Apps

1.0.09

The source code of deformations of human communication

The meme of perpetual flight

For centuries western queer people were unable to seek each-other publicly. Most of the time they were murdered or persecuted by heterosexual establishment with its peculiar fetish around overpopulating the Earth. There was a need for fresh supply of meat for ever popular war games... Of course, the peripheral identities (e.g. effeminate gay men) were able to recognize each-other, while those who were not standing out of their gender's norms were unfortunately blending in too much. Not seen and unable to see potential mates. They spent their lives in loneliness or eventually forcing themselves into (intuitively-alien) straight lifestyle.

With the industrial revolution, the populations of towns exploded. The lifestyles changed, the anonymity and in the same time the density and physical proximity fostered creation of minority identities, subcultures and communities. The swelling urban population offered variety and choice, even statistically. The existence of public spaces (parks, bath houses, toilets) - some of them conveniently single-sex - facilitated the first attempts for encounters. The art of cruising evolved. Secret codes of eye-gazes, attire details, phrases, topics, manners. Of course, there was a risk of misreading - and hostile reactions, violence or even state persecution. In some time, the police surveillance caught up with "perversion" renaissance and preyed on the most daring individuals. The question of recognizing "ours" and not being identified by the rest - did not lose its urgency. The paradox of attracting mates and not attracting attention fatally frustrating as ever.

An idea of anonymous application hookups seems revolutionary at first glance. Virtual space is a shelter protected from the physical violence. The fact is that the apps arrived into the Western world quite a while after non-heterosexuality was decriminalized. Technological opportunity coming a bit late. Of course, there is still a significant residue of the centuries of oppression. Homophobia subsided but the threat is still there, too real. Many remain shy, many carry fears, way too many still did not come out or even grasp their true identity. For them the apps seem to be a redemption. However, the overwhelming onset of the technology created whole nations of asocial geeks, who do not feel comfortable with live communication or interaction. Apps not only saved them, they allowed the asocial traits/habits to inflate and embed, they nourish the social phobias. In other corners of the world, the oppressive state institutions keep up with the innovations - and now have special units abusing the fake profiles to fish for queer men, to harass them or even murder them.

Virtual reality - the oxymoron

Here in the West, the immediate danger might be gone for now. Straights have become somewhat benign, or largely oblivious to gay life, busy mating and playing with their own kind. How do applications and cruising compare in this new situation? As much as social media (or as their offspring), the applications allow individuals to present themselves through invented and often quite fake identities. To show or to hide face, reveal genuine or artistic image of their body shape, show just body parts or completely unrelated objects, point out only certain aspects of their personality or lifestyle. Legs, hands, heads, dicks and butts thrown into potluck. It's almost impossible to see and meet the whole person. The dissected organs and limbs generated a bit different fashionable shame - somewhat inadequate to the progressive times we are living in.

The most significant and the least noticed disadvantage of the applications lies in the nature of seeking. We compare virtual profiles - a set of liberally filled-in categories, copied quotations, cultural cliches - and search for a match. The hunter instincts of many are satisfied with mere self-confidence confirmations - provided by the objectified others... "Can I win you? Yes? Ok, next!" Those who meet in person are seldom not disappointed. The live impression is completely different from the fantasy created in head - based on body-part categories and interests (with lot of personal input by the receiver who's dreaming the fantasy). And even if the impression of the remote individual is good, even if he turns out attractive in reality - something is still missing. There's nothing to talk about, there's nowhere to start, it's just some stranger from the street.

All the human history, all their interactions - happened face to face. Not only as an information and impression exchanges, but within a course of some events. Every encounter - whether business, dispute, conversation or intimacy - happened with(in) its own small story. The sympathies and antipathies arose from observing the person - the way he is reacting in the context of life, in specific course of events, in particular situations.

The rules of attraction

Nowadays, there's two levels of detachment in the way how queer men meet:

The first one is way older and references to the external dangers threatening the possible lovers. We had to create the separate safe spaces to meet. Bars, clubs, saunas, cruising grounds, private parties. Established often with only one intention - to meet mates - sometimes with false pretext, sometimes genuinely in a course of specific "activity." Whether it is a dance - sport - piss - showering - beer. Many of those designed spaces even today remain somewhat eventless and storyless. Everyone there is taken out of the context of their life - fished out of his own element (swimmer, movie geek, gym bunny, intellectual, hiker) - having just one activity: searching. To some extent, everyone looks alike, undistinguishable, devoid of peculiarity, oddity, or even personality. In most of the artificial environments designed to meet - we pause our life and the only thing we do is searching - devoid of any halo of our unique identity or life. It's not a rocket science what to ask a swimmer at the swimming pool, hiker in the mountain, farmer among his animals. The context provides topics. The parties often offer none.

