Voices on Love as Capital, namely Tim Inglis**

Do you ever feel that moment when something resonates with you so deeply that you just have to share your thoughts? That’s exactly what I’m experiencing right now......so here’s my response!

I’ve been reflecting on the topic of Love, internally and reading how Inglis articulates Love Capital got me thinking about my own research.

It's loosely related to my semi planned/ written research paper on the cause and effect of male dominance in fashion; although I am not entirely convinced of it yet....but have gone into the dark hole of research and reflection anyway...( there's a methodology in there somewhere)

Book: Inglis, T. (2013) Love. 1st edn. Routledge.

This is Inglis' voice on how Love is fairing as capital, in consumer capitalist society; (cute cover right?)

.....However, the relentless move in consumer capitalist society towards the self, individualisation and the fulfilment of pleasure and desire, tends to undermine the value of love capital. Being loving has become conflated with being passionate, erotic and romantic......because our understanding of love is structured by the market and media, the idea of love and being lovely have become conflated with sex, passion and romance.

The under-valuation of love capital is also part and parcel of patriarchal society and the symbolic domination of women. In each generation, girls are socialised into the roles of servants and carers. The market and the media are full of images of women pandering to the needs and interests of men. If there is to be a love revolution, as opposed to a sexual one, then the value of love capital will have to increase dramatically. (Inglis, 2013)

Interesting to hear his perspective on love being mediated by market and media and how he links the symbolic domination of women; as being carers and servants, with patriarchy. I would argue this is more prevalent in mass market and mainstream media as there are multiple perspectives on love available if you move away from the mainstream. ( more on that later.. hello Ian Chambers Border Dialogues; Journeys in Postmodernity, I think you might have something to say about this)

Let's talk about online dating....

It has been said* that online dating platforms are designed in ways that favour male strengths, which can create disadvantages for women...let's look at the evidence...

Key Characteristics which Favour Male Strengths

• Competitiveness: Many online dating environments encourage a competitive mindset, which aligns with traditional male strengths.

• Emotional Detachment: The nature of swiping and scrolling often promotes a level of emotional detachment that can benefit male users.

• Aesthetic Judgment: The emphasis on visual appeal over meaningful engagement can disadvantage women, who may find it harder to convey depth and connection in a quick glance.

Impact on Women's Strategies

Women may feel compelled to rely on what is termed "erotic capital" to attract male interest. This reliance can create a dynamic where:

• Women are pressured to emphasise physical attractiveness over emotional connection.

• It becomes challenging to showcase "love capital" within the limited time frame of swiping through images.

Game Theory and Aesthetic Competition

It has been said* that the mechanisms of online dating can be analysed through the lens of game theory, where:

• Competition: Users are often pitted against one another in a race for attention and approval.

• Freedom and Abundance: The vast number of options can lead to superficial comparisons, further emphasising aesthetics over emotional qualities.

• Speed and Quick Turnaround: The rapid pace of interactions can result in a focus on immediate gratification rather than long-term connection.

Resultant Behavioural Dynamics

These factors contribute to a shift in dating dynamics that may favour sex over love, leading to:

• Transactional Relationships: Interactions may become more transactional, with an emphasis on physical attraction rather than emotional depth.

• Patriarchal Characteristics: The overall experience can reflect and reinforce patriarchal values, creating an environment where male intentions and mindsets dominate. ( ie. women who act like men do better)

So what?

The design and functioning of online dating platforms can perpetuate gender disparities, favouring traditional male characteristics and creating challenges for women seeking genuine emotional connections.

Why this matters....

Many relationships that originate from online dating platforms often reflect societal norms and expectations. Specifically, these relationships can inadvertently reward women who conform to traditional roles of being a servant or carer. This dynamic perpetuates patriarchal mechanisms, creating a cycle of cause and effect......essentially a form of social karma.

The Role of Servant and Carer in Relationships

• Servant Role: This role often involves self-sacrifice, prioritising the needs of others, and providing emotional or physical support. It can lead to an imbalance in relationships where one partner is expected to take on a submissive or nurturing role.

• Carer Role: Similar to the servant role, the carer is focused on the well-being of others, often at the expense of their own needs. This role can be seen as an extension of nurturing behaviour, reinforcing traditional gender roles.

Perpetuation of Patriarchal Mechanisms

The expectation for women to embody these roles can lead to a reinforcement of patriarchal values. As relationships form around these dynamics, they may unintentionally endorse the notion that women should be caretakers, thus limiting their autonomy and reinforcing traditional gender norms.

Understanding this connection is crucial for fostering healthier, more equitable relationships that challenge these outdated roles and encourage mutual respect and partnership.

Interesting to see his perspective on how we have had a sexual revolution but not yet a love revolution, I really like the sound of a LOVE revolution!!

a few tangents there so clearly more on this and that later....

Notes:

Inglis, T. (2013) Love. 1st edn. Routledge.

Chambers, I. (2013) Border Dialogues (Routledge Revivals). 1st edn. Routledge.

Collins, H. (2025) Creative Research. Bloomsbury Publishing.

*I remember something and then have to check back through my memory of conversations had, podcasts listened to/ books, papers, articles read/things observed/documented research/questions 'googled' or 'chatgpt'd' then once I'm happy with the general consensus or I agree and feel the view has relevance/ some credibility, I summarise it into the phrase "it has been said'

**'Literature as a voice' (Collins, 2025, p. 150) I don’t need to believe that my idea is more important, even though someone who is better known and has more authority has already had the same idea. I quote other people’s work because someone else has said something the way I would like to say it and they said it first; by writing in Italics I hope to show respect for the work of others and how it influences me and my own work.