948958

research-article2020
JOS0010.1177/1440783320948958Journal of SociologyDwyer et al.

Original Manuscript
Journal of Sociology

Navigating ‘thin’ dating

1­–17
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
markets: Mid-life sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1440783320948958
https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783320948958
repartnering in the era of journals.sagepub.com/home/jos

dating apps and websites

Zack Dwyer  and Nicholas Hookway

School of Social Sciences, University of Tasmania, Australia

Brady Robards
School of Social Sciences, Monash University, Australia

Abstract
This article is a qualitative analysis of how people aged in their 30s and 40s use dating apps and
websites to repartner following relationship separation or divorce. While ‘mid-life’ is a period
of significant relationship churn, there is little sociological research that addresses how people
in this age group use digital dating technologies to repartner. Drawing upon in-depth interviews
with a small group of Australians, the article shows how dating technologies help ‘thicken’ thin
dating markets associated with time pressures and access to the night economy, but also loss and
convergence of friendship networks unique to mid-life. The study highlights the impact of gender
on digital repartnering experiences, particularly experiences of online safety, and introduces
the concept of ‘emotional filtering’ to describe how past relationships specifically shape the
repartnering process for this middle-aged group.

Keywords
dating apps, divorce, emotions, filtering, gender, intimacy, online dating, repartnering, separation

Sociological evidence has detailed how digital technologies have transformed sexual and
romantic connections, yet less is known about how people in the middle stage of life use these
technologies to repartner following relationship breakdown (Barraket and Henry-Waring,

Corresponding author:
Zack Dwyer, School of Social Sciences, University of Tasmania, Newnham Campus, Locked Bag 1345,
Launceston, Tasmania 7250, Australia.
Email: zdwyer@utas.edu.au
2 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

2008a; Newett et al., 2018; Rosenfeld and Thomas, 2012). Significant sociological attention
has been given to addressing the extent to which intimate relationships have been reshaped
by processes of individualism, consumerism, globalisation and technological changes
(Bauman, 2003; Elliott and Lemert, 2005; Hobbs et al., 2016; Illouz, 2012). However, these
theories tend to pre-date mainstream dating app use and are often technologically determin-
istic. There is a growing body of scholarship in media and cultural studies that brings sociol-
ogy into dialogue with interdisciplinary approaches to attend to the ways intimacies are
mediated in digital spaces (Berlant, 1998; Dobson et al., 2018). For instance, Dobson et al.
(2018) point to the way Berlant’s observation that intimacy ‘involves an aspiration for a nar-
rative about something shared, a story about both oneself and others that will turn out in a
particular way’ (1998: 282–3) has been taken up in the study of digital media, especially in
research on dating and hook-up apps.
While there has been a productive focus on ‘digital intimacies’ (Dobson et al., 2018),
especially in research on dating and hook-up apps, people in their 30s and 40s are not
often a focus of this research. People near the middle stage of the life-course (those in
their 30s and 40s in particular) are some of the most likely to divorce and experience de
facto relationship dissolution (ABS, 2016; de Vaus, 2004). With this middle-aged group
having high exposure to relationship churn – and reporting high levels of loneliness
(Franklin et al., 2019) – they are also the group most likely to be seeking to repartner after
exiting from a previous romantic relationship. While data show that digital platforms are
increasingly popular within the 35–54 age cohort (Smith and Anderson, 2016), there is
little sociological research that analyses how repartnering is practised and experienced
online for this age group. Similarly, the research on ‘digital intimacies’ has not yet closely
attended to this ‘mid-life’ cohort, especially for heterosexual users of dating apps.
This article reports the findings from qualitative research with Australians in their 30s
and 40s who used dating apps and websites to repartner. The article examines the social
and personal factors that motivated this group to take the repartnering search online, the
type of intimate relationships they sought, and the practices and strategies utilised to sort
potential partners and manage risk. A key finding is that dating apps and websites are
powerful tools that helped the participants thicken ‘thin’ dating markets caused by dimin-
ished access to the night-time economy, living ‘hurried lives’, but also the loss and con-
vergence of friendship networks that appear unique to mid-life. The study also underlines
the impact of gender in digital repartnering, particularly regarding the types of relation-
ship pursued and the approaches to, and experiences of, safety and harm. We also intro-
duce the concept of ‘emotional filtering’ to describe how past relationships shape
decisions about the types of people and relationships sought and evaluations about where
potential matches are situated in the break-up/recovery process. We use these findings to
extend current research on ‘digital intimacies’ that has tended to focus on the use of dat-
ing apps among young people and queer people.

Repartnering in ‘mid-life’
The causes and consequences of relationship ‘endings’ have been extensively theorised
and researched but less attention has been paid to relationship ‘beginnings’ (Hookway
et al., 2019). This gap is particularly evident for research focused on understanding how
Dwyer et al. 3

