologies at the disposal of children. These new advances are changing the focus of everyday life of children.

As researches gravitated to children to learn of their view on the technologies, powerful factors were discovered that needed to be addressed when studying the uses of these devices.

The first is the bias when asking about uses. The more one spends using it, the more one defends the point. Continually, there are many errors, simple human errors, in just simply recalling one’s usage and activities that cause distortion in the data. The next important point to take into account is the fact that fads and bursts of popularity changes the data completely. Something may become obsolete or replaced over a relatively short amount of time, outdating the research entirely. The studying of adolescents brings notice that they take advantage of these technologies to develop their “identity, autonomy, intimacy, and sexuality� (Subrahmanyam and Greenfield 2008, 124). In another study, just under fifty percent of teens have faith that using online implementation allows for enhancing relations between friends and even romantic partners.

Also, the authors like to point out that sixty one percent believe that spending time in the virtual world is negating time in their reality. Even with this belief, they come to the conclusion that the internet is allowing the cease in desiring physical contact between acquaintances (Finkel and

15

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

Eastwick et al. 2012).

Barriers are created, not just between the virtual and physical world as mentioned above, but between peers, leading to cyber bullying through chat rooms and texts. This separation and anonymity of the internet allows for too great of negative use. Couples are able to keep in constant contact through hours not previously available and this can reinforce or dishearten and aggravate relationships. One of the examples given is that a quarter of teens talk in some form every hour from the middle of the night to dawn (Finkel and Eastwick et al. 2012). Moving on, the sex information available tends to leave critical psychological results on adolescents; for example, depression, trauma, revulsion, mortification, discomfort, shame, and even humiliation.

On the upside, these similar, if not same, venues allow for sexual exploration and minority freedom. Even still, many users of these settings often give false information, creating an image they want to see of themselves or purposefully lying. This is the “funhouse mirror� that gives the ability for both the creator and the observer to form a distortion in creating the virtual reflection (Finkel and Eastwick et al. 2012). This changes the scape of relationships and how they are formed in the virtual world. Going further, research begins to rethink relationships and definitions within them, such as roles, boundaries, rules, and intimacy, which have changed and are redefined in their own way through the technological transition (Hertlein 2012). Such can be seen in information gratification and sharing, cybersex (leading to infidelity), sexual encounters, and thus all allowing a breach from the usual relationship, even marriage bound ones.

Phone usage is affected by the situation, including but not limited to, parental regulations (which is limited, even with the use of blocking software), present company (those who are surrounding you when using or not using the mobile devices), knowledge of who is on the other end, and the environment (Hertlein 2012). Boundaries are even formed and blurred in a different

16

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

understanding in sustaining a relationship. When social networking, people can get upset with personal postings without permission or, oppositely, the constant access to one another may make one feel stifled within the relationship, each putting a new stress on couples. The role of such internet uses also change, becoming contested on the part of daily usage, obligations being avoided, and expectations on roles of particular functions themselves. Intimacy between one another can be related to frequent use of internet and communication through it. Also, intimacy is highly affected by interpretations. The receiving party may construct an entirely different aspect than that of the sender, leading to less reliant on another individual, than the self. This all affects the sex and emotion between one another in a relationship. Furthermore, there is constant maintenance within a relationship in the modern technological world and these effects can be understood and adapted to after carefully and particularly focusing on the “timing and tempo” of intimacy and romance (Hertlein 2012: 376).

Now, with my focus on college students, there is much to know and understand about this latest generation limited in the short college years. Bringing back the idea of the “Millennial generation,” being born and raised within a time of economic affluence, with plenty of comfort and luxury amongst their protected bubble, has lead the new generation into that of indulgence (Hanson et al. 2011: 24). Multitasking becomes a major trait adherent to this new generation, one that did not exist to such an extent in the prior ages. For example, many study for their classes while listening to music or similar typically defined distractions. Instead of reading newspapers, the generation is reading online headlines and small blurbs. Replacing physical libraries, the college student’s time is spent using the electronic databases provided by their college or university. College goers are seeking “instant feedback” and instant gratification in their everyday classwork, taking “short cuts and plac[ing] priority on activities with the highest

17

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

reward” (Hanson et al. 2011: 24-27). In a recent study, researchers hoped to learn how college students managed their time, especially in this world with amplitude of technological devices nearly everywhere we go. The study showed that these Millennial students are more fixated on social interactions, the “‘connectedness’ with friends, family and colleagues,” (Hanson et al.