The second detachment happens on the apps, where even the weak pretext of "partying" and "having fun" is gone. Many describe feeling of being a product on a shelf. The rules of the game are to trick the "buyers" with fancy wrapping, often regardless of what's inside. Though the fundamental insufficiency is in the lack of any story.

Modern humans, growing up with technology, profess tendency to execute the "proven" instruction codes of conduct. If we'd take just a moment to pause and think - it is not difficult at all to discern what and when induces interest in us. We find others attractive in situations, when they are unaware of themselves, focused on their moment, in the context of their life. A real person enjoying his sunset swim can be hundred times more attractive than an artificially wet model on a professionally (technically!) well made but somewhat sterile picture. People appear impressive, mysterious, magnetizing - when they are in their element. It's like contrasting a fish in the sea floating around the coral reef vs. a dissected dead fish on a laboratory table. Even more importantly, we are beautiful and sexy when we are "submerged in our activity", when we don't consciously work on appearing beautiful. Authenticity is the key to attraction. Trying hard causes inner frustration that leaks to the surface, it is recognizable for those who observe us. Focused on our life, doing what we like to do, on the background of our "characteristic" environment - we are relaxed and we appear natural as well.

Imagine being invited to a party of your friend. You come without expectations, not primarily to hunt. A person catches your interest. You eye him, trying to see if there is any reciprocity. Recognizing the "look a second longer than appropriate" - a wave of excitement electrifies your body. A change of body chemistry, temperature, sensual perceptions, mood, focus. Sparkle ignited. Heart-beat, shyness, finding courage to make a walk towards him. Someone has to speak first. Effort, action, involvement. You may start by conversation, or perhaps even slower - with a dance. Literally dancing (on a party) or "dancing" through another physical interaction - sharing a walk, hike, run, swim, wrestle - specifically men incline to "communicate" through activity. There are endless options how to flirt, to attempt to "accidentally" touch (and see the response) and follow the course of events, a moment by moment, an impulse by impulse, an impression by impression. This allows one to be led by the natural development, without forced conversations and action. The story itself provides the conversation topics, questions to ask, drama, content - all those impulses that many couples established and held together by mechanically following the templates actually struggle to invoke, artificially.

Handbooks for robots

Even if in some perspectives queer people represent the intermediate sex (as in two-spirit model) somewhere in between male and female, most gay men - as part of their struggle to survive (invisibility) and be somewhat accepted among other men (approval) - spend a lot of effort to imitate "real men". Whatever this fluid concept means in certain culture, at certain time of history. Gay men are naturally different in voice, sensitivity, tendency towards aesthetic self expression (attire, body-building, interests), overwhelmingly not feeling attracted towards competition, combat, war - in literal sense or in form of certain aggressive sports. Of course, this is just a statistical pre-disposition - many decide to resist it and set out on life-long struggle along the line of "normality" and expected "manly" behavior. In a persisting conceptualization of separate sexualities (gay vs. straight), queer people are ghettoized together, with no or minimal intimate interaction with distinct "100%-straight" men. Therefore, in order to attract the other gay men, everyone feels (and creates) a pressure to enact exactly that what he finds attractive when he is gay - i.e. imitate manliness of straight men. We perform - an ideal - for each-other.

A side-effect of this macho Olympics is a complacent adoption of the surrounding toxic (or just plainly dumb, immature, un-evolved) masculinity traits. Quite a large gay men's population feels like straight men trying to have sex with straight men, co-creating an idealized male underworld. In an ancient cliche - still not clear if based on nature or nurture, but nevertheless overwhelmingly recognizable - men's thinking is more technical and practical. Men prefer not to communicate - or even worse: to navigate the labyrinth of non-verbal signals or goddess-forbid: to share emotions. Men simply do. Straight men do not indulge in extensive chatter as a way to break ice or to give the mutually spent time some content. A hike, run, exercise in gym, competition, play-fight, travel, building something, breaking something, bullying someone - is an excuse not to talk, a way of being together or even bonding. This is how male friendships are realized and perpetuated. The adventure provides the "fill in".

