In this brief bonus, Kris and Lauren share their reflections on podcasting this season and their favorite profile highlights.

Episodes referenced include...

Episode 5: Right-Wing Femme & Arrogant Aspiring Astral Projector

Episode 6: WTF Tinder & Unsettling Art

Episode 9: A ripped social Justice Advocate & a Lady-Loving Lady

Drop us a note at B4USwipe@gmail.com to share your highlights!

In this final episode of Season 1 of B4 U Swipe, Kris and Lauren share two stories and the lessons they learned as they connect with people they met online.

Kris’ storytime highlights include: The ripped social justice advocate from Episode 9 writes back! Kris shares how that went as we reflect on boundaries, the lies we tell ourselves, and managing this fucking pandemic.

Lauren’s storytime highlights include: Lauren’s appreciation for “soft,” sexual inventories and articulating pleasure, and a “hard no.” Kris manages to reference Letterkenny yet again. Lauren shares how they put on their sex educator hat to talk about boundary setting with their match. The results may surprise you!

The More You Know: Consent and respecting boundaries

In this episode of story time, you heard both Kris and Lauren experiencing someone not responding well to their boundaries. We thought we’d review some pro-tips for accepting boundaries to hopefully make this a much more affirming, consent-driven world.

First off, we want to acknowledge that holding (or even knowing) our boundaries can be hard for some of us. In a US culture where there is a lot of shame, silence, and pressure around sexuality, we often find ourselves having boundaries dictated to us rather than being taught to reflect on our own values, desires, and goals. Many of us were never given space to have a conversation with ourselves, and we also weren’t taught how to have consent conversations with others.

As in all things, practice makes perfect. Without good role models or opportunities to try on different conversations, we may be more nervous and less skilled when connecting with real life partners. Finding our words can be hard. Also, when we’re excited at new possibilities, sometimes we can lose track of how someone else may be feeling.

We are all just humans trying to find our way together in this sexually messed up world. Our responsibility is to recover and grow beyond the mess.

So, with all that preamble, here are some of our tips for being a more skilled receiver of a boundary.

PRO-TIPS: DO THIS! (or at least something in line with this)

• Acknowledge the Boundary. After someone says, “No, I’m not into that,” (or otherwise doesn't respond in a way that suggests they are enthusiastic about your suggestion), try saying:

  • Okay, thanks for letting me know!

  • Noted!

  • Got it!

  • Cool!

• Carry on! Keep the conversation or play going with something like:

  • I’d love to know what your yes’s are with me

  • Tell me something you are interested in…

  • What would you like me to do next?

  • What feels good to you?

  • Note: each of these options keeps the power and control in the hands of the person who just set a boundary. That’s intentional. They were vulnerable and revealed something. Our response in those moments shows how we respect and care about their boundaries. They should ALSO be asking about yours.

• As appropriate, learn a little more. And if you’re building a deeper bond, you could even ask for more information about any boundaries that are shared:

  • Is there anything else I should know about that boundary?

  • Are there any other related behaviors you want me to know are off the table? I want to make sure I don’t do anything that crosses your lines.

• Manage your feelings if any come up after hearing a no. Some of us experience “no’s” as rejection. Some feel disappointed. Some may feel like it’s a challenge to convince or debate to get your way. There’s nothing wrong with having feelings! Your reaction is personal and valid for you and your lived experiences. However, what you do with your internal reaction, how you respond, matters. To support you managing your emotions, we have some thoughts for consideration:

  • Try not to personalize it. Someone not wanting to do an act with you doesn’t mean they don’t like you or want you. It simply means they know themselves and have some preferences. That speaks to their self-awareness, which is delightful in a prospective (sexual) partner!

  • Don’t make your partner(s) manage your feelings about the boundary. If you’re disappointed by receiving a no, that’s okay! However, try not to talk to the person who said no about your feelings. That can feel like pressure to participate. Process those valid feels on your own, with a friend, or with a therapist.

  • NEVER challenge someone's boundary. See more below.

  • Celebrate their honesty. They trusted you with information and with an expectation that you are capable of honoring a boundary. Feel special.

PRO-TIPS: POTENTIALLY HARMFUL MISTAKES TO AVOID!

• Don’t ask about 4 or 5 variations of what you proposed. If someone says no they don’t want a burger because they don’t eat red meat, you wouldn’t sit there and say “But what about steak? What about some other thing we do with red meat?"

• Don’t imagine you’re so special that you have the magic touch, or whatever. If you find yourself wanting to say “Ah but you haven't tried that with me yet…” Just stop yourself. You aren’t some magical perfect human to introduce another to something. All you’re doing is pressuring someone into an activity they already said no to. You’re trying to activate some kind of FOMO non-sense when you should just be trying to figure out where your “yes’s'' align and skipping with delight toward those activities.

