Dating apps and websites focus on common ground: if a pair loves the same movies, food, and band no one else has heard of, then they just might be perfect mates.
It’s romantic to assume two people could fall in love over a shared interest of eating waffles in bed.
You’re looking at loves and hates, curating your own, messaging with matches.
Colorado, it is 2017, why do you still have beef with *NSYNC?
Also what kind of tuna are they eating in Georgia, cause I do not want to try it.
Hater’s inclusion of references like “locker room talk” removes the gray area.
It’s a specific, loaded phrase that challenges you to clearly state where you stand.
A person can tell you that they identify as Republican or Democrat, religious or not, but that only provides a surface-level understanding of what values they might hold.
And such reductive labels encourage people to judge off stereotypes and assumptions rather than complexity and depth.It’s realistic that one of them will hate how loudly the other chews.At least that’s the logic powering the new dating app, Hater.Some stuff kind of makes sense, like New Yorkers hating Times Square or Connecticut hating winter. And then there is Mississippi's hatred of anal sex, which certainly deserves some analysis.(It's cold in the Northeast, folks.) But then we have stuff like "biting string cheese"... Like what did Jerry Seinfeld do to Kansas to inspire such disdain? that argued for the merits of shared negative attitudes.