people in the middle stage of life create new intimate connections following relationship
separation. This is surprising as people at this stage of the life-course (30–49) are more
likely to remarry than those who exit relationships at an older age (de Vaus, 2004).
Despite this trend, investigation into repartnering dynamics focuses almost exclusively
on older cohorts (50+ years) (Brown et al., 2006; Carr, 2004; De Jong Gierveld and
Peeters, 2003; Malta and Farquharson, 2014; McWilliams and Barrett, 2014). However,
while de Vaus (2004) helps spotlight this gap in the literature, his emphasis on remarriage
is symptomatic of the long-standing issue with repartnering work; that is, as attention is
regularly limited to divorcees and those who remarry (Anderson et al., 2008; Cherlin,
1978, 1992; Hughes, 2000; James and Shafer, 2012; Khoo, 1989) the experiences of
individuals who exit de facto unions and/or enter non-marital relationships are over-
looked (Evans, 2015).
Notable exceptions to consider a broad range of repartnering experiences for middle-
aged groups are found in pockets of research from the UK (Lampard and Peggs, 1999,
2007; Shaw, 1991), Canada (Wu and Schimmele, 2005) and Australia (Skew et al.,
2009). Some may argue that late modern experiences of people in their 30s and 40s,
‘mid-life’, are now radically different to the experiences of people this age a generation
or more ago. As previously key markers of young people’s ‘transitions’ to ‘adulthood’
like entering full-time employment, moving out of home, graduating from study, enter-
ing into marriage-like relationships, and having children have been delayed (or alto-
gether eschewed), so too have these changes in transition profiles flowed on to those now
in their 30s and 40s (White et al., 2017: 170). However, attending to how people in their
30s and 40s engage with dating apps to repartner provides a new and important dimen-
sion to the research on both dating apps and repartnering practices.
A central theme in research on repartnering practices among middle-aged groups is
the gendered nature of repartnering. For example, Skew et al. (2009) identify that, in
contrast to males, Australian females are significantly less likely to recreate romantic
unions following relationship dissolution. Lampard and Peggs (1999, 2007) found simi-
lar patterns following their study on repartnering in the UK, arguing that women struggle
to recreate romantic connections due to time constraints associated with primary care
commitments. They also suggest that female repartnering is more regularly shaped by
the legacy of a previous relationship (Lampard and Peggs, 2007). This legacy – often
marked by an ex’s adultery or betrayal – manifests in a reluctance or inability to trust
potential new partners (Shaw, 1991).
More recent scholarly work argues that broader structural constraints limit middle-
aged adults’ capacity to form new intimate ties. A key example is survey work by
Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) who suggest individuals in their 30s and 40s occupy a
‘thin’ dating market. Despite individuals at this stage of life experiencing increases in
divorce and relationship churn, a large proportion remain in committed relationships
(Blackwell, 2017; Rosenfeld and Thomas, 2012). Therefore, repartnering may be chal-
lenging as the number of single people to potentially connect with is small. In order to
mitigate this issue, Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) and Blackwell (2017) suggest the
internet is a valuable resource. As the internet – and online dating specifically – tran-
scends geographic boundaries, it allows individuals to broaden their pool of potential
partners and ‘thicken’ an otherwise thin dating market.
4 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

Repartnering in intimate publics

Dating websites and apps (smartphone applications including Tinder, OkCupid, Grindr,
Scruff, Bumble, and Her) have become popular ways for people to facilitate romantic
and sexual encounters (Barraket and Henry-Waring, 2008b; Hobbs et al., 2016; Rosenfeld
and Thomas, 2012). This popularity is reflected in US data showing that, in 2017, 39%
of heterosexual couples and 60% of same-sex couples met online, with digital spaces
displacing family and friends as the most popular method of partner identification
(Rosenfeld et al., 2019). Dating, hook-up websites, apps and digital technologies have a
longer history for men who have sex with men, with Gaydar, for example, growing in
popularity from 2009, leading to other apps like Tinder (launched in 2012) taking geo-
locative dating apps ‘mainstream’ and into heterosexual culture (Duguay, 2017).
Four million Australians are reportedly registered with an online dating device/ser-
vice (Relationships Australia, 2017) with Tinder one of the most popular apps (Hobbs
et al., 2016). Sociological research has examined the type of connections online daters
pursue (Hobbs et al., 2016), the nature of digital interactions (Couch and Liamputtong,
2008) and the interplay between digital and physical spaces (Newett et al., 2018). Further
research has spotlighted the unique affordances of digital spaces for shaping self-presen-
tation and partner selection, particularly the importance of the dating profile, photos, and
filtering to communicate identity, attractiveness, status and match-worthiness (Alterovitz
and Mendelsohn, 2013; Couch and Liamputtong, 2008; Davis et al., 2006; Ellison et al.,
2006, 2012). There has also been valuable research on how young same-sex attracted
people negotiate intimacy, visibility, and risk on hook-up apps (Albury and Byron, 2016),
context collapse and visibility on Grindr (Blackwell et al., 2015), experiences of racism
among Indigenous Australians on dating apps like Tinder and Grindr (Carlson, 2019),
and the experiences of lesbians on Tinder (Ferris and Duguay, 2019). Gillett (2018, 2019)
has spotlighted women’s experiences of ‘intimate intrusions’ on the dating app Tinder,
showing how abuse is a normalised part of digital dating cultures for women.
For good reason, much of this work has centred on experiences of marginalisation,
including age/youth, race, and sexuality, often attending to the intersection of different
experiences of marginalisation. What is less well understood is the role of dating web-
sites and apps among heterosexuals in the ‘thin’ dating markets of the 30s and 40s, espe-
cially as this relates specifically to processes of repartnering. Work that has explored
dating technologies and repartnering concentrates on ‘older adults’ (50+), finding that
online dating is an effective repartnering tool for people who have suffered the death of
a spouse or breakdown of a marriage or de facto partnership (Malta, 2013; Malta and
Farquharson, 2014; McWilliams and Barrett, 2014). Researchers here have found the
decision to search for new intimate connections online stems from disillusionment with
offline meeting spaces (such as bars and clubs), where perceived age norms make older
adults feel unwelcome (Malta, 2013; McWilliams and Barrett, 2014). By searching
online, older users avoid this issue and broaden the pool of potential partners (Malta,
2013; McWilliams and Barrett, 2014). This work also highlights how the types of con-
nections older adults seek differ by gender, with older males typically using online dating
to locate strong and committed bonds, and previously partnered females preferring inti-
macy and companionship in flexible friendship-like unions (Malta and Farquharson,
Dwyer et al. 5

2014; McWilliams and Barrett, 2014). While this work offers important insights into the
motives and experiences of older groups, a consideration of people in the middle part of
the life-course is missing.
This research centres on the role dating apps and websites play in facilitating repart-
nering for those in their 30s and 40s. Such a focus is important in light of arguments that
this age cohort is highly vulnerable to the churning of intimate relationships (de Vaus,
2004), are under significant time pressures related to work and family commitments, and
– unlike young and older adults – occupy a ‘thin’ dating market (Blackwell, 2017;
Rosenfeld and Thomas, 2012). This research is also important in light of evidence that
those in the middle part of life are particularly prone to loneliness and that is related not
necessarily to the quantity of social bonds but their quality (Franklin, 2012; Franklin
et al., 2019). Addressing middle-aged people’s experiences of dating and hook-up apps
acknowledges how age and life-course factors are important in understanding digital
practices and is an important step in understanding the social shaping of technology.