• Don’t use guilt. If you’re feeling rejected and want to go down the whole “If you love me you would...” relationship death spiral, again, just stop yourself. Do you really want someone to do something because you made them feel like a bad partner if they didn’t? Do YOU really love this person if you would want them to violate their own comfort level for you? That’s not love.

Also, in this episode, we talked about how COVID and sex ed conversations have a lot in common. Here’s a story from National Public Radio that addresses this very thing: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/07/08/886541838/starting-a-covid-19-social-bubble-how-safe-sex-communication-skills-can-help

Happy day of Lesbian Visibility! In this episode, Kris and Lauren discuss a ripped social justice advocate and a “Lady-Loving Lady.”

Kris’ profile highlights include: Our praise of consistent profiles, dopamine hits, hypocrisy, and astrological tattoos. Overall, this profile left Lauren and Kris drooling a little.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Confusing profile pictures, biphobia, and Kris and Lauren sussing out their feelings about a certain phrase. Overall, this profile gives us an opportunity to discuss discrimination and oppression while still loving on lesbians and most “lady-loving ladies.” We all learn together!

The More You Know: Exclusionary Queerness

The second profile in this episode got Lauren’s hackles up and led them to reflect on their past experiences being harmed by both heteronormativity (see episode 1 show notes) and feeling kicked out of the lesbian community for dating men. Below, Lauren expands on some ideas to consider when using exclusionary expressions like "Lady-loving Ladies Only" in your profile.

First things first, lesbians are awesome. This episode released on Lesbian Day of Visibility. Enthusiastic support. “Lady-loving Lady” is a rally cry for many in the lesbian community supporting visibility. Also, alliteration is the best. Lesbian bars and other self-created spaces are disappearing all over in the US when they should be protected and celebrated. We don’t talk enough about the Lavender Menace and the role of lesbians in queer liberation and other fights for social justice. Let’s all pause and say three cheers for lesbians.

So, the issue that amped me up is when someone adds “only” after “lady-loving ladies.” Well, that’s actually not the only thing, but let’s start there. To anyone who uses this expression...

Let me get this straight (ha): You won’t date me because of who I’m attracted to or fantasize about? You won’t date me because I have been dick adjacent? Really? Why?

What about the fact that I have “lady parts” but don’t identify with the word lady? I’m non-binary and genderqueer. You won’t date me because of that, either? Ugh!

What if I identified as a lady but didn’t have “lady parts”? In other words, what if I were a trans woman or intersex? This is a dark and ugly line of questions that directly follows from the stand alone line “Lady-loving Ladies Only.” Again, I say, ugh.

Legit underlying reasons this may be in someone’s profile:

1) If you care about whether I’m clear in my attraction to ladies, that’s fair. Lots of people have stories about being some straight woman’s experiment (been there). It can be fun, but it can also be annoying, exhausting, and hurtful. You should be able to say you aren’t signing up for that.

2) If you care about my sexual risk taking and whether I’m at higher risk of STIs because I have a vulva that has hung out with penises, that’s also fair. Rates of STI contraction and transmission are higher among people who have contact with penises.

Pro Tips! Both of these concerns can be addressed more thoughtfully than by just rejecting a segment of the population. Including lines like, “Not available to be someone’s first time with a woman,” or “Support everyone finding their way in this queer world, but I’m not available to be someone’s sexual orientation coach,” or “Please be out and proud about dating women.” Regarding STI risks, that should always be a conversation. We will do a follow up set of suggestions for how to talk about that in a future episode.

3) It occurs to me the most important thing you might be trying to convey is that you aren’t interested in dating men. The apps don’t make it easy to limit who sees your profile. So, okay, fair. Pro Tip! You could just say that: “Men Need not Apply” If you like your cute catch phrase, you could adjust it to say “Femme bi/pan/fluid/queer lady-lovers welcome! Men need not apply” Also, do you mean femme when you say lady? Are you just talking about genitals? What about masculine or butch women? Again, I digress - BECAUSE THIS PHRASE IS A PROBLEM!

Less legit/problematic reasons someone might include this phrase

We need to acknowledge the lesbian elephant in the room: The lesbian community has a term for women who have never been with a man - they are called “gold star lesbians.” Gold star, meaning prized pupil. WOW. Some of us had really hard journeys to feeling safe and permitted to express our interest in women. Some of us were also sexually assaulted by men. And some of us like dudes and women and nonbinary people! This kind of sexual shaming and competition within a marginalized community (suggesting, “I’m a better lesbian than you!”)... it makes me want to scream - WTF are we doing?