2011: 23). The students participating in the research mostly believe that they manage time well, but the time diaries they kept, for the sake of the project, proved otherwise. While sleeping an average of seven hours per night, the students have a totaled mean of 26.41 hours per week of different forms of entertainment, including but not limited to reading, playing video games, and watching television (Hanson et al. 2011: 27). Social networking, such as Facebook, had a mean time of 5.43 hours per week and texting and emailing at about 15.93 (Hanson et al. 2011: 27).

These different forums for applied personal time of college students can all be done through the apps of small mobile devices we have today. So where do dating apps fit in? Yes, they are a form of social networking, but are they not also seen as entertainment as well? How do college students view and understand the dating apps? How do college students use them? Why? These are all primary questions that need to be addressed in order to obtain an understanding for this contemporary technologically powerful object. Through an interactive analysis of the social dating apps, I, as a student of archaeology will put to the test all of the interpreting theories and concepts when reading and, in this case, observing material culture to see if it is possible to truly understand an artifact.

18

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

RESEARCH DESIGN During the extent of this ethnographic examination, I spend my time observing Hofstra University students. Though this may be a national or even global phenomenon, I am setting my boundaries just within the Hofstra University student community, with no limitations in sex, social standing, sexual orientation, Greek life, or originating geographic locations, though I will take all into account. To do so, I am focusing on the college community within the locations where students congregate the most, such as the Student Center and other eating establishments on campus where students, both commuters and residents, spend their free time outside classes.

With my attention on students, from approximately eighteen to twenty five, I am looking at the uses of social dating apps, such as purpose and reasons, during the spring semester. At this point, most students have been in college for at least one semester and have become a part of the college community. I make use of the cluster of students to perform open interviews with students willing to talk. For those who are resigned otherwise, I have prepared a separate interview set of questions with the main points that I stress in the interviews. As each interviewee is different, the extent to which they know of social dating apps and/or use them, I attempt to gather as much in depth and personal information on the relationships or impressions between the user and the apps. Through the collection of interviews, I encourage the subjects to narrate their experiences and expressions of intimacy when and through using the dating apps. I gather the impressions the dating apps have left on the non-users. With all perspectives, from users to non-users of the apps, I set out to discover the extent of using the apps within the physically interactive world. Do students use the apps to form relations instead of interacting with their peers in the informal and very social setting that the bars present? Are the apps actually an addiction that the students feel as though they need to check them, and have these 19

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

apps become as instinctual to check as social networking sites? Through this system of gathering data, I analyze the effects and perpetuation of dating apps within the college community at Hofstra University. If there are any consequences or achievements resulting from usage, this research provides the answer. With this in mind, I aim to see if there is a difference between the ways in which apps are utilized, specifically in purpose and intent, conduct and behavior, and also setting and performance, and how this may relate within and to the college community.

RESEARCH METHODS

For my research into understanding the effects and views of dating apps on the initiation of intimacy in the college community, I focus on the students at Hofstra University. During this research, I have formed an interview, of which I ask questions to answer my research objectives.

Such would be, to start off with, to learn if the Hofstra University student has ever used or heard of any dating apps. ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏ ❏

How much do they use it (frequency)?

How did they first learn of the app(s)?

When did they first download the app(s) and for what reason?

When do they use the app(s), as in time of day, weekday or weekend, emotional state, etcetera?

Where do they use the app(s), at home, on campus, in public places, bars/other social locals?

Have they had any success with it?

What uses do they use each app for?

How do they use the app?

Do they only chat, chat then physically meet, or meet in person nearly right away?

Does it strengthen a relationship they might be in?

Did they start a relationship through a dating app?

Did they see people they know on their app and what reaction they had towards this?

Do they maintain connection or use of the app even after intimacy has been found?

What is their attraction to the app(s)?

Do they like what they see in the app, the people and community?

20

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

While I have been on campus, I have observed the dating scene up close and looking for those who are using their mobile devices. I have noted who is physically communicating while doing so and who are not, but have either physical or virtual party idle while exchanging with the other.

To study the data, I have textually analyzed the responses. By reviewing the data, I aim to discover if there is an effect from the dating apps on the Hofstra University students and their intimacy and relationship with the virtual object in any way and form. I am ascertaining if there are factors which grant this effect, such as accessibility to dating apps, frequent usage and reasons for such, as well as possible popularity effects, like peer pressure. I have a compiled list of the popular dating apps and sort all responses accordingly. I wish to demonstrate the correlation between the apps and the purposes proposed by the users, and how they are distinctly different from one another in the college community. I further attempt to study the successful (discovering what many of my subjects may consider “successful�) uses of the app as well as the results merited, in all forms, through the dating apps. I endeavor to understand if there is a negative or positive outcome from the apps, or whether the apps are being used in such a way as to keep the users safe from possible negative effects. Is this intangible object, indirect in every way, becoming a subject through the given power of the users?