Approach
This article presents the findings from in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted
with 12 current and former Australian online dating users aged 34–49 (seven females and
five males). The data reveal how the group used smartphone dating apps and websites to
form new intimate connections following the dissolution of a previous romantic relation-
ship and builds an understanding of how these technologies are experienced in the par-
ticipants’ intimate lives.
All participants identified as heterosexual and began using online dating following
the breakdown of a significant romantic relationship (see Table 1). The research design
enabled participants to self-define what a ‘significant’ relationship was, with most refer-
encing either the length of relationships or that they had lived together. Eight respondents
resided in Tasmania while the remaining four lived in metropolitan areas including
Brisbane (n = 3) and Melbourne (n = 1). Most participants were professional (n = 4) or
community and personal service workers (n = 4). Others were sales workers (n = 2) or
full-time students (n = 2). Six were former online dating users who had left after com-
mencing a new relationship. The remaining six were active users. Overall, 10 different
online dating services were used across the sample, with many participants using more
than one platform. Rather than focusing on one specific website or app, the study included
all services and platforms to capture a broad range of narratives and experiences.
Participants were recruited through a ‘call for participants’ that was circulated in two
newspapers and widely distributed research flyers. While this strategy was effective it
must be recognised that, like other small-scale qualitative online dating studies (e.g.
Ellison et al., 2006), individuals with positive online dating experiences were potentially
more willing to participate. However, while vulnerable to this bias we do not make causal
or generalisable claims about our findings.
Interviews occurred over a two-month period (July–August 2016) and ranged from 17
to 54 minutes in length. Six of the twelve interviews occurred via Skype while the
remaining six were conducted face-to-face in public locations such as cafés or libraries.
Using Skype as an interview medium was invaluable as it granted the researchers access
6 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

Table 1.  Participant characteristics.

Name Age Sex Dating service(s) Previous relationship Location

Alice 34 F Zoosk, OkCupid, Tinder Separated after 8 years Brisbane
Andre 38 M Zoosk, Tinder Separated after 7 years Melbourne
Debbie 44 F RSVP, Tinder, Plenty of Fish Separated after 3 years Launceston
Olivia 39 F RSVP, Mature Singles, Tinder Divorced after 12 years Launceston
Nathan 44 M eHarmony Divorced after 8 years Launceston
Nikki 44 F RSVP, Tinder Separated after 3 years Brisbane
Zoe 38 F RSVP, Match, Tinder Separated after 4 years Brisbane
Jasmine 46 F Tinder, Plenty of Fish Divorced after 17 years Hobart
Simon 36 M RSVP, Plenty of Fish, Geek- Separated after 7 years Hobart
to-Geek
Susan 49 F RSVP, Tinder Divorced after 16 years Hobart
Eric 48 M RSVP, Elite Singles, Tinder Divorced after 26 years Launceston
Jake 41 M RSVP, Tinder Separated after 3 years Launceston

to otherwise inaccessible respondents while replicating the quality of face-to-face inter-

view interactions (Deakin and Wakefield, 2014; Sullivan, 2013). All interviews were
transcribed and examined using the program ‘f4analyse’. To protect participants’ identity
and privacy, pseudonyms were assigned during the transcription and analysis stage.
Following Minichiello et al. (1995), analysis involved examining interview tran-
scripts and coding for patterns, themes, and keywords, and interpreting how these fit
within broader topic areas of online dating and repartnering. Codes formed both deduc-
tively, based on existing empirical and theoretical literature, and inductively as they
emerged from the data (Willis, 2010). Coding was not linear and all themes that emerged
were continually re-worked and refined throughout the fieldwork component of the
study (Minichiello et al., 1995). At the conclusion of the analysis stage four central
themes were identified: (1) relationship breakdown and declining social networks; (2)
seeking fun, seeking equality: gendering digital relationship seeking; (3) intimate intru-
sions and collapsing the offline/online binary; and finally (4) emotional filtering. Each of
these themes is unpacked and discussed below.

Relationship breakdown and declining social networks

Dating apps and websites were invaluable resources in the repartnering journey for our
participants. All interviewees explained how these platforms enabled them to overcome
multiple social and personal barriers caused by separation or associated with their life-
course position. Mirroring Malta (2013) and McWilliams and Barrett’s (2014) findings
on older online dating users, digital technologies afforded this middle-aged group new
spaces to connect with potential partners as access to the ‘hook-up’ zones of the night-
time economy such as nightclubs and pubs became closed off. As Debbie (44) said: ‘the
way I’ve met partners before is through going out, but the older you get that’s not easy to
do’. Further, all participants revealed the value of dating websites and apps in addressing
time pressures related to repartnering as they juggled work and caring responsibilities.
Dwyer et al. 7

Their accounts also underline the role digital technologies can play in softening the
restrictions dependent children place on people in their 30s and 40s forming new inti-
mate connections (Lampard and Peggs, 2007). Eric, Jasmine and Nathan capture this:

My job means I’m incredibly busy. So online dating seemed to be a way of getting quicker
results and having the flexibility and freedom of being able to sift through people’s profiles and
target those sorts of people that you want to meet and avoid those people that you don’t want to
meet. (Eric, 48)

When I am out – shopping or whatever – I have kids in tow.. . . I’m not looking for someone,
and even if someone perfect was right in front of me I probably wouldn’t have the time or the
energy to talk to that person . . . it doesn’t matter with online dating does it? I mean if the kids
are in bed and asleep then it doesn’t matter that I am at home, sitting on the couch in my
pyjamas. (Jasmine, 46)

As a single father, you know, there was limited time. That’s why eharmony was so useful
though. (Nathan, 44)