If you’re a lady-loving lady and I identify as a lady who also loves ladies, that should be good enough - drop the “only” drop the gold star routine. Even better, consider including genderqueer and non-binary people who are interested in you in your list of “maybe, baby’s.” It shouldn’t matter who else I may love (or sleep with or come into contact with) throughout my life. It shouldn’t matter what label I use or what shape my genitals take.

And as we mentioned in the podcast, sexual fluidity is real! Check out Dr. Lisa Diamond’s TED talk. Your gold star and "only" narrative may be limiting you or others you care about. What fun is that?

And if you’re going to tell me you only want to be around strict lesbians, well, then I guess that’s your choice. Exclusionary communities and bias against people based on who they love, like, or want to f*ck is not something I stand for, but, I guess, you do you.

Within the queer community and beyond, there is a bias favoring monosexuals (aka people only interested in one gender): heterosexuals, gay men, and lesbians are privileged. There’s little room for bi/pan/fluid/queer people or non-binary people. Historically, bisexuality was treated as a phase - you were confused or just on your way to becoming a lesbian (or gay man). The field of psychology was part of this, and I’ve had more than one lesbian say this to me (e.g., saying "You just haven’t been with the right woman"). Having also been called a breeder as I was teased and pushed out of a lesbian community for dating a man, it doesn’t feel good.

For anyone who says, “but we all have preferences, just a few episodes ago you both rejected a right-winger:” Yeah, we do have preferences and values alignment can certainly shape that. But, there’s a difference between rejecting someone with different values and rejecting someone purely because of their more flexible sexual orientation (when their orientation includes you) or other identity characteristics. Someone’s values tell me about how they view the world and other people. You don’t know anything about me based on my queerness other than I’m open to all the genders. Rejecting someone because of their sexual orientation when you would otherwise like them based on their gender, that’s the problem.

To summarize as a general rule: Rejecting people based on mismatched values and/or political ideologies - YES! Based purely on identities or who they are attracted to, please, re-evaluate.

Is the person who wrote this on their profile a bigot? I dunno. They could be. They could also just be trying to be cute with a snappy expression and didn’t think it all the way through.

Profiles can do harm or support change. They contribute to our collective conversation and norms around who is valued and who is not. They can reinforce divides or open new connections. Racism, sexism, colorism, ableism, homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia all show up in profiles. Thinking about what you’re saying and the implications, particularly when you’re commenting on a marginalized group, as Kris mentioned, is important. Let’s value each other rather than add to stigma and erasure.

If you have a strong bias and you aren’t budging on it, be honest. But please, if there are other ways you can express your preferences without re-enforcing bi/panphobia (or other -isms), that would be great.

This has been a strongly worded, very personal “the more you know.” Not everyone may react so strongly or even have the same take. As you heard in the episode, Kris wasn’t bothered by this personally, but now has a better understanding as to how this phrase can harm others -- including those she loves! As always, take what feels useful, and leave the rest. Thanks for reading! XO, Lauren

In this episode of B4U Swipe, Kris and Lauren discuss a weed-smoking skier with a violent side and a karaoke-loving, suit-wearing dominant.

Content Warning: In this episode we discuss relationship violence because of a profile image we describe. Please take care of yourself as you decide whether or not to listen. If you need support (an ear, planning, local resources), reach out to the National Domestic Violence Hotline by calling 1.800.799.SAFE (7233) or chat live through their website https://www.thehotline.org/ - you can also find information on what to expect if you call. We’ve used this hotline and are incredibly grateful it exists.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Dom jams, dating people who are going through a divorce, the stressors that can enter a relationship, and the awesomeness that is karaoke. Overall, this profile perked Kris right up! And for easy reference and giggles: Vandelay Latex video clip

Kris’ profile highlights include: love languages, dating violence, and classism. This profile is horrible and we break our non-judgemental vibe to tell our listeners never to post violent images.

The More you Know: Swipe Smarter (for relationships)

Many of us have a list in our head about the characteristics we look for when searching for a mate online. Problem is, according to research, when we start actually looking at profiles, we tend to throw our list out the window. We end up ignoring a lot of our dealbreakers and focus on the superficial instead. Why are we so shitty at remembering our carefully culled checklists of partner must-haves?

Because we end up focusing on looks and a general sense of commonality instead of the deeper stuff.

This can be better understood through research on Mate Value and Unique Value. This research was conducted by Paul Eastwick who Kris seems to think is a pretty cool human based on this AMA on Reddit.

A person’s Mate Value is based on a broad population’s consensus about desirable qualities. For example, in a general poll on which people think is tastier – beer or cod liver oil, beer is going to win out overall. Beer has better Mate Value than cod liver oil. In the same way, more people are going to find higher Mate Value in Beyonce and John Legend than Mick Jagger.