21

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

DATA AND ANALYSIS: SOCIAL DATING APPS AND THE COLLEGE COMMUNITY

As I have analyzed it, the research has provided many interesting points, all of which point to one specific problem: misconception. There is a wide misconception accepted by both users and non-users. This misconception can be split into parts including the dating applications themselves, the users, and the uses of the dating apps. The reality behind social dating apps lead to developments in both relationships and the community, encompassing effects on the individual versus the society, the private verses the public.

It did not take long for me to see a trend in the twenty interview responses. The first, to my own amazement, is that there is a widespread misconception in the world of social dating apps. Looking back at the interviews, I realized quite quickly that social dating apps are not as well-known as I had first assumed. One of my subjects, when asked to describe what Tinder is, stated matter-of-factly, “Everyone knows what Tinder is.� Her own statements rang true for the tone given by all the Tinder users, including myself, but this was not accurate at all. A surprising fifteen percent of the Hofstra University students interviewed had not heard of Tinder, or Grindr for that matter. Of these students, the age range was rather large, from nineteen to twenty one, and also the originating homes all came from relatively close proximity to the Hofstra University campus. None of this data seemed relevant, at first, until the next commonality uprooted through the speeches of dating app users.

Every single interviewee, with the exception of those mentioned before, have heard of

22

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

Tinder or Grindr, as well as social dating apps in general, through “word of mouth.” While Tinder is shown floating around the top fifty apps for Apple’s IOS, as well as being mentioned in mass media, all of the Hofstra students interviewed have heard of the dating app(s) from a friend.

An acquaintance shows or describes the application to another and that person passes on to others, creating a cycle, increasing in rate this latest semester. One interviewee in particular is spreading the word of the app to all of those within her sorority, getting her sisters to join. I will call her F1 (female one) to ensure that her identity remain completely anonymous. She had stated that she is known as the “Tinder Guru” amongst her sorority on campus. This continuous action amongst peers of like ages is what seems to have made Tinder spread like wildfire and become popular. Sororities have a family mentality, being connected by intangible bonds, even to sisters who are merely acquaintances. This social bond of sororities and fraternities ensures the cooperation of members as well as easy transmission of trends from one to the next. Greek life and the college community in general make for a good environment for something so small to spread simply by word of mouth. Especially at Hofstra University, a community as tightly bound together with the mixing of so many different people, it is inevitable that a fad would make its way in and disperse amongst the population. The ones who have not yet discovered these social dating apps are commuters who limit their time on campus. It seems that the fact that they had not yet heard of the app, until I informed them about it, is due to lack of exposure to the users on campus. Even so, there is no doubt that these apps are being used outside of the campus community as well, but it is far more likely to come into contact with a user within a site comprised of the average age group. The average Tinder user, for example, is twenty seven and in college, but it is wise that this statistic is almost a year old now and the popularity and consumer base has increased (Roberts 2013).

23

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

One Hofstra student, male, had returned to his home in a different state and was staying with a group of his old friends. Amongst the rowdy drinking games, one pointed out an app in his phone, informing my interviewee to download the app, that there are a lot of “sluts” on it.

All of the male heterosexual users and even non-users have stated that they discovered the app through a male friend, often calling the female users “sluts.” The homosexual males, on the other hand, all stated that they learned of the apps through another gay friend who had mentioned that they could actually meet someone on it. All of the females who used or knew of the apps had learned of the app through a friend, mostly female, but some male and even one who was homosexual. Out of these females, only one said that she learned about the app from a friend who told her there were a lot of guys to “fuck around with.” She explained this as being an opportunity to chat with the males on the app, making fun of them without them knowing. In the male aspect, a non-user informed me of an interesting gathering he had attended at a fraternity where the men pulled out their phones to search for girls on Tinder, since they “needed” more for the party. To understand this idea of Tinder being full of sluts, I compared the responses with their impressions of Tinder. These males, except for one, described Tinder for “hooking up.”

This parallels the titles given by news reviews for the app, such as “Hook up app Tinder wants to change its image,” and “Tinder Users Hope to Swipe Their Way to New Love.”

