Agreed, prostitution aside, there's a whole grey area here of what's societally acceptable to pay for and what's not, and I don't believe anybody is a true moral arbiter of where that line is.
For example, buying "ad space" (basically Tinder Highlights or Bumble Spotlight, or beyond) with your face on it would be considered not "buying" someone, it would be acceptable. It's just you paying to put your face on a digital billboard, in the hopes to be seen by someone.
Sending someone super-likes, that's again paying for signaling interest, in the hopes that she matches with you.
Paying 20 bucks for extra digital flowers in Coffee Meets Bagel, when liking someone, isn't buying that person, that's again paying to signal interest.
Sending someone $1000 worth of actual roses with your number on a card. That's paying to get someone's attention and signal your interest.
None of that is forcing anybody to do anything, but of course the more you pay, the more they're likely to feel like they need to reciprocate.
And yes, of course some men will feel entitled to get something in return, just like some men will feel entitled to get sex because they paid for lobster dinner. There will always be a scummy, entitled and exploitative portion of the male dating population that will require education or flat out avoidance. They're there, with or without dating apps.
Maybe the key here is that the money doesn't go to the woman. Maybe someone can bid $1000 on a date with someone they really desire, but the money would go to a charity if she accepts and actually shows up. Make the patriarchy pay for important charitable causes :)
> There will always be a scummy, entitled and exploitative portion of the male dating population that will require education or flat out avoidance. They're there, with or without dating apps.
Taking a stance that is essentially equivalent to "rapists exist, there is nothing we can do to discourage them" is another reason women might feel unsafe using a dating service designed by you.
For example, buying "ad space" (basically Tinder Highlights or Bumble Spotlight, or beyond) with your face on it would be considered not "buying" someone, it would be acceptable. It's just you paying to put your face on a digital billboard, in the hopes to be seen by someone.
Sending someone super-likes, that's again paying for signaling interest, in the hopes that she matches with you.
Paying 20 bucks for extra digital flowers in Coffee Meets Bagel, when liking someone, isn't buying that person, that's again paying to signal interest.
Sending someone $1000 worth of actual roses with your number on a card. That's paying to get someone's attention and signal your interest.
None of that is forcing anybody to do anything, but of course the more you pay, the more they're likely to feel like they need to reciprocate.
And yes, of course some men will feel entitled to get something in return, just like some men will feel entitled to get sex because they paid for lobster dinner. There will always be a scummy, entitled and exploitative portion of the male dating population that will require education or flat out avoidance. They're there, with or without dating apps.
Maybe the key here is that the money doesn't go to the woman. Maybe someone can bid $1000 on a date with someone they really desire, but the money would go to a charity if she accepts and actually shows up. Make the patriarchy pay for important charitable causes :)