Eastwick’s research on first impressions has shown that people do in fact reach some degree of consensus about each other in precisely this way. During an initial encounter (like seeing an online dating profile), some people generally inspire swooning through qualities like attractiveness, charisma and portrayed success. In other words, the higher the Mate Value, the more “swipe-rights.”

Yet alongside this consensus of who is considered “a catch,” is a more important concept: Unique Value. This is the degree to which someone rates a specific person as lower or higher than the person’s mate value. For example, even if Alex is a 6 in attractiveness on that general 1-10 scale, people will still vary in their impressions of them. Some may be put off or unimpressed by Alex’s love of karaoke and lower their attractiveness to a 3. Yet Kris will think Alex is a 9, finding their love of singing Pat Benetar to a group of drunk bar goers a huge turn-on. In other words, Alex has high Unique Value to Kris. And here’s the thing -- Unique Value is more important than Mate Value when it comes to couple success.

The takeaway? The very things we swipe right on are NOT the things that will ultimately keep a couple together. Boo.

Unique Value research supports the old axiom that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” However, during initial impressions, Mate Value, which focuses on the superficial, reigns. As people get to know each other, Mate Value decreases in importance giving way to Unique Value. Swiping apps are designed to capitalize on our superficial impulses. So what to do if we want to find a relationship as we swipe?

Our Pro Tips For people looking for a relationship on apps:

• When creating your profile, highlight your unique qualities over (or in addition to) your general appealing ones.

• When swiping, if you find a Hottie McTottie you want to swipe right on, go ahead. Just know you may not have anything else in common to carry the chemistry forward.

• Also when swiping, keep that post-it note of idiosyncrasies you find endearing nearby lest you forget what they are. If you see someone who doesn’t immediately ring your bell but they tick some boxes on your post-it, give them a chance and swipe right.

Citation: Eastwick PW,& Hunt LL. (2014). Relational mate value: consensus and uniqueness in romantic evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 106: 728-51.

Also, Kris talks about this more in her Science on Tap talk, “Looking for Love in Virtual Places”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4nlCTVQVK8&t=418s

And check out this New York Times article: So You’re Not Desirable ...

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/18/opinion/sunday/so-youre-not-desirable.html

In this episode of B4U Swipe, Kris and Lauren discuss a kilt-wearing dude with a fish and an affluent couple with car trouble

Lauren’s profile highlights include: ambiguous couple composition, interpreting drama, math, car aesthetics, and Netflix as a hobby. This profile is a great example as to what couples who are looking for “fun” should NOT do to attract someone.

Kris’ profile highlights include: barn terminology, dad bods, establishing trust, get to know your firefighter day, masculinity, and presenting your authentic self. While this guy seemed pretty darn cute, we question how honest he is.

The More you Know: Profile Honesty

It’s probably not all that surprising to learn that not everyone tells the truth on their dating profiles. While we don’t have a good sense of how often people lie, we do have a good sense of what kind of lies are most common.

Most of the fibs are those that push the boundaries of truth around what scientists call “impression management” -- that is, we lie to look better in the eyes of those who might swipe right on us.

Those things tend to vary a bit by gender (again, researchers pretty much only deal in the gender binary in these sorts of studies. We will continue to apologize on behalf of the research community): men are more likely to lie about their height and occupation, while women are more likely to lie about their weight and use less-than-accurate photos to make themselves look better. Not the most thrilling research in the world, but there you have it.

Sometimes people will lie about their age. While some simply do this to appear younger, some do it for a related reason: they want to make sure they show up in more people’s searches! Many of us set up an age filter for profiles they are willing to look at -- understandable. There are many reasons a person may not want to date or hookup with someone significantly older or younger, and there are so many profiles, setting age parameters seems like an easy way to limit options to something more manageable. But what if that person who would make you sing is just ONE YEAR OFF your age filter? Then you’re screwed (or not, I guess). Enter lying about one’s age. People will fudge a year or two to fit into more searches: a 51-year-old becomes 49. A 23-year-old who likes older partners might sneak up to 25.

These small fibs may not seem like a big deal -- ah, but they can be! One study found that people who lied on their profiles, and then met someone in person, had up to a 30% less chance of a second date. Oops.

Another common way people lie is about their availability. Simply put: They are in a relationship that doesn’t allow for additional partners and they try to meet up with others anyway without mentioning the current relationship. That is violating at least two people’s consent. We are all for ethical non-monogamy at B4U Swipe. Have the talk or end the relationship before you open up to other pals or partners.

So, the not-too-surprising moral of this story is: be honest up front. Unless you don’t care if you ever see the person again. On second thought. Just be honest. It makes for a nicer world.