A finding unique to this middle-aged group’s repartnering was the use of dating tech-
nologies to offset an inability to generate intimate connections through existing friend-
ship groups. In many cases, separation following a long-term relationship coincided with
the foreclosing of key social networks. These participants experienced a particular form
of dating thinness related to the loss of friendship networks that stems from ending a
long-term romantic relationship. This thinness is caused by partners’ friendship networks
tending to converge over time or one partner becoming over-reliant on the partner’s
friendship network. Jasmine, Nathan and Simon illustrate how changes to friendship
networks following separation shaped the repartnering experience for this age group:

there was the marriage break-up sometime after we got here, and I guess that’s when I realised:
all of the people I knew were his friends. So, all of a sudden, I didn’t have that network.. . . I
have no groups of friends who have groups of male friends .  .  . none of that network to fall back
on. (Jasmine, 46)

after the divorce I had a pretty limited social network to work with, because they were mainly
her friends. (Nathan, 44)

That’s why I decided to use online dating in the first place. I put so much of myself into that
relationship and then when it ended, I felt a bit lost, you know? I had lost touch with most of
my old friends. (Simon, 36)

The experiences of these two male participants, Simon and Nathan, align with Franklin
and Tranter (2011) and Davidson’s (2004) assertion that in the middle period of the life-
course a heterosexual man’s social network is often heavily structured around their
romantic partner. Both revealed that as their romantic relationship progressed, their orig-
inal friendship network declined and was replaced by their partner’s. Consistent with
Franklin and Tranter’s (2011) findings, this left Jasmine, Nathan, and Simon vulnerable
to social isolation after the relationship dissolved and, in the absence of a network, made
8 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

it difficult to form new intimate connections. However, Jasmine’s story, where divorce
left her without a social network to assist in the formation of new partnerships, broadens
Franklin and Tranter’s (2011) argument by pointing to how this phenomenon is not lim-
ited to males. More recent research using longitudinal HILDA data, shows that while
overall levels of loneliness are consistently higher for males, females are more likely to
report feeling ‘very lonely’ (Brook, 2018).

Seeking fun, seeking equality: gendered digital relationship

seeking
A key theme of contemporary sociological theorising is that intimate relationships have
become more short-term and less fulfilling than in the past. Bauman (2003) and Illouz
(2012), for example, argue that internet dating and changing cultural values have turned
Westerners into relationship ‘shoppers’, with an excess of choice making it difficult to
find and create meaningful and enduring love bonds. Illouz (2012) nuances the argument
in relation to gender, claiming that increased choice means men are more likely to be
commitment phobic while women’s choices are constrained by reproductive and care
roles, and a stronger attachment to romantic love ideals.
Despite their previous relationship breaking down, participants were generally opti-
mistic about using dating technologies to find committed relationships. Alice (34), for
instance, explained that finding ‘that “forever” type of relationship was always the hope’
while Simon (36) was ‘hoping to find the love of my life’. For some of the males, how-
ever, hook-ups were the initial motivation, but long-term relationships were the outcome.
Andre (38), for example, started using Zoosk and Tinder after coming out of a long-term
relationship and, despite the initial goal to ‘date some people casually, have fun and
stuff’, explained how he ‘ended up meeting my current girlfriend and that ended that’.
Similarly, in using RSVP, ‘Elite Singles’ and Tinder, Eric was not initially looking to date
long term, but this is what eventuated:

One of the things for me was that I didn’t want to meet someone to date. I didn’t want to get
into a long-term relationship initially . . . that just came about unexpectedly. (Eric, 48)

It is notable that only the males in the sample spoke of dating technologies enabling
sexual hook-ups. This is suggestive of Illouz’s (2012) argument about Western hetero-
sexual males finding self-worth through accumulation of sexual partners and adds a gen-
dered dimension to Bauman’s ‘consumerist love’ model. However, many participants
were searching for – or ended up in – exclusive and committed relationships. This is
consistent with Hobbs et al.’s (2016) mixed-methods study of Australian online daters,
which rejects Bauman’s (2003) argument that romantic ties have undergone processes of
liquefaction as a result of online dating. There is a tension, however, in the accounts of
repartnering between the males who talk about using the internet initially for hook-ups
and ‘fun’ but end up in long-term relationships, and the females – particularly those com-
ing out of marriage – who are not looking for short-term romantic connections but alter-
native relationships that are more equal and democratic. The following two female
participants highlight this search for more equal relationships:
Dwyer et al. 9

I’m not really interested in a relationship that is going to end with someone moving in. I like
being in charge of my life, my kids and my family. . .. I guess what I am looking for is a
companion . . . someone to share some time with. (Jasmine, 46)

I’m sort of not desperately trying to seek another partner . . . just someone to spend some time
with. I want equality, you know . . . none of this, ‘you’re the woman so stay home and look
after the kids, cook and clean and you attend to my needs and everything revolves around me’
kind of thing. (Olivia, 39)

These findings nuance Illouz’s argument: middle-aged females in this study were not
necessarily looking for traditional romantic relationships but wanted to create more equal
partnerships less bound to traditional gender roles. The distinctive repartnering feature for
these females is the creation of new types of relationships different to their previous union.
Gender appears important in understanding the repartnering decisions for this age group,
with males more likely initially to use dating technologies to seek hook-ups, while the
females seek new types of companionship characterised by equality and independence.
This research echoes the findings of McWilliams and Barrett (2014) and Malta and
Farquharson (2014) who found that gender shapes the types of relationships older adults
seek. While we similarly found that repartnering females sought flexible friendship rela-
tions, the males, rather than solely searching for long-term and commitment relationships,
initially approached internet dating with a focus on desire, fun and hook-ups.
Gendered differences were also evident in how photos were used as a ‘filtering
method’ to evaluate desirability and compatibility. Although both male and female par-
ticipants emphasised the importance of judging attractiveness through the profile photo,
men appeared to place more importance on appearance to determine compatibility.
Simon (36) said: ‘I think I just looked for attractiveness really’, Andre (38) explained
that he was looking: ‘from a photo perspective . . . anyone that looked attractive’, and
Jake (41) reflexively observed that: ‘It’ll probably seem a bit shallow, but really I just
looked for people I found hot.’ Females, on the other hand, downplayed the importance
of physical appearance and spoke of images as a gauge for cultural similarities and
whether the potential match was more interested in a sexual rather than romantic encoun-
ter. As Zoe (38) shared: ‘if someone just has shirtless photos, it’s pretty clear what they’re
there for . . . they just want to hook-up’.