To understand how the social dating apps are perceived, I look to a more scholarly definition of a “hook up.” Even as a college student myself, I did not know what exactly hooking up entailed, hearing it used in multiple varying cases. A well-defined idea of hooking up exemplifies this ambiguity as “casual sexual encounters (ranging from kissing to intercourse) between two people with no clear mutual expectation of further interactions or a committed relationship,” (Owen, Fincham, and Moore 2011). With this definition in mind, explanations

24

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

given by the interviewees can be compared when asked to elaborate further on the idea of “hook up apps.” It is here that a trend develops. After a moment of considering what it fully entailed, all the users and non-users stated a similar idea of hooking up.

The users of the dating apps who have met with people through said apps actually have a higher tendency to have intercourse within the second or third, but sometimes even first, dates than they actually realize. All stated a low chance, on a scale from one to ten (with ten being completely likely), of having sexual encounters of any kind with someone they met through dating app(s). Casual sex is constantly given as “zero to one” on this scale. Interestingly, “one to two” is the range given for likeliness to actually meet someone that they chat with from the dating app(s). This belief is contradictory to what they actually do.

All the physical meetings with their dating app partners, especially after the first date, had ended with intercourse. This shows the separation between reality and consciousness in regards to the app as an artifact. In reality, they act ironically, doing what they believe they would never really do (the 0 to 1/10 hook up probability). This being said, these few who meet with another user through the app(s) do so selectively, rarely, and safely. F1 encourages others to use the app safely while also heeding her own warnings. Though she is meeting with complete strangers, she informs a friend or two where she is going, when, and who with (including all the information she has on him). She avoids meeting anyone at or near her house, getting in a car with said stranger, or even going to his place. Another female student user, F2, gives the similar safety precautions she uses when meeting someone from a social dating app, or any online forum. Out of all my interviewees, only these two females have used Tinder in such a way to relate it to the hook up scene. Notably, F1 used dating apps as a way to branch out to different types of people since she originated from a small town, and F2 used dating apps also to branch

25

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

out, but particularly looking away from Hofstra, finding the community too small and intimate.

Between the two of them, they have only met with about five men. This shows that there is a basis for the “hook up” app and the vulgar views of the female users as “sluts,” but these conceptions are greatly distorted to appear far more dramatic than it actually is.

One female interviewee who did not use the dating apps goes to the bar a few times a week and finds someone to have casual sex with every time. There is no difference between using the app or going to the bar when considering casual intercourse in this regards. From this research, it seems almost safer for females to use the app for casual hook ups. Perhaps these malicious misconceptions are caused by the same method of advertising employed by the apps: word of mouth. An example of such can be the actual experience of hooking up through the app being told to close friends, who may tell other friends, who may be over heard, the internet may catch on it (a meme or joke may arise), which will then be read, interpreted, and spoken about, a new cycle forming.

If only a small percentage of the interviewees actually used the dating apps for the greatly hyperbolized notion of hook up sex, what were the apps, particularly Tinder, being used for? To understand this, I explore the perception of “success,” both from users and non-users. When asked directly, many subjects stated that success meant meeting new people, but few brought up an interesting point. Particularly is a male who, while he does have and use Tinder, never meets up with any of the females nor does he even chat. As a different notion, his version of “success” is that of the match. The swiping motion, the repetitive lefts with the sporadic rights, when performed by both parties mutually, darkens the screen to inform the user. This is a form of instant gratification, a functionality behind the app that is incredibly different from its manifest function (meeting new people) and its believed function (hooking up). When using dating apps,

26

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

both parties understand that the other “likes” them, whether the user actually likes him or her (since swiping right does not mean it was done for that sole purpose) is irrelevant. You are liked.

Seeing this new screen encompass the mobile device, having interrupted the addictive swiping motion employed by each individual, breaks through the haze formed from the stream of pictures sliding in and out of your vision, just long enough for the realization and “high” from getting a match to hit. This makes the success of users require much less connection and interaction with one another, allowing the individuals to remain as such and continue on through the app or even end it there for the moment.

Most of my interviewees, bisexual and heterosexual, stated that they do not use the app “seriously” or to actually meet people. It is considered a “joke.” The app is considered for hooking up, and yet it is mainly used to look at people and sometimes chat, as the non-serious users informed me. Instead, the app is entitled to fill a void. A term to come up in every student’s description of using the apps themselves or seeing others who use them, even when being used to find “hook ups,” is “bored.” Dissecting their more elaborate answers, the role of apps in the lives of the Hofstra University students can be clearly seen. First, the timeframe of usage is understood. What is “bored” to them? From the interviewees recollection, they use the apps when they are on campus, waiting between classes, in the bathroom, while lying in bed, and typically whenever “bored” (which some admit includes sitting in class). A picture of what the apps are to the users can begin to fully form. The social dating apps are used when “bored,” like mobile games, and also share or replace social networking time, though that does not say that multitasking many apps at once does not happen. During these short bursts of free time, what the users define as boredom filled moments, the dating apps are utilized as entertainment as a latent function, as if time has a necessity to be filled with something. This corresponds to what