Citation: Sharabi, L. L., & Caughlin, J. P. (2019). Deception in online dating: Significance and implications for the first offline date. New Media and Society, 21, 229-247. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1461444818792425

In this episode of B4 U Swipe, Kris and Lauren discuss a bro with a fancy watch and an unsettling profile image. Note, this profile includes cartoon violence that leads to a brief discussion of gender and violence.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Carefully crafted superficial fanciness, versatility in ball caps, an inexplicable motivational poster, Tinder dismissiveness while being on Tinder, and a beer debate that includes Lauren’s beer snobbery and Kris’ lesson that “Every beer has its place.” Overall, we couldn’t get past the superficiality, arrogance, and were left wondering, WTF is this dude bro thinking?

Kris’ profile highlights include: Where do we even begin? Shy Tinder writer with a vivid, explicit, provocative image including a school girl, a hammer, and a deranged Thumper (Pop over to the website to see the de-identified image). Interpreting representations of violence, art-based subcultures, and how gender shifts our read of profiles. Also a reminder to credit other people’s artwork - even on Tinder!

Be sure to check out the bonus follow up content on gender identity and our reactions to the art through a gender/patriarchy framework.

Reminder: Gender and sex are not a binary (there are more than two genders and more than two sexes naturally and beautifully occurring across humans)! Gender is a social construction!

The More you Know: Gender, Art, & Profiles

Alright, y’all. We rarely can actually share a profile image out of respect for people’s privacy. This time we can! Click here to see the image we discussed in Episode 6. We’ve learned it was created by Victor Castillo. We hope the visual matches our description at least somewhat.

Now, imagine you’re chilling on your couch, swiping along and all of a sudden you find this image as the only profile picture. What comes up for you? What stands out? For us, as two people concerned with building a world filled with sexual respect and liberation, this piece used as a Tinder profile image brought up a lot of reactions (as you heard in the episode).

Art is a powerful, wonderful creation of humans. We both love love love art of all kinds. We honor different styles and purposes, and so long as the art isn’t reinforcing the subjugation and oppression of others, we try to avoid judging other people’s preferences.

Some art is quite provocative. The piece shared in this profile is that kind of art. References to famous beloved cartoon characters sporting what appears to be an aroused phallic nose, nods to child sexualization, and a clear act of impending violence. Is this sexual violence survivor art? Something like: “I will lure you in, vile predator, and then bludgeon you so you can never harm another?” Is it a “F*ck Disney” for their portrayal of girls and women (although getting a little better now)? Or is this some other kind of pairing of sexualization and blaming, where girls and women’s bodies and sexualities are framed as a threat to others? Or something else?

We have no idea what the profile creator meant to communicate. Maybe it’s not that deep. Maybe they just like the color scheme?

As noted in the episode, we don’t know the gender of the person who made the profile. For us, existing in a patriarchal society, knowing the gender of the poster would influence our interpretation. Yes, that draws on a lot of cultural norms, bias, and stereotypes. If a cis het man posted that, paired with the profile description, it feels far more threatening to us as people socialized as women in this world. It reminds us of the subculture of angry white dudes who feel entitled to women’s bodies. Seeing women as tricksters and untrustworthy. Shudder.

However, if we learned a femme person posted this, we find ourselves simply curious about what the piece means to them.

Is it fair that gender matters in how we interpret the exact same object? Absolutely not. Are all men actually a threat to women’s safety? No. But are some? Yes. Is US culture a threat to women, femme, and non-binary people? YES!

One in four or more of women have survived sexual and/or relationship violence, most often at the hands of men they know. Rates of violence are higher for women of color and for trans people of all gender identities. Depending on what kinds of violence and harassment you ask about, these stats go up and up. If you’re a dude seeking women, consider the imagery of your profile and pay attention to stereotypes about your gender. Pay attention to women’s very understandable fear of men and violence in relationships.

All of that said, we are intrigued by the idea of integrating art into your profile. When you are deeply moved or inspired by an artist, that can be a meaningful way into a connection. Lauren has a shout out to their favorite cultural thinker and creator, adrienne maree brown, in their profile. Their line is “adrienne maree brown is gospel.” This is often something people reference in their first or early messages. Similarly, when a fabulous tinder match in Lauren’s life shared their love of Frida Kahlo, it sparked new directions in conversation. They could have included a piece of Frida’s work alongside their photos, and it would have been an easy conversation starter and point of connection. However, it’s key here that this content be included alongside other profile content, not in place of. Also, if you include someone else’s work, always include credit to the original artist!

Bottom line: Art can be provocative and a source of connection. Consider the context in which you share it and what other information you make available in your profile. And if you only have one image in your profile, make it of you.