Intimate intrusions and collapsing the offline/online binary

Gendered differences were clearly evident in the different focus males and females
placed on digital safety and their experience of ‘intimate intrusions’ (Gillett, 2019) in
their repartnering journeys. Perceptions and experiences of risk and harm were heavily
gendered, with only female participants speaking of potential threats to physical safety
and reporting behaviours from men that made them feel uncomfortable. This is consist-
ent with Gillett’s (2018, 2019) research, which uses the framework of a continuum of
sexual violence to analyse the normalisation of abuse and intimate intrusions on mobile
dating apps like Tinder. Most female participants recounted how negative experiences
triggered a realisation they need to protect themselves online:
10 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

I had a very bad experience early on. You have to be very protective and careful with keeping
safe . . . there was a guy who I had been talking to, but he was being kind of pushy about
catching up . . . he said ‘Oh I know where you work, I’m just a couple of blocks away’, and I
didn’t know this guy from a bar of soap . . . so I googled him, and he’d just got out of jail, you
know? And I was like, okay this is a very good lesson. (Susan, 49)

You really need to be careful of your safety and you need to have your wits about you and be
wise because people get in situations – bad situations – all the time. It’s like, if two guys that
you’ve never met invite you to a hotel room at ten o’clock at night what do you do? And that
happened to me. (Debbie, 49)

Aligning with research on risk management among online daters (e.g. Couch and
Liamputtong, 2007; Pitts et al., 2011), and work by Albury and Byron (2016) on hook-up
app use among same-sex attracted young people, our interviewees explained how they
developed and employed various strategies to protect themselves to ensure their physical
safety while using dating platforms. For instance, following her negative experience,
Susan created a set of personal guidelines for all future online interactions and face-to-
face meetings to protect her identity:

it created a few rules for me about always using a fake name. So, when I’m on Tinder
I’ll link it to a fake Facebook profile. I don’t usually give them my real name until
after I’ve met them in person. I don’t give them my phone number until I have met them.
(Susan, 49)

Other strategies that our female participants employed to ensure their safety included
asking connections or ‘matches’ to exchange photos. For instance, Zoe was mindful that
dating apps and websites grant users a degree of anonymity, and felt it was important to
establish authenticity before arranging physical meet-ups:

I don’t trust a singular profile photo. I mean anyone can find a random photo, stick it up, and
pretend it’s them. What I do is, after we’ve chatted for a bit, get them to send more photos. I do
that because before I meet up with people I try to make sure they match with the profile photo
and the person is who they say they are. (Zoe, 38)

This technique of requesting additional photos to confirm identity is consistent with

Albury and Byron’s (2016) findings. In this case, further picture sharing was a key
method in which their participants managed safety, along with moving across different
apps and platforms and blocking people who were harassing them or who they were not
interested in (Albury and Byron, 2016).
Despite some female participants being concerned that online dating contained inher-
ent risks, others found the technology heightened their agency and reversed traditional
dating norms:

I felt that I had a lot of control over the situation and that was a very good thing. Because it is
very intimidating to be the proactive one when it comes to face-to-face, particularly as a
woman. (Alice, 34)
Dwyer et al. 11

In this case, Alice felt the digital mediation of dating liberated her from traditional gender
scripts. While contemporary courtship still places value on males being the ‘aggressor’
and females being ‘chased’ in romantic pursuits, our findings hint at gender performances
in digital spaces being more fluid and flexible. New apps like Bumble, where in hetero-
sexual pairings females must initiate the conversation, point to examples of app affordances
modulating gendered dating practices. Ultimately, while dating apps and websites can
introduce challenges and risks (as described by Susan, 49, and Debbie, 44) these
affordances of dating platforms described by Albury and Byron (2016) align with Alice’s
(34) sense of having ‘control over the situation’, and with Susan’s (49) and Zoe’s (38)
efforts to develop tactics for managing safety. In highlighting strategies that females used
to protect themselves online, and how dating apps can be empowering for women, we
must not lose sight of a wider culture that normalises abuse of women and the responsibil-
ity of dating app companies like Tinder to address normalised abuse (Gillett, 2019).
Our findings also show how face-to-face interactions mediate digital intimacy around
judging risk and safety but also compatibility. For example, many participants explained
how their digital searches were not always undertaken alone as they regularly invited
active input from friends, family, or even work colleagues in sorting potential matches.
This was particularly prominent among participants who utilised smartphone dating apps.
The following participants capture this shared construction of intimacy in digital spaces:

My friends are kind of fascinated by it [laughs]. They always want to look over my shoulder to
see who is coming up on my account. But if I see someone I’m unsure about it can be kind of
helpful to get their thoughts . . . it’s definitely an interactive thing. (Zoe, 38)

Sometimes when I’m out having a drink with my girlfriends or something then I open up Tinder
and say, ‘this is who I’m talking to, what do you think?’ And then it can be a fun thing too
because they all want to grab the phone and decide who I should like and who I shouldn’t like
. . . (Nikki, 44)

The ‘always-on’ and flexible nature of dating apps allowed participants to perform their
repartnering search in a highly social way, and to receive, instantly, the opinions of trusted
friends on potential matches. This type of social filtering echoes ideas from the digital
intimacies framework about ‘intimate publics’, where intimacy and private desire is medi-
ated between personal and public networks and shaped by narratives of desire and co-
constructed identities and disclosures (Berlant, 1998: 283; Dobson et al., 2018). It also
echoes arguments, for example, by Newett et al. (2018) that the physical world shapes –
and merges with – digital dating practices. By using our participants’ stories to outline
how friends in physical spaces shape the digital repartnering search, we add further weight
to arguments from the digital intimacies framework that an online/offline binary is inad-
equate in understanding how people use and experience digital dating cultures.