27

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

the co-founder of Tinder, Sean Rad, had mentioned during an interview, ‘“Nobody joins Tinder because they’re looking for something. They join because they want to have fun. It doesn’t even matter if you match because swiping is so fun”’ (Stampler 2014, “Inside Tinder”:1). With that being said, Sean Rad had in fact met his girlfriend on his very creation, showing that there is much more than the addiction aspect of motion that entangles its users. From observing users on their own or my own dating app(s), the addiction is evident, as one non-user pointed out as she put down my mobile device. But from what I saw, as well as the time frame of using the app(s) stated by the users, they are able to put it down. They can stop swiping whenever they lose interest or something else grabs their current attention. The main effect of the swiping motion appears to be passing up “cute” guys or girls, as they are used to swiping “no” and realize too soon that they saw something they liked.

Of the male interviewees, none of the heterosexuals actually meet or even chat with the girls on the apps. Contrary, all the interviewed homosexually oriented males use the dating apps to their full advantage. Using Grindr, as the app that started them all, as well as other niche fitting apps, such as Scruff and Adam to Adam, the men seek out other men when they go out.

Since Hofstra University is on Long Island, it is easy enough for the students to get into New York City. When going to the city, they could look for someone to meet up with or hook up with in the city. Some even mention trying to avoid ex-hook ups that may be nearby usual hang outs, both physical, as in bars, and virtual in the apps. One, M1, is graduating and leaving the state for graduate school. Since he is not going to be staying here for much longer, M1’s search through the apps has changed from possible relationship material to just hook ups. This being said, M1 and the other users of Grindr have made some friends through the apps, chatting frequently, meeting a handful, and having intercourse with many of those.

28

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

Though all users may adapt a routine for using the social dating apps, there seems to be a subtle hope beneath all of the users that maybe they might just find someone good enough. F1 uses the app as “a joke,” something commonly used to refer to Tinder, but she had met her current boyfriend on the app. She stated how they have lived parallel lives up until that very moment. They had lived in the same building freshmen year and had attended similar classes, but never once did they actually interact with one another. When using Tinder, she came across his profile. Curious, since she had seen him around before, she swiped right. It was a match.

Afterwards, they talked briefly on the app, meeting up in person nearly immediately.

The app, as she pointed out, allowed them to both know that they were interested in one another.

Without this slight nudge and help from Tinder, she would never have known that he was interested in her and he would never have asked her out. Similarly, F2 is currently dating someone near campus who is not a student. She states that she would never have met him if the GPS range of Tinder never picked him up. In the cases of M1 and other homosexual students, using the dating apps help immensely in “luck” of finding partners. M1 states that it is not easy to tell the difference between straight and gay men, but using the apps gets rid of that uncertainty.

When using the dating apps, chatting is, of course, the next step past matching. This step is crucial. In the interviews, there are hints of language signifiers in which a conversation is started that hints towards a desired outcome, such as suggesting sex. Some of these are obvious, while others may start off as a simple “hey.” While relevant in both Grindr and Tinder, the individuals that use the latter scoff at these language signifiers, referring to them as either being jokes or being creepy. An example of such can be seen in the following screen shot from my own Tinder app as used by one of my interviewees upon her request and my acceptance: 29

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

As you can see, he (the orange) started off with something preposterous, with my subject (the blue) barely egging him on. This is an example of a user who is not intending anything past talking, stating something ridiculous that would never be polite in our society to say. Other similar conversation initiations start with “Ur cute,” and sometimes as classy as “Have u ever had 10 inches before?” This two may be intended as the male from the screenshot, but with a hope of hooking up, as the signifiers are more physical to sexual based. On the one hand, some females are put off by such chatting, while on the other hand many of the other females like to make jokes and point out statements and comments for entertainment in itself.

These lead to an important emic concept within social dating apps. Being online and avoiding face-to-face anxieties, a feeling of “anything goes” develops. Even still, there are some dating apps that seem to merit respect while others lack it completely. Though a dating site, OkCupid has branched off to flourish in the dating app world. OkCupid is used by all sexual orientations as well as the same users that have met people on Tinder and Grindr. Both of these

30

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

groupings rank OkCupid amongst the most respectable dating app, followed far behind by Grindr and Tinder since they both mainly pushed towards a hook up focus, with other dating apps such as Hot or Not and Adam for Adam considered “sleazy,” as a few stated. That all being said, as mentioned before, Tinder is considered a laughingstock in the social networking, gaming, and hook up worlds.