In this episode of B4 U Swipe, Kris and Lauren discuss a tough, proud right-wing femme and an arrogant aspiring astral projector. Brace yourselves for Lauren’s loudest cackle and a “Dear men” moment.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Our first submitted profile! A “New right” woman who hates bad hats. We marvel at their gender norms and appreciate an unexpected Marx joke. Our bias against white supremacist right-wingers comes through loud and clear. Overall, the profile is effective in telling a story and sparking conversation. It’s just not a conversation we want to have. Postscript: We recorded this episode before January 6, 2021. Now we wonder, was she at the Capitol and part of the insurrection? Maybe.

Kris’ profile highlights include: Men using words people don’t know (and being a dick about it), stalker vibes, spaced out selfies, and references to moon beams and astral projecting. PSA: It isn’t cute when you try to boss around women or femme people. Unless they’ve consented to submissive power play, you’re actually just being an asshole. Overall, the profile was baffling and aggravating. Always, f*ck the patriarchy.

The More you Know: Gendered swiping patterns

After wrapping up and admitting we would swipe left on these profiles, we spend the last 5 minutes of the episode discussing basic profile creation. I, Kris, bring in some research data and I wanted to elaborate on what I mentioned regarding some men not putting a lot of effort into their profiles.

Before going too far, a caveat: Sadly, there isn’t good info on the best profiles for men who seek someone other than a woman for a partner. Also, this research is focused on the gender binary and ignores transgender and non-binary people. I call bullshit on researchers. Do better, my peeps.

So, cishet swipers, this info is for you! And anyone else who is just curious about human habits and online dating.

I’ve seen stats that state up to 30% of men only have one picture and no other information about themselves on a profile. Is a good strategy? Research says, nope!

Men, if you are hoping for a woman to swipe right on you, you need to do more than that just post a photo. In fact, this article in Psychology Today points out that if men increase the number of profile pictures from 1 to 3, they get 4.5 times more matches. Lauren and I talk about picture strategies in other episodes and show notes (See the show notes for Episode 3, for example). I’d like to add here that marketing research also claims that bathroom shots, professional photos, and out-of-focus images are turn-offs. Also, unless you're part of a kink scene, consider cutting out the bunny-ear and heart add-ons.

Similarly, men who include a bio get, on average, 4 times more matches. Again, effort = reward.

But what information should you include? This survey done by the Pew Research Center states that women want to know what type of relationship a potential match is looking for more than men do. Overall, women just want to know more about a person than men do up front, whether it’s your hobbies, religion, or height. But relationship type is the most important thing after seeing a few photos.

Women who seek men don’t seem to need to put in as much effort in their profiles. This might be because men who seek women play the odds game while women seeking men are more choosy as to when to swipe right. Case in point: In one survey, no women stated they liked most profiles, whereas over a third of men said they did. Also, twice as many guys admit to swiping right on profiles they aren’t attracted to when compared to women. Why anyone would swipe right on a person they aren’t attracted to is a topic for another day, but I do have some ideas on that. Stay tuned!

In this episode of B4 U Swipe, Kris and Lauren discuss a woman who seems to have one really good side and a couple looking for some playmates.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Our memories of black bras and white tank top, getting started dating later in life, and an important conversation about consent, including other people in your images, and respecting dancers and sex workers. Overall, this profile was solid, but we wished for better photo choices.

Kris’ profile highlights include: This was a doozy! Bisexual couple with no photos for a pretty awkward reason! Some words of caution when considering playing with or advertising as a couple. Challenges with race and ethnicity disclosure and interracial couple fetishization. We talk about classism, power dynamics, and risks when proposing weekend getaways. Bonus! Safety planning and check-ins (“My cat’s on fire!”), and bonding with bartenders post bad date. Overall, the profile made us uncomfortable for a 1,000 reasons.

The More you Know: Compersion!

One of the profiles reviewed in this episode had “compersion>jealousy” in their profile. We wanted to pause on this point just a little longer. Compersion is all about the way our hearts expand (we get a dose of dopamine) when we learn about the joy of others we are connected to.

Compersion is that feeling of excitement you get when a friend has a good date, when your child learns a new skill and shows it off with pride, or when someone else you love has a good performance review at work.

Compersion can show up in any relationship - friendships, family, and dating or long term partnerships. Some people in polyamory and ethically non-monogamous relationships experience compersion when they hear about their partner or pal’s romantic or sexual connections with others. For some people it’s magnified joy, and for others it can also be a turn on and spark more connection within the partnership.

The idea of compersion is rarely talked about in popular culture. TV shows and movies thrive on storylines involving jealousy and singular ownership of dating partners. The “I saw you talking to her!” followed by “Babe, she doesn’t mean anything to me” trope is hella played out. Imagine if instead the story was: “I saw you talking to her and you looked so happy. I love seeing you like that,” and maybe even a, “Tell me more!” That’s compersion.

