Blog

Bumble, like Tinder, encourages the ‘othering’ of trans, gender non-conforming, and queer individuals through a cis heteronormative infrastructure that resituates users into binary and heteronormative sex-gender-sexuality regimes.

Conclusion

The distinct use of binary gender identity within the programming of dating applications like Tinder and Bumble is influenced by and promotes a binary-heterosexual model of gender-sexuality intelligibility. Tinder and Bumble therefore operate as part of the cis heterosexual matrix, in which gender identity falls into one of two unchanging categories, male or female, and that the only ‘natural’ sexual relationship exists between a man and a woman is socially assumed and structurally reinforced. Advanced by app infrastructure, the stagnant depictions of gender coupled with the competitive nature of virtual dating platforms dangerously normalize the commodification of female users and the aggressive displays of male sexuality. Furthermore, the limitations in the interface and programming of both Tinder and Bumble render these applications largely inaccessible to transgender, gender non-conforming, and queer users. Users who do not fit into the assumed cisgender heterosexual identities have repeatedly reported a pressure to obscure their identities and realign themselves with binary sex-gender-sexuality regimes both to access the same benefits of online dating interfaces and to ensure their personal safety.

The findings in this paper are additionally subject to several limitations: the focus on sex-gender-sexuality regimes does not include a detailed investigation of critical intersections with race and disability. While dating applications uniquely rely on and reference a binary interpretation of gender and sexuality, it is undeniable that the intersections of race and disability along with gender and sexuality further otherize and exclude users who do not fit into the applications’ assumed identities. Historically, the intersections of sex-gender-sexuality and race and disability exist as identity-forming systems which have been used to institutionally other individuals as ‘deviant’ in order to validate the legitimacy of the state (Patil, 2018). These findings would benefit from further research that investigates beyond the western cisgender and heterosexual matrix and interrogates the use of identity within dating applications while acknowledging the influence of historical networks of imperial relations.

It is difficult to fix these exclusionary issues given that profit, via the number of consumers or users, continues to be the main, if not the only, motivation for implementing initiatives for superficial ‘inclusivity’ in mainstream apps. Initiatives and campaigns advertising the diversification of user experience on both Tinder and Bumble, such as the inclusion of additional gender options during profile creation, allow for companies to reap the benefits from the appearance of inclusivity without doing the work to reorganize or reprogram these platforms for meaningful inclusion, as demonstrated by users being forced to realign themselves with binary pronouns. Currently, Tinder and Bumble include identities outside of the cisgender heterosexual matrix in name only while excluding them in structure and design. Since functionality for their target audiences and revenue take priority, it is not likely that these dating apps will take the steps necessary to function in a truly inclusive manner. Rather, startup dating apps may have the opportunity to build gender inclusivity into their programs while benefitting from inclusivity’s marketability, much like how Bumble set itself apart by declaring itself the ‘feminist Tinder.’ Inclusive design is critical for transgender, gender non-conforming, and queer users to safely navigate dating apps without being forced to compromise their identities for the sake of functionality.

To effectively create a platform for users of varying identities, dating apps must reframe and reprogram the ways in which gender and sexuality are categorized in the respective application’s database.

To effectively create a platform for users of varying identities, dating apps must reframe and reprogram the ways in which gender and sexuality are categorized in the respective application’s database. In particular, replacing current gender input – where ‘male’ and ‘female’ options are separated from selections outside of the binary – with a customizable textbox is one option dating apps can implement to improve inclusivity (though admittedly with its own limitations). Similarly, the inclusion of a selection box where users can choose the identities of individuals they would prefer to see within their potential matches would increase accessibility to all users without limiting functionality to those who fit the normative gender categories. Moreover, dating apps must provide more methods of protection for transgender, gender non-conforming, and queer users as well as for those in other identity groups who currently lack adequate support. Such alterations could help dismantle stereotypical binary perceptions of gender and identity in not only dating applications, but also in society at large.