The irony of life comes when men - wired this way, raised this way, supported and pressured by their peers to act this way - want to date women. On one side the species that are used to talk, communicate, or express how they are emotionally ... and on the other the chronic doers, the fact-analyzers, and not to forget the heroes. Supermen feel humiliatingly helpless in rich communication: "Why is she asking so many question?" "Why does she always want something?" "Why does she need to dig into it constantly?" "Why doesn't she calm down?" A different natural predisposition or cultural upbringing creates epic misunderstanding - the subject of most of the arts - and also prejudices: "They are illogical." "They don't know what they want, but they insist on getting it." "They are hysterical." "They are stupid." "They need someone rational to lead them." Regardless of the fact that this all rather describes a male incompetence in certain areas of life. Men try to pass through the emotional outbursts of their partners with sneering silence, complacent "yes", or if irritated they respond with physical violence - the same expression they are familiar with in the all-male world. A world where they are used to either argument the thing with facts (not feelings), battle their opponent or eventually ground him opponent with physical superiority. Wrong skills applied in wrong environment - which appears comical at times, often with tragic consequences. Said in a raw but genuine way: straight men prefer the company of men and dealing with men - because that is the mental set-up that they resonate with - but they desire sexually (sometimes even intimately) women. All their life they try to impress other men (body, cock, strength, success, victories, dominance, wealth, possession of things - cars, smartdevices, gadgets, sport equipment, trophies), but couple and have sex (and kids) with women. Winning them in a way as if they were trying to impress their male peers. "I won the match." "I have this new cool tool." "Look how big I am." "I got higher in the hierarchy." Which is not seldom responded to by female confusion, embarrassment, complacent praise, or subject-object convenience ("He is alpha, he is successful, he is useful, he will bring money home, he will protect us.") The animal biology.

Gay underworld, minus the "wrong bodies", represents ideal world of a straight men - where all the interactions and needs are covered in a way convenient and native to male thinking. Facts. No bullshit talks. No tedious conversations. No essays loaded with emotions. Brief matter of fact practicality. "Cute. Looking for? Sex? Now? Are you top or bottom? Next."

A male answer to a problem is cool-headed rational analysis, fixing it. Ideally inventing a technical gadget. Socializing - talking, dancing, flirting, risking a rejection - is a horror ride for a superhero with suppressed emotions, stone face, always on top of the situation. A characteristic male solution: invent a tool that will fix it or at least bypass it. The app is the answer! Compare the categories, numerical data, check boxes, radio buttons, list boxes. Algorithm finds the match. Arrange meeting. Consume. And ... ?

The application introduced a deformation in a society/time/world that at the same moment was struggling to redefine masculinity in less caricature and inhumane fashion. Barely starting with this effort - now there is machines and programs that allow men and supports men to comfortably retreat into the worst silent-cowboy cliches of their personality. A culture of one word questions and one word answers. Complex, unpredictable and undecipherable human beings simplified into categories. A process akin to choosing the right tool from well organized and label shelves. Emphasizing the tragedy of the straight world - subject-object thinking - treating the others as things, that are convenient, usable or standing in the way. Encapsulation of men and masculinity in self-centered old patterns.

Knife is not a problem, it's the hand and the brain

A sad attempt to avoid all the difficult parts of life - the communication, negotiations, uncertainty, rejection, shame, self-confidence, incompetence - through the gadgets - could be commented upon stoically: A good try. If it was a genuine attempt for a solution, not a blatant bypass or shortcut or retreat to ones inadequacy. "The wheel, once devised, cannot be forgotten" - the tool is now there, the question is who uses it for what and how. The apps are here to facilitate communication, but ironically allow to skip it as such. They bring matching people together, to "set up relationships", but castrate the initial story that would create a content of that relationship. Couples are there, but hapless of what to do with each-other.

In a parallel - wheelchairs or cars are of great assistance to people with disabilities. It does not mean that the whole population should stop walking. The traffic congestion and the epidemics of obesity prove the opposite. Applications could be a great help for the shy - if used as the ice-breaking aids, what they are made for - to search, say hello, see if the other side is likeable, exchange information, arrange meeting. Here the assistance ends. Now the life, story, content of the encounter, intimacy or relationship must happen!