Emotional filtering
Existing online dating research has highlighted the importance of ‘filtering’ behav-
iours by focusing on how individuals use photos and profile information to determine
12 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

authenticity, navigate safety, identify similarities and differences with potential

matches, and determine compatibility (Couch and Liamputtong, 2008; Gillett, 2019).
While these themes were also evident in our group, a distinct filtering practice that
emerged was the importance of emotional filtering. Emotional filtering is strongly
shaped by past emotional attachments and relationships. Emotional filtering involves
making decisions about the type of person and relationship you want based on previ-
ous relationship experience and emotionally evaluating the degree of relationship
readiness of self and others.
Similar to the finding showing how females sought more equal relationships, par-
ticipants articulated how past relationships shaped the search for different types of
people:

I mean it was sad at the time, but I guess the benefit of having the relationship is that, in some
ways, it influences you because you are looking for someone who is not like that person.
(Alice, 34)

It helped me move on too. What I did was look back and think of all the qualities that I
liked about her, but also all the qualities I didn’t like. So that sort of helped me realise what
the important things were and that I should be looking for those things in new people.
(Andre, 38)

While some participants like Alice and Andre were able to incorporate lessons from a
previous union into their repartnering search, allowing them to find positive value in
separation, others expressed a belief that being divorced or separated signalled that they
were flawed and would be bad partners. As Zoe (38) explained, being divorced or sepa-
rated was ‘baggage’ that made it ‘harder to meet people’ and repartner. Moreover, for
Nikki, her filtering behaviour consisted of investigating ‘the baggage’ of the people she
encountered online:

Being older and single is hard because what happens is you both try and figure out why the
other person is single. So, when you’re in that online space and you initially start chatting with
someone, you try and work them out in that way. You want to figure out, you know, should I
take this further or is there a good reason that you’re single. (Nikki, 44)

In ‘filtering’ potential partners, participants spoke about making decisions about the
extent to which a prospective partner had successfully moved on from a previous rela-
tionship. Jasmine (46), for instance, developed an emotional filtering method based on
the amount of time it took for her to be emotionally ready to start dating again after her
divorce. Jasmine used her own experience of recovering from divorce as a guide and
would ask potential partners how long they had been separated to determine whether she
would pursue them:

I never like when the men I’m chatting with are recently separated, because they can’t possibly
be ready for a new relationship. I just know that they’re not ready. So, the first thing I say to
people is: ‘tell me when your last relationship ended,’ and if they say ‘I’ve been separated three
months,’ then I’m just out of there. (Jasmine, 46)
Dwyer et al. 13

For others, like Nathan, they explained how discerning whether someone had fully
‘moved on’ from their former partner could occur by examining particular types of dis-
closures made in profiles:

People’s profiles told you a lot about where they were at in terms of the recovery from former
relationships. Because people would write and share a lot of information about how significantly
bad their last relationship was. . .. So you could really delineate between people who viewed
life positively and how that might actually transcend into future relationships or those that were
stuck in the past . . . so you could almost investigate or actually make guesses as to how their
former relationships fell apart from the profiles they posted. (Nathan, 44)

Consistent with wider online dating research, filtering – the sorting of prospective part-
ners based on personal and cultural criteria – is a central feature of the repartnering
experience. What is unique for this target population is the importance of emotional fil-
tering strongly shaped by the legacy of past partnerships. Participants not only need to
gauge attraction, compatibility and issues of safety – themes that cut across online dating
populations – but also use past relationships to seek new types of people and make com-
plex emotional decisions about their own and others’ readiness for an intimate relation-
ship. Berlant (1998: 283) notes that intimate publics can be understood as scenes centred
around media and culture that ‘promise and generate feelings of belonging and consola-
tion’. We suggest that intimate publics for this group are ‘emotional’ scenes that involve
careful management of self-narratives shared, but also intricate decoding of others’ pres-
entations of self as they make decisions about where a potential match might be in their
break-up/recovery process.

Conclusion
Through in-depth interviews, this research investigated how people in their 30s and 40s
use dating apps and websites to repartner following the dissolution of a marriage or de
facto partnership. With most existing research focused on young people’s uses of dating
apps, the use of these apps and websites among gay men, or the repartnering experiences
of an older cohort (50+), this study goes some way to addressing a significant gap in the
literature. This research makes a modest but important contribution to the sociology of
intimate life by documenting the digital repartnering experiences of an age group acutely
vulnerable to relationship churn and dissolution.
Empirically, our research highlighted four central themes. First, the research indi-
cates how, in addition to facing a ‘thin’ dating market caused by busy lives and limited
access to the night economy, our middle-aged group face a unique form of dating thin-
ness connected to the loss of friendship networks when ending a long-term romantic
relationship. Second, the study showed how the type of relationship sought was shaped
by gender, with a tension emerging between the males who initially sought sexual hook-
ups and fun – though ended up in long-term relationships – and females who sought a
new form of equitable companionship that avoided the traditional gender roles of for-
mer relationships. Third, gender was important in terms of understanding perceptions
and experiences of ‘intimate intrusions’ (Gillett, 2019). Women were acutely aware of
14 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

the risks of online dating, but this risk is balanced with possibilities for safety and con-
trol that digital spaces afford. The final theme introduces the concept of emotional fil-
tering to capture how past relationships significantly shape relationship seeking for this
middle-aged group. Emotional filtering is described as an emotionally reflexive process
where participants seek partners differentiated from past relationships and use evalua-
tive judgement to determine the extent to which they and others are emotionally ready
for a relationship.
We suggest there are three important lessons from our research. First, gender appears
crucial to understanding digital repartnering experiences, with women hopeful that digi-
tal spaces can help them create more equal relationships despite the risk and realities of
abuse and harm. Second, we must be wary of technologically deterministic arguments
that dating technologies are transforming the nature of intimacy and love, such as claims
that dating technologies are liquefying social bonds (Bauman, 2003). These perspectives
treat technology as autonomous and ignore the social and cultural shaping of technology
(Baym, 2015). Third, researchers should avoid reproducing an offline/online binary in
investigating dating and hook-up apps. We are critical of approaches that conceptualise
the internet as a distinct meeting space that opposes, or even replaces, traditional intimate
arenas. Here we suggest a productive exchange between the ‘digital intimacies’ frame-
work and wider sociological accounts of intimacy, social change and gender (Bauman,
2003; Illouz, 2012).