With this new generation of technology, there are many obvious effects of these dating apps on the college community, at least here at Hofstra University. The students who have established relationships with a partner through or while using any of these dating apps require “a talk” in order for their intimacy to continue or to establish “official” relationship status. Even those who use the dating apps for entertainment all agree, some with shocked revelation on their faces, that they would like to know if their partner is using the app(s) and in what way. The ones who do not take the app seriously in any form, are fine with their intimate other is still using the app(s) while they are dating. The interviewees expressed that they are complacent as long as he or she is not using it to hook up. Even still, except for one who had given such a nonchalant response, seemed hesitant, admitting that they might be slightly uncomfortable and need to know exactly how their other is using the dating apps. Of the remaining students interviewed, all of the ones who have met with someone through the use of the apps have had “the talk” with someone who they intended to get serious with, whether they had met inside the virtual domain or out.

This entails discussing concerns of how the partner uses the app: (1) if he or she uses it for entertainment, usually never chatting to any matches; (2) chatting with another on the app; (3) chatting and meeting with someone from the app; and (4) hooking up with another, which would be considered cheating once in an established relationship. Once this is made aware to both parties, the fear of the app is valued and taken into account. The final step is to both agree upon

31

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

a plan, either: (1) keep using the dating app(s); (2) use the apps in a different manner; (3) delete the accounts; or (4) delete the app(s). An example of this is with F1, after a few dates with her current boyfriend, before she had been certain enough to bring up “the talk,” he had informed her, casually, that he had deleted the dating apps from his phone. After he told her, she happily did the same out of courtesy and mutual regard for one another. This is a sign of commitment within the intimate formation of relationships, a new step that is formed that only exist due to its own threat.

The dating apps further affect the intimacy practices of college students. With Hofstra University as a tight knit community, people know one another and can connect each to one another easily. In a case of a sorority on campus, a sister had broken up with her boyfriend, though she had been hoping it would be more of a short time off. Not long later, the boyfriend had matched with a sister’s profile on Tinder. He proceeded to hit on her and ask her out, in a sense of a hook up. The sister informed the other about the actions of her now ex-boyfriend and the two proceeded to “play around” with him. The interviewee retells this story with far more vulgarity than I will elaborate on. This shows the open opportunity to allow for manipulation and revenge amongst young adults in the college community that had not previously been able, prior to smart phones and mobile devices, due to limited technology.

Then there is the community on the apps. Cultural codes are expressed and yet put in question when people who are known by the user show up on these applications. The idea of an individual being unexpected or expected on a specific dating app has a great social impact. This can be seen when a student is “outed,” becoming widely known for his or her homosexual orientation, whether he or she wishes the fact to become public knowledge and gossip. One interviewee expressed using a friend’s Grindr. On it she had seen a fellow peer who she had

32

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

assumed was gay or bisexual, but did not know for certain. Seeing his profile, she had her answer. Since it is personal information that does not pertain to him or her, some may keep this a secret, but seeing as how this interviewee conveyed the information of the gay individual with enthusiasm during her interview, it is highly unlikely, especially in a very cozy community. This shows that the social dating apps have formed a problem in an individual’s private realm. While it is understood by users of dating apps that the information is being made public, the fact that, if you desire to find dates or hook ups via apps, you have no choice but to sacrifice your privacy and, in the case of LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender), broadcast your sexuality to the community, collectively.

Finally, with a holistic view, there is an obvious connection between the dating apps and the Hofstra University student community: the users. Students are seeing their peers on these dating apps. Some have an adverse reaction to this. Finding the situation awkward, the user would swipe left or even block the people he or she knows. The other portion of users believe seeing an acquaintance is extremely humorous. They would swipe right and match with friends, following only with funny messages to one another. Comparatively, on the other side of the screen, the users each act in reality as they do in the virtual, respectively. The ones who see people on campus after seeing them first on the mobile device find it extremely entertaining, as if the act of finding them in reality is a game in itself. These actions, though striking bipolar opposites, both show that when a connection is already formed between people, the app(s) loses its appeal and the people are ignored as matches or possible matches (when ignored or swiped left). This is the connection the application has as an object with the community. It attempts to pair the individual with the society while simultaneously keeping them separate through the focus on the small screens.