Now, jealousy is often talked about as the flip of compersion, which would suggest you can’t feel both at the same time. Not true! You can be both happy for someone and feel a bit jealous. You’re not a bad person for feeling jealous, but figuring out what that feeling is really about and what to do in response is important.

We will unpack jealousy in future episode notes.

To learn more: consider checking out @shrimpteeth or @lavitaloca34 on instagram for more important conversations about compersion and jealousy (and polyamory and so many other great topics!). Another interesting potential read is the book “PolySecure” https://thorntreepress.com/polysecure/ (Note: please say “polyam” instead of poly - which is shorthand for the polynesian community).

In this episode of B4 U Swipe, Kris and Lauren discussed a “vintage” white guy looking for an LTR and a queer, vegan, monogamous, sober human.

Kris’ profile highlights include: Feelings about grammar and punctuation, choices in profile metaphors (another man and a car!), mysterious “gifts,” the baggage of claiming “no baggage,” and posing for photos. Overall, the profile left us wanting and wondering if a physical therapist was involved in its creation.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Our feelings about cooking shows, the pros and cons of specific references (more metaphors!), wardrobe choices, and disclosing sobriety. This profile left Kris pretty intrigued and somewhat wishing she were younger and living in Chicago.

The More you Know: Photo selection!

Before you flood your profile with the maximum number of photos just because you can, consider these questions:

1. What does each photo say about you? Think about what you’re wearing, the setting, and your expression. Your photos tell a story. Are you telling the story you intend to tell?

2. What poses are you striking? Standing back on your heels with your hands in your pockets conveys a very different message than leaning into the camera. Be dynamic in your posture across photos and lure someone into your profile!

3. What does this photo add? Ideally, each photo shows something different about you, instead of being a photo that’s very similar to one already posted. Just because you see that subtle difference, doesn’t mean someone swiping through will. Maybe only include one or two close-up selfies of you in the same pose ;)

4. How old is the photo? We get it, you want to show an important moment in your life/the fact that you have traveled to cool places. Or maybe you want to show that one time you had a six-pack. But if it happened a long time ago, be honest and put a year on it. Include a caption or a note in your bio that includes the year but also says why you included that moment. It’s not because 10 years ago you looked extra hot and you’re trying to trick someone into swiping right (is it???); it’s because you just had to talk about your favorite city, the happiest day of your life -- something like that. If an old photo really misleads someone about what you look like now, consider cutting it. No one likes to feel tricked right out the gate.

5. What are your goals with that semi-nude body shot? Research shows that bare body shots are a turn-off for people looking for a relationship. You also may be violating people’s expectations and consent depending on the image you’re sharing (revisit Episode 2 Consensual Sexting notes). We’re not saying don’t show off your bod if you’re proud of it. We are saying consider what you want out of the dating app before posting your bareness. Consider what other users are expecting given the norms and purpose of the app. You can give a flavor and a peek without risking crossing someone’s boundaries. If after all this caution you still want to include a bare bod shot, we have one last request: please don’t dehumanize yourself. When you cut off your face in the shots, it suggests we should separate your body from your brain. Also, how do we know it's really you? You’re on a app to meet, so prove it’s you by including your face (especially if you’ve already shown it). If you’re worried about who will see it on the app, maybe this is yet another reason to save the bod shot for a consensual sext in the future.

In this episode of B4U Swipe, Kris and Lauren discuss a world traveling burner and bad carpet that pretty much matches the drapes.

Kris’ profile highlights include: Introverts, soul patches, living bear skin rugs, sexting, and the merits of headless torso shots. Overall, the profile delivers, even if we don’t love all choices.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Baby shit brown carpet, mismatched “passions” and images, theorizing why some people create profiles not designed for matching, and the story of WizardCat (oh, WizardCat - if you see this, find meeee!). This profile left us laughing and wondering, why?

The More you Know: Safe(r), Consensual Sexting

Sexting, or sending sexually explicit images, videos, or messages, can be a great tool for foreplay, full play, or just a way to kill time. Like all forms of sexual expression, it isn’t for everyone and that’s okay! Some sexting guidelines to live by:

1) You don’t owe anyone images of you or your body.

2) ALWAYS GET CONSENT BEFORE SENDING (images, fantasies or anything else).

3) Someone not wanting to sext doesn’t mean they don’t want you. Putting things in writing or sending photos just isn’t for everyone.

4) Never pressure someone to play, and avoid personalizing another person’s preferences.

5) Ways to say no: “Sexting isn’t my thing, but I look forward to playing in person.” This establishes a clear boundary while also affirming interest in the person.