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.

ORCID iD
Zack Dwyer https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4625-7090

References
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) (2016) Marriages and Divorces Australia, 2016, Canberra:
ABS Cat. No. 3310.0.
Albury, K. and P. Byron (2016) ‘Safe on My Phone? Same-sex Attracted Young People’s
Negotiations of Intimacy, Visibility, and Risk on Digital Hook-up Apps’, Social Media +
Society 2(4): 1–10.
Alterovitz, S. and G. Mendelsohn (2013) ‘Relationship Goals of Middle-aged, Young-old, and
Old-old Internet Daters: An Analysis of Online Personal Ads’, Journal of Aging Studies 27:
159–65.
Anderson, E., S. Greene, L. Walker, C. Malerba, M. Forgatch and D. Degarmo (2008) ‘Transitions
into Dating Among Divorced Parents’, Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 20(3–4): 61–75.
Barraket, J. and M. Henry-Waring (2008a) ‘Dating and Intimacy in the 21st Century: The Use
of Online Dating Sites in Australia’, International Journal of Emerging Technologies and
Society 6(1): 14–33.
Barraket, J. and M. Henry-Waring (2008b) ‘Getting It On(line): Sociological Perspectives on
E-dating’, Journal of Sociology 44(2): 149–65.
Bauman, Z. (2003) Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds. Cambridge: Polity.
Dwyer et al. 15

Baym, N.K. (2015) Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Malden, MA: Polity.
Berlant, L. (1998) ‘Intimacy: A Special Issue’, Critical Inquiry 24(2): 281–8.
Blackwell, D. (2017) ‘Love Isn’t Just for the Young: Examining the Online Dating Experiences of
Older Adults’, pp. 91–112 in N. Punyanunt-Carter and J. Wrench (eds) The Impact of Social
Media in Modern Romantic Relationships. London: Lexington Books.
Blackwell, C., J. Birnholtz and C. Abbott (2015) ‘Seeing and Being Seen: Co-situation and
Impression Formation Using Grindr, a Location-aware Gay Dating App’, New Media &
Society 17(7): 1117–36.
Brook, A. (2018) ‘The Australian Experience of Loneliness’, Relationships Australia, October,
URL (consulted 27 May 2020): https://www.relationships.org.au/news/blog/the-australian-
experience-of-loneliness
Brown, S., G. Lee and J. Bulanda (2006) ‘Cohabitation Among Older Adults: A National Portrait’,
The Journals of Gerontology: Series B 61(2): S71–S79.
Carlson, B. (2019) ‘Love and Hate at the Cultural Interface: Indigenous Australians and Dating
Apps’, Journal of Sociology 56(2): 133–50.
Carr, D. (2004) ‘The Desire to Date and Remarry Among Older Widows and Widowers’, Journal
of Marriage and Family 66(4): 1051–68.
Cherlin, A. (1978) ‘Remarriage as an Incomplete Institution’, American Journal of Sociology 84:
634–50.
Cherlin, A. (1992) Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Couch, D. and P. Liamputtong (2007) ‘Online Dating and Mating: Perceptions of Risk and Health
Among Online Users’, Health, Risk and Society 9(3): 275–94.
Couch, D. and P. Liamputtong (2008) ‘Online Dating and Mating: The Use of the Internet to Meet
Sexual Partners’, Qualitative Health Research 18(2): 268–79.
Davidson, K. (2004) “‘Why Can’t a Man Be More Like a Woman?” Marital Status and Social
Networking of Older Men’, Journal of Men’s Studies 13: 25–43.
Davis, M., G. Hart, G. Bolding, L. Sherr and J. Elford (2006) ‘E-dating, Identity and HIV
Prevention: Theorising Sexualities, Risk and Network Society’, Sociology of Health & Illness
28(4): 457–78.
Deakin, H. and K. Wakefield (2014) ‘Skype Interviewing: Reflections of Two PhD Researchers’,
Qualitative Research 14(5): 603–16.
De Jong Gierveld, J. and A. Peeters (2003) ‘The Interweaving of Repartnered Older Adults’ Lives
with Their Children and Siblings’, Ageing & Society 23(2): 187–205.
de Vaus, D. (2004) Diversity and Change in Australian Families. Melbourne: Australian Institute
of Family Studies.
Dobson, A., B. Robards and N. Carah (eds) (2018) Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media.
Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
Duguay, S. (2017) ‘Dressing up Tinderella: Interrogating Authenticity Claims on the Mobile
Dating App Tinder’, Information, Communication & Society 20(3): 351–67.
Elliott, A. and C. Lemert (2005) The New Individualism: The Emotional Costs of Globalization.
London: Routledge.
Ellison, N., R. Heino and J. Gibbs (2006) ‘Managing Impressions Online: Self-presentation
Processes in the Online Dating Environment’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
11(2): 415–44.
Ellison, N., J. Hancock and C. Toma (2012) ‘Profile as Promise: A Framework for Conceptualizing
Veracity in Online Dating Self-presentations’, New Media & Society 14(1): 45–62.
Evans, A. (2015) ‘Entering a Union in the Twenty-first Century: Cohabitation and Living Apart
Together’, pp. 13–30 in G. Heard and D. Arunachalam (eds) Family Formation in 21st
Century Australia. Dordrecht: Springer.
16 Journal of Sociology 00(0)