33

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

CONCLUSION: SOCIAL DATING APPS AS ARTIFACTS

Like magic in the ancient world, spells, amulets, and relics are used over a great expanse of time, not solely on faith, but because they do sometimes work. The system would no longer be in place if it did not work as intended. The same can be said for social dating apps. Most users are not using the apps for the intended purposes of meeting new people, nor are they using it to hook up (the frequently expected objective). But that does not mean that hooking up and casual sex do not occur through the use of the app, it is simply not commonly used for the purposes originally believed. This is the connection between concept and fact within an artifact.

Archaeologists see the tangible, developing concepts from it and comparing it with known facts.

As with these social dating applications, they are artifacts that have been misunderstood as being hook up apps, while the facts of the apps’ usage are something far less sexual.

As Sigmund Freud stated, there is a “meaning, which [is] unknown to the subject, but which could easily be discovered by analytic means” (Freud 1963: 235-236). The latent function of social dating apps appear to be entertainment as well as ego boosting. This symbolic yet unrecognized meaning is what connects the individuals with the app. The relationship between user and interface is based upon the functionality, what “helps maintain the entity” or artifact, rather than the manifest function, the “obvious, stated reason for using something” (Berger 2009: 54). The app is a commodity. Like all things in our capitalist society, it is trying to sell the consumer something, in this case, your insecurity. Social dating apps are telling you that vanity is important and you need to know if your appearance is accepted. Dating apps allow the user to 34

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

create a personal advertisement in an impersonal market. These personal ads, or user profiles, are a way of promoting your desire to be liked, an ego booster that keeps users interacting with the application. There is not much more you could ask for from the app once you are accepted, reaching your success. It has successfully provided you with the temporary cure for the insecurity it had created. It will continue to create this insecurity and success until the user no longer desires to interact with the application. This is the power behind the apps: the object becoming important, dominating a person as if the app itself is a subject, is only an illusion purposefully built into the appeal. The controlling power on the lives of users is taken on as part of the applications’ attributes and qualities. The object is desired because of its power over us, but, in truth, we control that power. This is the personification of commodity fetishism in the modern day. Technology, something far more different and potent than Karl Marx had ever encountered, may have a pronounced hold on us, but only to the extent that we let it; we grant it a position of dominance. The power of trends displays this never-ending cycle of acceptance, utilization, and abandonment that accompanies our indulgence in technology. Most of the interviewees who had not given in to temptation yet, or who had not heard of the dating apps, agreed that they might just download the apps to try them out for fun. Only two said they would not bother, that they were not desperately bored enough just yet.

Expanded research is needed to understand the trends that may lie within social dating apps. All research should contain a larger and diverse sample size. It would have been ideal if my research could have included the very beginning of this trend, in order to show the transition and any differences in uses from its first uses to how it is used today. It would also be interesting to see the difference between small campuses and larger ones, as well as the difference between urban, suburban, and rural locations, where the number of residents and commuters change

35

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

drastically. The differences between college students, high school students, and those already in the workforce should also be studied, in terms of knowledge of the social dating apps and their uses. Finally, we should ask whether there is a blurred distinction between work (the intended uses and socially prominent reasons for the apps) and play (the misuses of the apps for entertainment and ego promotion).

It is impossible to fully grasp what we lack in knowledge, even with a contemporary artifact that we recognize in our current culture every day. It is it difficult for archaeologists to grasp the fragmented remains of ancient great civilizations, and yet we try daily to strive towards a better understanding of the past. The idea that “if, as the truism goes, the past only exists in the present moment, then archaeology as a discipline should sit firmly within the realms of contemporary culture� is often criticized (Trubshaw 2009: 359). It is true that archaeologists study the past from the present and interpret through a lens of cultural bias. What needs to be addressed here is that archaeologists, in the same as well as different cultures, develop their own insights on artifacts and ancient societies. This is how archaeology is a science. It allows contested theories to be analyzed, addressed, and hypothesized, such as in applied archaeology.

It is through the hard study of the remains of the past that we have learned how much we have changed and developed as the human race. If archaeology is so firmly set in contemporary culture, then my research disapproves such an idea. I attempted with my own research to view and understand a contemporary artifact. I have discovered that the object itself and its relationship to people are far different than I, an archaeology student in this contemporary culture, would have ever imagined. The context of artifacts, no matter what the time period, cannot be contained in the present, it is a constant flow impacted by the past and consistently through time. Uses develop from previous uses, though styles and approaches for the use may

36

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

change. An example of this can be seen, quite simply, in modern day vehicles. First the wheel was invented, then later the cart, carriage, and finally the car. If one does not understand the past’s effects on the present object, one will not know why it is as it is. Even cars from different decades have subtle changes. They are more aerodynamic, or more pleasing to the eye. They are more eco-friendly, or use less gas. Using the term “more” is a comparative adjective, thus, at the most basic understanding of artifacts there is a comparison being done, an interpretation and identification of the object. The long line of interpretation echoing from the past leads to what we have today, and seeing history as it happens cannot compare to learning it from fragments.

