Relationships

Do people tend to speak up more about issues facing our society because of social media? Does everyone’s voice get heard? If you were to look at any Facebook feed, you’d probably say it’s a great tool for discussing issues and stating opinions. It’s given many people a voice, and the ability to craft a thought and publicize it.

But a recent study by Pew Research points to something else – namely, that people have quite the opposite reaction when it comes to social media: they are afraid to share their views. There is a tendency of people not to speak up about policy issues in public—or among their family, friends, and work colleagues—when they believe their own point of view is not widely shared. This tendency is called the “spiral of silence.”

Social media has only deepened this tendency, at least as Pew researched human behavior pre-Internet compared to what is taking place now. Facebook and Twitter especially seem to advocate for those who hold minority opinions to use their platforms to voice them, but many users haven’t.

Pew conducted a survey of 1,801 adults, focusing on one important public issue that most Americans had heard about: the Edward Snowden revelation about government surveillance of Americans’ phone and email records. Pew says they chose this issue because Americans were divided about the issue - whether Snowden’s leaks to the media were justified or whether the surveillance policy itself was a good or bad idea.

The research firm surveyed people’s opinions about the leaks, their willingness to talk about the revelations in either in-person or online settings, and their perceptions of the views of other people, both online and offline.

It turns out, people were less willing to discuss the Snowden-NSA story over social media than they were in person, with 86% willing to discuss in person versus only 42% of Facebook and Twitter users who were willing to post about it on those platforms. In addition, in both personal and online settings, people were more willing to share their views if they thought their audience agreed with them. For example, those who felt their co-workers agreed with them were about three times more likely to say they’d join a workplace conversation about the Snowden situation.

It is similar with Facebook users – those who thought their friends would agree with them were also more likely to post their opinion about the issue, but those who weren’t sure were less likely. Facebook and Twitter users were also less likely to share their opinions in person with friends, say over dinner, if they felt that their Facebook friends didn’t agree with them.

Many people might decide that sharing political viewpoints over Facebook or Twitter might alienate friends or colleagues. This is also a reason why people refrain from sharing information that is too personal. Regardless, the Pew study shows that Americans may be a lot less willing than we assumed to share their true feelings over social media.

For the single women reading, how many lewd messages have you received on OkCupid in the past month? How many guys have stalked you over Tinder? If you answer “too many” for either one, you might be ready for a new kind of dating app called Siren.

Siren is an alternative to the typical dating apps like Tinder, where many men swipe right to have more women in their cue - meaning, they play the numbers. They make the first move, often approaching women in a way that makes them feel pressured, uncomfortable, or just plain creeped out. It’s become a kind of risky game for some women, where they aren’t sure if they will meet someone and feel safe. If they don’t, the whole dating app experience becomes tainted.

Like with online dating, Tinder seems to give females the advantage over males, at least in terms of your chances for getting a date.

Many guys complain that women have it better in the dating world because women can choose who they want to date, while guys are left saying "yes" to every woman's profile they view online or on an app like Tinder, just to improve their chances of meeting someone. (Women tend to be more picky, and say "no" to most men, probably because so many men just swipe right to everyone.) While online dating does seem skewed, apparently some tech geniuses have decided to make the odds work in the guys' favor.

Instead of manually going through all the matches Tinder sends his way, one techie decided that he could automate responses. According to website ValleyWag, former Microsoft developer Yuri de Souza details "how he reverse engineered Tinder to mass-like every girl on the network." He was sitting around one Sunday afternoon mindlessly swiping right on all of his female matches, hoping that one would swipe right back, when the idea struck him.

" [I] recalled my friend telling me how he would spend hours swiping right on Tinder just to accumulate as may matches as possible," de Souza told ValleyWag. "This had me thinking, why can't I reverse engineer Tinder and automate the swipes? After all, I'm pretty darn good at taking things apart!"

He was successful, and went to share his idea with other guys, only to find he wasn't the only one or even the first to try to game the system.

While it seems counter-intuitive to accept matches that you don't even see in the hopes of having more choice in who you want to date, this is the thinking behind guys looking to game the dating app system. (An article in New York Magazine last year naming the most successful online daters included a guy who admitted to saying "yes" to all women on Tinder to improve his chances, so this might have inspired a lot of guys to follow his lead.)

Other tech-savvy users have created shortcuts and automation to help them (and other guys) avoid the challenging task of looking through so many women's profiles. It turns out, people aren't even willing to spend the time to look at photos anymore, let alone read words in a profile.

What does this mean for dating? While it's understandable that guys are frustrated with their lack of choice (and womens' general avoidance of swiping right unless a man really intrigues her), is reverse-engineering the best way to meet a woman? Maybe apps like Tinder, fun and game-like as they are, are not the best avenue for many people. Instead of casting a large net and hoping to catch someone - anyone - why not try to focus on what you want? If you're putting it out there that you can't seem to meet a woman, then likely creating an automated way to say yes to everyone on Tinder isn't going to improve your game.

Maybe it's time to try another site or app that is more conducive to your search. Better yet, try something more old-fashioned. How about you approach a woman in person and ask her out? That will make you stand out from the Tinder crowd.

For more on this dating app please read our Tinder review.

Ashley Madison, the infamous dating website that makes its revenue from matching married people looking for affairs, has now admitted to spying on its own users.

A recent study published by the company was gathered from emails the sites’ users sent to each other under what they assumed was a condition of anonymity. According to a recent article in Time Magazine, Eric Anderson, a professor at the University of Winchester in England who conducted the study, claims that “women who seek extra-marital affairs usually still love their husbands and are cheating instead of divorcing, because they need more passion.”