6) Ways to accept a no: “Thanks for letting me know! Should we set up our next date?” This respects their boundary while moving the connection forward.

7) If you’re disappointed by receiving a no, that’s okay! However, try not to talk to the person who said no about your feelings. That can feel like pressure to participate. Process those valid feels on your own, with a friend, or with a therapist.

8) Do not share photos you receive with anyone else (unless you have permission).

9) Assume someone might be an asshole and show other people your photos.

10) Consider how identifiable you are in your image - background, body art, etc. Only you can decide what you’re comfortable sharing.

In this episode of B4 U Swipe, you heard some first episode jitters as we reviewed profiles without photos. Kris and Lauren discussed a questionably positive gentleman and a queer woman who really wants to get to know you. Both profiles also want you to know, they work out.

Kris’ profile highlights include: Egregious capitalization (and a wish for secret decoder messages), a fixation on “good manners” (and why only dudes seem to comment on this), lurking subtext, weird repetition and considering how you elaborate, and Portland’s love of the outdoors. Overall, Kris and Lauren were pretty unimpressed.

Lauren’s profile highlights include: Queerness, labels, and choices with acronyms; judgmental working out; healing journeys, disclosure, emotional bandwidth, and setting boundaries. Also, emojis as profile summary and/ or generational difference (plus a Lucky Lager story!). This profile left us feeling like this person may aggressively judge us, cross boundaries, and wouldn’t be great at affirming their playmate, but we liked that they created a clear 3-part essay and job ad.

And, always, Black Lives f*cking Matter.

The More you Know: Heteronormativity and Labels in the Queer Community

In this episode you hear us briefly discuss queer, bisexual, pansexual, demisexual, and sapiosexual orientations. Some people might wonder, why so many labels? That’s because sexuality is diverse! There’s not just one way to be queer* (or straight!), and labels may help us find similar people.

However, labels aren’t universal or singular. Our quick description in the episode, even of identities we hold, are likely missing nuance or things that may be important to others who share the identities. Some pro-tips around labels:

• If someone shares a label with you, ask them what it means to them! Ask about how people relate to sexual attraction, romantic attraction, and relationship structures, among other things. No set of labels will cover all the beautiful variation we carry with us.

• And for the love of all that matters in this world, don’t ever try to argue with someone about their sexuality. If you don’t get it, you don’t have to! It’s theirs. Ask questions to get to know someone not to decide whether who they are, what they feel, and what they want is valid.

You heard us bump against the difference between bisexuality and pansexuality. While some link bisexuality to the gender binary (and by association, transphobia), the bisexual community has been fighting this stereotype for decades. We encourage people to check out the Bisexual Manifesto from the 1990s for some resistance and the Bisexual Resource Center for more info. It’s important to acknowledge that even within the queer community, some identities get put down or misunderstood.

Why does all this matter? US culture treats heterosexuality and the gender binary as normal. It also presumes all people are sexual and interested in romantic partnerships. While straight cis binary people interested in sexual and romantic relationships may be most common, that doesn’t make them more right or valid than people with other identities, interests, or experiences. This is called heteronormativity and it is rooted in oppressive power structures.

Heteronormativity has caused a lot of harm, isolation, and erasure among queer people. Members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community and sexuality scholars continue to create more nuanced labels that disrupt this limited view of sexuality, reflect the beauty of human sexual variation, and support people self-defining and finding community.

To learn more about some of the labels that came up in the episode and others, we recommend checking out the INQUEERY series by them. https://www.them.us/video/series/inqueery For an important additional perspective on heteronormativity, settler colonialism, and labels, check out this post by Kim Tallbear. There are also lots of youtube and TikTok videos out there on any number of identities and labels. Seek information from multiple people who are members of the community and be cautious of anyone who says there is only one way to “do” or embody the label. If someone is peddling shame, don’t buy it! Just like there’s many ways to be a woman, there’s many ways to be queer!

*Lauren and Kris use queer as an all encompassing term for the LGBTQIA2S+ community. This term doesn’t feel right for everyone, but it feels right to them.

Other Episode Nuggets:

Kris referenced her Science on Tap talk about online dating profiles. Check it out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4nlCTVQVK8&t

Bonus Discovery!

Upon further reflection, we have come to the conclusion that the mysterious “CMN” discussed in this episode, alas, does not refer to the Canadian Media Network, but quite possibly was a typo for “CNM” which we believe was meant to stand for “consensual non-monogamy.” This is similar to the term “ethical non-monogamy” (see more in “The Ethical Slut” by Hardy and Easton). Since we believe everything in dating and hooking up should be consensual, we prefer the term “ethical non-monogamy.” We will discuss more in the future, stay tuned!