Ferris, L. and S. Duguay (2019) ‘Tinder’s Lesbian Digital Imaginary: Investigating (Im)Permeable
Boundaries of Sexual Identity on a Popular Dating App’, New Media & Society 22(3): 489–
506.
Franklin, A. (2012) ‘A Lonely Society? Loneliness and Liquid Modernity in Australia’, Australian
Journal of Social Issues 47(1): 11–28.
Franklin, A. and B. Tranter (2011) Loneliness, Housing and Health. AHURI Final Report 164.
Melbourne: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.
Franklin, A., B. Neves, N. Hookway, R. Patulny, B. Tranter and K. Jaworski (2019) ‘Towards an
Understanding of Loneliness among Australian Men: Gender Cultures, Embodied Expression
and the Social Bases of Belonging’, Journal of Sociology 55(1): 124–43.
Gillett, R. (2018) ‘Intimate Intrusions Online: Studying the Normalisation of Dating of Abuse in
Dating Apps’, Women’s Studies International Forum 69: 212–19.
Gillett, R. (2019) Everyday Violence: Women’s Experiences of Intimate Intrusions on Tinder, PhD
thesis, Queensland University of Technology.
Hobbs, M., S. Owen and G. Livia (2016) ‘Liquid Love? Dating Apps, Sex, Relationships and the
Digital Transformation Of Intimacy’, Journal of Sociology 53(2): 271–84.
Hookway, N., B. Barbosa Neve, A. Franklin and R. Patulny (2019) ‘Loneliness and Love in Late
Modernity: Sites of Tension and Resistance’, in R. Patulny, A. Bellocchi, R.E. Olson, S.
Khorana, J. McKenzie and M. Pete (eds) Emotions in Late Modernity. New York: Routledge.
Hughes, J. (2000) ‘Repartnering after Divorce: Marginal Mates and Unwedded Women’, Family
Matters 55: 16–21.
Illouz, E. (2012) Why Love Hurts: A Sociological Explanation. Cambridge: Polity Press
James, S. and K. Shafer (2012) ‘Temporal Differences in Remarriage Timing: Comparing Divorce
and Widowhood’, Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 53(7): 543–58.
Khoo, S. (1989) Repartnering after Divorce: The Formation of Second Families. Child Support
Scheme Evaluation Study. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Lampard, R. and K. Peggs (1999) ‘Repartnering: The Relevance of Parenthood and Gender to
Cohabitation and Remarriage among the Formerly Married’, Journal of Sociology 50(3):
443–65.
Lampard, R. and K. Peggs (2007) Identity and Repartnering after Separation. Hampshire: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Malta, S. (2013) ‘Why Go Online? Older Adults’ Reasons for Online Dating’, paper presented
at The Australian Sociological Association national conference, ‘Reflections, Intersections
and Aspirations: 50 Years of Australian Sociology’, Monash University, Victoria, 25–8
November.
Malta, S. and K. Farquharson (2014) ‘The Initiation and Progression of Late-life Romantic
Relationships’, Journal of Sociology 50(3): 237–51.
McWilliams, S. and A. Barrett (2014) ‘Online Dating in Later Life: Gendered Expectations and
Experiences’, Journal of Family Issues 35(3): 411–36.
Minichiello, V., R. Aroni, E. Timewell and L. Alexander (1995) In-depth Interviewing: Principles,
Techniques, Analysis. London: Longman.
Newett, L., B. Churchill and B. Robards (2018) ‘Forming Connections in the Digital Era: Tinder, a
New Tool in Young Australian Intimate Life’, Journal of Sociology 54(3): 346–61.
Pitts, M., P. Liamputtong and D. Couch (2011) ‘Online Daters and the Use of Technology for
Surveillance and Risk Management’, International Journal of Emerging Technologies and
Society 9(2): 116–34.
Relationships Australia (2017) ‘November 2017: Online Dating’, Relationships Australia
November, URL (consulted 8 July 2019): https://www.relationships.org.au/what-we-do/
research/online-survey/november-2017-online-dating
Dwyer et al. 17

Rosenfeld, M. and R. Thomas (2012) ‘Searching for a Mate: The Rise of the Internet as a Social
Intermediary’, American Sociological Review 77(4): 523–47.
Rosenfeld, M., R. Thomas and S. Hausen (2019) ‘Disintermediating Your Friends: How Online
Dating in the United States Displaces Other Ways of Meeting’, Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences 116(36): 17753–8.
Shaw, S. (1991) ‘The Conflicting Experiences of Lone Parenthood’, pp. 143–55 in M. Hardey
and G. Crow (eds) Lone Parenthood: Coping with Constraints and Making Opportunities.
London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Skew, A., A. Evans and E. Gray (2009) ‘Repartnering in the United Kingdom and Australia’,
Journal of Comparative Family Studies 40(4): 563–85.
Smith, A. and M. Anderson (2016) ‘5 Facts about Online Dating’, Pew Research, 29 February,
URL (consulted 14 March 2016): https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/29/5-
facts-about-online-dating/
Sullivan, J. (2013) ‘Skype: An Appropriate Method of Data Collection for Qualitative Interviews?’,
Hilltop Review 6(1): 54–60.
White, R., J. Wyn and B. Robards (2017) Youth and Society, 4th edn. Melbourne: Oxford
University Press.
Willis, K. (2010) ‘Analysing Qualitative Data’, pp. 407–38 in M. Walter (ed.) Social Research
Methods. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Wu, Z. and C. Schimmele (2005) ‘Repartnering after First Union Disruption’, Journal of Marriage
and Family 67(1): 27–36.

Author biographies
Zack Dwyer is a sociology PhD candidate in the School of Social Sciences at the University of
Tasmania. He operates primarily within the sociology of sport, with his current research exploring
how people experience parkrun – a free, weekly, 5 km community run/walk event held around the
world – as a site of community and identity work.
Nicholas Hookway is a senior lecturer in sociology in the School of Social Sciences at the
University of Tasmania. His research focuses on how emotions, identity and social bonds are being
reshaped by wider social change. He investigates these issues using empirical case studies, includ-
ing kindness, loneliness, intimacy, and everyday morality. His latest book is Everyday Morality:
Doing it Ourselves in an Age of Uncertainty (2019) published with Routledge.
Brady Robards is a senior lecturer in sociology at Monash University. He studies digital cultures,
with a focus on how people use and produce social media. He has studied social media use among
particular groups, including young people, LGBTIQ+ people, tourists, and in the context of alco-
hol consumption. His recent books include Growing up on Facebook (2020, with Sian Lincoln)
and Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media (2018, with Amy Dobson and Nic Carah).