For my proposed research problem, there is an underlying question that may never be answered: the Rashomon Problem (Berger 2009: 25). There are bound to be experts that disagree when theorizing and interpreting concepts of artifacts, each with their own valid arguments. What is correct and what is misinterpretation is in constant flux within the archaeological field. Thus, I leave you with a question to consider, the very question behind the Rashomon Problem: Can we know reality?

37

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

REFERENCES CITED Albright, Julie, Simmens, Eddie. 2014. Flirting, Cheating, Dating, and Mating in a Virtual World. The Oxford handbook of Virtuality.

Oxford: Oxford Press. 284-297.

Berger, Arthur Asa. 2009. What Objects Mean: An Introduction to Material Culture. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast.

Caple, Chris.

Routledge.

2006. Objects: Reluctant Witnesses to the past. London:

Churchill, Elizabeth F., Goodman, Elizabeth S. 2008. (In)visible partners: people, algorithms, and business models in online dating.

Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings. 2008(1):86-100 Finkel, Eli J., Eastwick, Paul W., Karney, Benjamin R., Reis, Harry T., and Sprecher, Susan. 2012. Online Dating: A Critical Analysis From the Perspective of Psychological Science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 13(1): 3-66.

Freud, Sigmund, and Philip Rieff. 1963. Character and Culture. New York: Collier.

Fromm, Erich, and Karl Marx. 1962. Beyond the Chains of Illusion. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Hanson, Trudy L., Drumheller, Kristina, Mallard, Jessica, McKee, Connie, Schlegel, Paula. 2011. Cell Phones, Text Messaging, and Facebook: Competing Time Demands of Today's College Students. College Teaching. 59 (1): 23-30 Hertlein, Katherine M. 2012. Digital Dwelling: Technology in Couple and Family Relationships. Family Relations. 61(3): 374-387 Merkle, Erich R., Richardson, Rhonda A. 2000. Digital Dating and Virtual Relating: Conceptualizing Computer Mediated Romantic Relationships. Family Relations. 49(2): 187-192 Griffith, Eric, and Popolo, Meredith. 2014.

Magazine.

Mobile Dating Apps. PC

Owen, Jesse, Frank D. Fincham, and Jon Moore. 2011. Short-Term Prospective Study of Hooking Up Among College Students. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 40(2): 331-41.

TABITHA ROSE 38

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

Quiroz, Pamela A. 2013. From Finding the Perfect Love Online to Satellite Dating and ‘Loving-the-One-You’re Near.’ Humanity & Society.

37(2): 181-185 Raddatz, Kate. 2014. Tinder Users Hope to Swipe Their Way to New Love.

CBS Minnesota. WCCO. Robehmed, Natalie. 2013. 5 Dating Apps To Help You Find Love.

Forbes.Com. Roberts, Daniel. 2014. Hookup App Tinder Wants To Change Its Image.

Fortune.Com. Shanks, M., & Tilley, C. Y. 1992. Re-constructing archaeology: theory and practice (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Stampler, Laura. 2014. Inside Tinder: Meet the Guys who Turned Dating into an Addiction. Time.

Stampler, Laura. 2014. The New Dating Game. Time. 183(6): 40.

Subrahmanyam, Kaveri, Greenfield, Patricia. 2008. Online Communication and Adolescent Relationships. The Future of Children, Princeton University. 18(1): 119-146 2013. Tinder. App Store.

Trubshaw, Bob. 2009. Archaeology Is a Brand: The Meaning of Archaeology in Contemporary Popular Culture. Time and Mind. 2(3): 359362.

39

TABITHA ROSE

Anthropology 191

The Intimacy of Applications

About the Author

Tabitha Rose Trose6@pride.Hofstra.edu Anthropology 191

Tabitha is a college student at Hofstra University. She is dual majoring in Anthropology, with a specialization in Archaeology, and Classics, with a specialization in Classic Civilizations. She is due to graduate a semester early in the winter of 2014. Prior to taking the senior thesis class in ethnography in the spring, she had downloaded the social dating app Tinder out of curiosity. She had heard about the app in passing, but only looked into it after a friend had created an OkCupid account for her.

Tabitha then found Tinder and the many growing ranges in social dating apps it very intriguing, enough to study for her senior thesis.

40

TABITHA ROSE