Mentor Research Institute

Healthy Contracts Legislation; Measurement & Value-Based Payment Contracting; Online Screening & Outcome Measurement Software, The Collapse of Dating and Marriage

503 227-2027

Power, Wealth, and Swipe Culture—The Economics of Attraction in U.S. Dating Apps

Bend Dating Team

For app designers and policymakers alike, the task is urgent: to rebuild platforms that elevate empathy, respect honesty, mutual investment, and equality, not just swipes, profits, or fleeting validation.


The Marketplace of Attraction

In the digital bazaar of U.S. dating apps, desirability often aligns with dollars and aesthetic appeal. Studies show the supply-demand imbalance is stark: one analysis found that the average man on Tinder is “liked” by fewer than 1 in 115 women, illustrating a hyper-competitive hierarchy of attraction that dwarfs even economic inequality. [7] [5] [6] In real terms, this means that most men subconsciously “bid” for attention, liking indiscriminately, while the most desirable women hold the power to respond selectively. The result? A rigid, stratified mating economy where a fraction of users receive most of the matches and control the digital dance.

Gendered Motivations and Messaging Behaviors

U.S. dating apps aren't just places to find love, they are behavioral experiments in gender and status. Pew Research reveals that men disproportionately pay for premium features, 41 percent versus 29 percent of women, yet also report higher satisfaction with their experience. [8] [1] [1] This points to a transactional bargain: men pay more to break through the match scarcity, while women capitalize on selectivity to demand higher quality connections.

Moreover, conversational dynamics reinforce that disparity. Research on platforms like Tinder shows men send the majority of initial messages, roughly 79 percent, and have shorter, simpler greetings, averaging 12 characters. Women, when they do initiate contact, take longer to craft messages, averaging over 120 characters. [8] [3] [2] The asymmetry underscores that men pursue en masse while women receive and finely curate attention, shaping the emotional tenor of digital courtship.

Social Status as Attraction Currency

Human mating strategies show that women in the U.S. often prioritize socioeconomic status, education, and ambition in potential partners, while men favor youth and physical attractiveness.⁹³⁵ This asymmetry is amplified by app algorithms and profile design. A college-educated man with a professional job in, say, engineering or AI becomes an elevated prize, a phenomenon even reshaping the dating scene in places like Silicon Valley. Matchmaking professionals report surging demand for AI engineers, who are sought after not despite—but because of—their perceived social capital and financial stability.¹⁷⁸¹¹ [1] [7] [8] [1] [1]

Financial Strain and the “Romance Recession”

The economic divide isn’t only virtual. Many young Americans are sidelining dating altogether because of real-world financial pressures. A recent Bank of America report found that over half of Gen Z ages 18–28 spend $0 a month on dating, redefining romance as a luxury in the face of bills, rent, and instability, a trend dubbed the “romance recession.” [1] [7] In this era, dating is no longer just swipe fatigue; it's affordability fatigue.

Backlash: When Algorithms Fail Tradition

Not all cultural reactions are optimistic. Critics argue that apps have flattened courtship rituals into highlight reels, eroding nuanced flirting and emotional anticipation. A comment featured in The Guardian described flirting as dying, replaced by insincere bios, satirical “boyfriend applications,” and the loss of decorum. [1] [2] [6] Such critiques argue that dating apps may facilitate connection, but they also dismantle the friction and playfulness that make human interaction rich.

Political Concern: Does Swipe Culture Undermine Society?

Beyond academic critiques, political figures are weighing in with alarm. In a recent interview, Vice President J.D. Vance condemned dating apps as “destructive,” asserting that they complicate communication between young Americans and contribute to declining family formation. He warned that AI-driven chatbots, designed for dopamine hits, may unintentionally set unrealistic expectations for human connection. [9] His remarks underscore a growing anxiety: if swipe culture continues unchecked, it threatens not just romance but social cohesion.

Implications: Redefining Courtship Norms

The gender economics of U.S. dating apps reveal deep structural dynamics. For men, the platform is a numbers game; for women, it’s a scarcity advantage. Wealth, education, and social prestige translate into virtual desirability. Yet financial precarity, emotional fatigue, and skepticism, including from political voices, threaten the system’s legitimacy. If courts become marketplaces, cultural values may shift toward fulfillment through community, creative connection, and in-person interaction.

For app designers and policymakers alike, the task is urgent: to rebuild platforms that elevate empathy, mutual investment, and equality, not just swipes, profits, or fleeting validation.


Related Articles

Key words: Supervisor Education, Ethical Charting, CareOregon’s New Barrier to Oregon’s Mental Health Services, Mental Health, Psychotherapy, Counseling, Ethical and Lawful Value Based Care,