“It is very clear that our model of having sex and love with just one other person for life has failed— and it has failed massively,” Anderson tells Time.

As it turns out, Ashlay Madison seems to have commissioned this study to boost its membership numbers - that is, to prove that almost every person in a monogomous relationship is looking to cheat, (and therefore should join their website). But for those who join the site on a strict condition of anonymity because they don’t want their partners to find out, this study is a direct infringement on their right to privacy.

So Ashley Madison is now in a tricky spot. Has it alienated its members, since now they know their emails are no longer strictly confidential, but subject to studies and read by a third party? Perhaps it was in the fine print when they joined the site, as most dating sites collect user information for the purposes of research. But most don’t analyze individual emails being sent back and forth between individual users.

As Time Magazine also points out, because of the nature of the dating site, and the fact that most of its members are being dishonest or lying by the mere fact that they are using the site for an extramarital affair, it calls into question the integrity of the data itself. Who knows what is true and what isn’t in each email? Who can say that anyone on the site is honest in any email they send to another site user?

According to Anderson, his data “included profile information that the women supplied when they signed up for the site (information not made available to other Ashley Madison users),” as well as information other users could see. “We also acquired all private message conversations that [users] had with men on the website for one month,” Anderson told Time.

The results of the study are still somewhat questionable. Anderson claims that in our sexualized culture, married folks could feel as if they are missing out when they are only having sex with one partner.

While this might be true for the users of Ashley Madison, it doesn't mean that it's applicable to the majority of married couples in the U.S.

Dating is a mystery, even for those who have been doing it for a while. Men and women misunderstand each other all the time when they are in relationships, so it’s only natural that communication problems would occur while you are just getting to know each other. Even before the first date!

Texting is a great tool to help us keep in touch, but it’s also created a whole new level of second-guessing and misunderstanding when it comes to dating. How many times have you stared at a text, trying to interpret it – even if it’s only “hey, what’s up?” We might think – is he asking me because he wants to see if I’m busy, or is he just being casual and reaching out to say hello? Then we might wonder: when should I text him back? Should I wait another five minutes, another hour, another day??

We drive ourselves nuts sometimes trying to figure out what’s going on in someone else’s head. But the truth is very simple: we don’t know. We can’t make assumptions. But we should also listen to our intuitions. If we find ourselves wondering too much about his motivations but afraid to ask, we should probably take that as a hint that you're not on the same page romantically speaking.

Following are some typical texts that men send, and what they really mean:

Hey, want to meet for a drink in an hour? [It’s 9:00pm.]

We might think he’s interested in us after all, but chances are, he’s not looking for anything serious and is seeing what you might be up for. Know what you want before agreeing or getting excited about seeing him again - the ball is in your court, so don't settle for less than the relationship you want.

It’s been fun hanging out, but I’m really busy right now with work. Maybe I’ll call you when I’m back in a couple of weeks.

Translation: I’m not really interested, but if I haven’t met anyone else I find attractive in the next two weeks I want to leave my options open. Time to date other people.

I don’t know…where do you want to go tonight?

This might be frustrating if you feel you are always planning the dates, but probably the guy hasn’t put much thought into where to go or what to do. He might spend a few minutes on Yelp before the date, or he might just want you to pick a place because he doesn’t want to take you somewhere you’ll hate. If you feel strongly about planning, then pick the place. If not, just leave it open and see what happens.

I had a nice time with you tonight.

This is a good thing – even if he doesn’t make plans right away for a second date, he’s letting you know he had a good time. Don’t get anxious about the timing, just let him know you had a good time, too. Then if you’re feeling motivated, ask him out instead of waiting for him to make the next move. It’s liberating.

There is quite possibly nothing in this world that perplexes us more than that strange collection of physical and emotional responses we call love. Humans have been trying to understand it since the dawn of…well…humans, in poetry, in art, in music, and in laboratories.

Writer Olga Khazan, in an article for The Atlantic, explores recent research being done into the murky, inexplicable world of online dating. These studies are designed to determine “what makes people desire each other digitally,” she writes, “as well as whether our first impressions of online photos ultimately matter.”

What do social scientists know that you don’t?

First, your face plays an important role in your romantic fate – which means yes, your photos matter. Some evidence suggests that qualities like extraversion, emotional stability, and self-esteem can be read in a person’s physical appearance. For example, writes Khazan, “Hockey players with wider faces, considered a sign of aggression, spend more time in the penalty box.” On a basic level, then, strangers viewing your dating profile may be making judgements about your personality on a subconscious level, solely from your photos.

But pictures are not the end of the process. Nuances of personality are only revealed through interaction, and looks can be deceiving. Personality may supersede looks as we get to know someone – or, explains Khazan, “at the very least, we tend to find people more attractive when we think they have good personalities.”

Frequently, we end up pairing off with partners who match us in level of attractiveness. Which brings up another question: should you date someone who looks like you? Psychologists say the answer is no. Khazan describes another experiment, in which “subjects who thought they were similar to one another were more likely to be attracted to each other, but that wasn’t the case for those who were actually similar to one another.” Where speech is concerned, however, couples with similar speech styles are more likely to remain in a relationship than couples with differing speech styles.

Then there’s the question on everyone’s mind: will online dating actually lead to a relationship? A 2008 study by Eli Finkel and Paul Eastwick at Northwestern University attempted to uncover the answer, and found it to be much more complicated than a simple yes or no. Online dating does give us more options than ever before but, as Finkel and Eastwick discovered, that isn’t necessarily a good thing.

Stay tuned for their discoveries in Part II.