I won't discount you here, because two of the best marriages in my circle were from dating apps (albeit back when they were more useful, like 2013-2014), but far more of them are based on what I said - regular interactions, lots of small talk, and time to develop closeness. It takes longer, it's less efficient, but it gets results and I don't think dating apps are really doing it any more - it certainly didn't for me.

> I have never met a romantic partner anywhere but through an app.

And I’ve never met a romantic partner on a dating app. If you’re suited to app dating good for you but most men aren’t going to appear as attractive through the app as they actually are in real life.

Why not? Is it just a matter of bad photos and poor writing skills?

That’s part of it, you can certainly optimize your profile for better chances but the medium is the message.

Most things that women find attractive in men are not things that are easily highlighted via a few photos and a bio unless you’re in the top tiers of physical attractiveness. And outside of dating apps women don’t generally prioritize physical attractiveness to the same degree men do. But dating apps put that front and center as the main criteria for matches.

I’m happily married to someone I started dating after almost a year of being in the same game night group and there’s no way we would have ever connected over the apps, because you’re not going to easily connect over shared humor and compatible personality on the apps.

> I have never met a romantic partner anywhere but through an app

I mean, okay, I get it, but people have been finding mates for hundreds of thousands of years before apps. People really need to exercise that muscle. Apps are a crutch (and imo a bad one, at that).

For most of that hundreds of thousands of years, mates were arranged and/or the men forced women to mate them. “Love marriages” weren’t a thing and still aren’t the norm in many cultures

Read the comment I was replying to closely:

> If you want to make friends and meet a partner you need to join groups

"Need" is obviously not true. I generally agree that it is mostly true for friends but I strongly disagree that it is mostly true for romantic partners.

> people have been finding mates for hundreds of thousands of years before apps

People have been doing tons of things before apps. Eating, moving themselves from point a to point b, buying things, etc. I'm not sure your point here.

> Apps are a crutch (and imo a bad one, at that).

Why specifically is this crutch bad?

You would never say that accountants were keeping books for hundreds of years before spreadsheets and that spreadsheets (or Quickbooks or Xero or whatever) are a crutch (and a bad one at that).

> Why specifically is this crutch bad?

The data speaks for itself: people are reporting being lonelier than ever, sexlessness is up for both men and women, birth rates are down. These apps are predatory, etc., etc. I wrote a blog post about it a few years ago[1]. Approaching women in the wild is more fun, more natural, and more in line with our biological imperatives. Comparing dating apps with Excel is, imo, a category error.

[1] https://dvt.name/2020/02/24/rfc-lets-disrupt-dating-apps/

We should be careful not to make claims that any particular behavior is "more natural". Citation needed. Many cultures place very tight constraints on men approaching women, sometimes to the extent of criminal penalties. I'm not saying this is a good thing — people should be able to live their own lives — but I'm just pointing out that we really have no idea what natural human behavior without cultural influences would even look like.

Your post won't load for me, but I find the date of the post intriguing...right on the eve of lockdown. A lot changed for a lot of people then, including young people who suddenly had no option to approach others "in the wild."