What I observe instead - akin to the traffic jams image - is a total migration of all the life to the apps. Cruising zones deserted. Clubs deserted. Real-life flirting abandoned. For all the old facilities that we used to love and hate - failing to provide what they claim to be made for, because of their lousy design or their incompetent users, same as the apps - the virtual world represents a challenge, a death that offer an opportunity for the reinvention and their rebirth in a more community-serving way.

For the apps - and their users - a learning curve is expected. Understanding that the applications are not life, nor a safer replacement for life, ... that the terrifying "unsafe" adventure in the real world is life. All the stories cannot be substituted by the software calculations. The stories will be missing - and the hole will be filled in with multitude of profile and the attempts to meet-up that will be null, void, sterile, eventless, storyless, adventureless, lifeless - and the resulting frustration frantically patched with even "more"... This is the classical dynamics of addiction - substances, alcohol, smoking, fetish, gaming - inability to get some ephemeral content (in social or emotional context) resulting in obsession with tools that are often associated with that content. Communication/shyness - alcohol. Boredom/fun - drugs. Intimacy/banishment - fetishes. The only way to deal with the frustration is to distinguish the objective from the means, the desired feeling from the form or way how it happens, from the appliances and applications to achieve it. Users need to tame the expectation to a realistic scale. Application is an assistance tool. Not a miraculous remedy for ineptitude of conserved/conservative prehistoric man.

A matter of choice?

Most of the gay applications - perhaps due to the patronizing roof of corporate platforms (Google play / Apple store) that are trying to serve the whole world, from the most liberal to the most conservative cultures, settling at the moralist rules of being non-offensive to the most bigot of the consumers - routinely prohibit a public display of the sexually explicit content or even the frank nudity in profiles. Once a sex-positive community that taught the world not to be afraid of body or sex is now being conditioned to adopt the typical mainstream media cliches: "sexandviolence", "protecting minors from exposure to sexuality", "excessive nudity",... Moralism sets in.

* * * * *

Personal experience, or: "Can somebody make one tool with all the basic functions? Where everyone will flock... I will pay!

Grindr: Just one profile picture - whether it is an artistic underexposed grainy glimpse of left calf, a car, a cup of coffee, a cap and sunglasses. On the other hand, it exposes the "shy" to the ruthless market of real faces and real bodies. One picture allows for a speedier app, hastier dating, more practical and mechanical treatment of the "sortiment". Sex? Now? The limited free-text field is one of the worst features ever designed - as it does not improve chances of finding partner, but forces humans to narrow themselves down to a sentence, phrase, set of categories. Grindr contributed the most towards "rationalization" (in negative sense) of human interactions. Not to mention it is now owned from China, with its dubious new moralism, contempt for privacy and disastrous human rights records. Not to mention soviet-grade customer support and service orientation.

Planetromeo: A paradox in practice. The worst web design ever progressively gained the largest community support in German-speaking countries. Negative ergonomics of profiles, message inbox, illogical ordering, no possibilities for custom settings. Minimalist take on profile categories. Impossibility to attach pictures from the device - and limited free galleries? A history of messages in paid section! This site and application does not even try to pretend that it intends to enable communication - it clearly inhibits is. History disappearing within a matter of a week. Impossibility to see through the conversation, what was said a month ago, a year ago, revisit the forgotten ones. In a matter of week one does not know if I have ever spoken with this guy, or what was it about. This facilitates just objectification, inhumane treatment of the ephemeral virtual entities, frustration of constant restarting from scratch. Not to mention introduction of unnecessary and extremely inappropriate - vague and outdated - categorization of pictures into decent, some skin, soft core and hard core. A mor(m)on herding the gays? Community updates and charity make up for the unusually pushing commercial tone of the app.

Scruff: Decent profiles, but just one picture. Very user friendly, neat design. Even more - a bit more mature personalities, statistically more talkative and human public, kink-positive. Grindr for adults. Of little use in Eastern Europe.

Iboys: Design-wise to be envied. The web offers extensive free galleries, unlimited profile text (truncated inexplicably in the app) and a stunning set of likes/dislikes categories almost at the edge of practical usability. Unfortunately the population is eastern European - normal, moralist, pushing the non-communication strategies towards the limits as well. Deaf support. Wish this one was international - the attitudes would have to adapt to more mature (open, human, friendly, non-judgmental) western audiences. An access to unlimited conversation history is a fundamental element of sensible communication.