Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-3770
  • E-ISSN: 2211-3789
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Success in the digital dating world is often dependent on an individual’s ability to negotiate the and of platforms (Bucher & Helmond 2017) while effectively expressing who one is and what they are looking for. Since mononormativity is the dominant script that underpins ideals of romantic love and intimate relations in our society (Wolkomir 2019), for the millions who ascribe to non-monogamy, profile creation is often complicated by dating platform interfaces and relationship orientations. This research takes a critical multimodal discourse approach (Machin 2016Milani 2013) to examine the interplay between various semiotic modes in meaning making about sexual normativities (Motschenbacher 2019) in digital dating contexts, and considers how people navigating non-traditional relationship orientations negotiate discourse in digital dating contexts to demonstrate how discourse and design have the ability to empower and marginalize users (Sun 2020) as well maintain cultural norms (Wachter-Boettcher 2017) about emotional bonding and sexuality.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Anderson, Eric
    2012The Monogamy Gap: Men, Love, and the Reality of Cheating. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199777921.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199777921.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Armstrong, Elizabeth A., England, Paula & Fogarty, Alison C. K.
    2012 Accounting for women’s orgasm and sexual enjoyment in college hookups and relationships. American Sociological Review77(3): 435–462. 10.1177/0003122412445802
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412445802 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ault, Michael K. & Gilder, Bobbi Van
    2015 Polygamy in the United States: How marginalized religious communities cope with stigmatizing discourses surrounding plural marriage. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research44(4): 307–328. 10.1080/17475759.2015.1048702
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2015.1048702 [Google Scholar]
  4. Barker, Meg
    2005 This is my partner, and this is my … partner’s partner: Constructing a polyamorous identity in a monogamous world. Journal of Constructivist Psychology18(1): 75–88. 10.1080/10720530590523107
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10720530590523107 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bauer, Robin
    2010 Non-monogamy in queer BDSM communities: Putting the sex back into alternative relationship practices and discourse. InUnderstanding Non-Monogamies. Meg Barker & Darren Langdridge (eds), 142–153. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Baym, Nancy
    2010Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Cambridge: Polity.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Berg, Alex
    2014 Why these queers are boycotting OkCupid – and you should, too. Huffington Post. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/these-queers-are-boycotti_b_5248971 (June29 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, Anna
    2020 Lesbian, gay and bisexual online daters report positive experiences – but also harassment. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/09/lesbian-gay-and-bisexual-online-daters-report-positive-experiences-but-also-harassment/ (August17 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bucher, Taina & Helmond, Anne
    2017 The affordances of social media platforms. InThe SAGE Handbook of Social Media, Jean Burgess, Thomas Poell & Alice E. Marwick (eds) 233–253. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Callis, April Scarlette
    2014 Bisexual, pansexual, queer: Non-binary identities and the sexual borderlands. Sexualities17(1–2): 63–80. 10.1177/1363460713511094
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460713511094 [Google Scholar]
  11. Carlson, Bronwyn
    2019 Love and hate at the cultural interface: Indigenous Australians and dating apps: Journal of Sociology56(2): 133–150. 10.1177/1440783319833181
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783319833181 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chapais, Bernard
    2013 Monogamy, strongly bonded groups, and the evolution of human social structure. Evolutionary Anthropology22(2): 52–65. 10.1002/evan.21345
    https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21345 [Google Scholar]
  13. DeLamater, John & Rebecca F. Plante
    2015Handbook of the Sociology of Sexualities. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑17341‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17341-2 [Google Scholar]
  14. Dijck, Jose van
    2013The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dimock, Michael
    2019 Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-and-generation-z-begins/ (May 30 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Douglas, Susan J.
    2004 [1999]Listening In: Radio and the American Imagination. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Drouin, Michelle, Miller, Daniel, Wehle, Shaun M. J. & Hernandez, Elisa
    2016 Why do people lie online? “Because everyone lies on the internet.” Computers in Human Behavior64: 134–142. 10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.052
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.052 [Google Scholar]
  18. Duguay, Stefanie
    2016 “He has a way gayer Facebook than I do”: Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse on a social networking site. New Media & Society18(6): 891–907. 10.1177/1461444814549930
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814549930 [Google Scholar]
  19. Ferrer, Jorge N.
    2018 Mononormativity, polypride, and the “mono–poly wars.” Sexuality & Culture22(3): 817–836. 10.1007/s12119‑017‑9494‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-017-9494-y [Google Scholar]
  20. Flowerdew, John
    2017 Critical Discourse Studies in context. InThe Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, John Flowerdew & John E. Richardson (eds), 165–179. New York: Taylor & Francis. 10.4324/9781315739342‑12
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739342-12 [Google Scholar]
  21. Foucault, Michel
    1977Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 1988Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Fry, Richard
    2020 Millennials overtake Baby Boomers as America’s largest generation. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/28/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers-as-americas-largest-generation/ (May 30 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Gahran, Amy
    2012 Riding the relationship escalator (or not). Solo Poly. https://solopoly.net/2012/11/29/riding-the-relationship-escalator-or-not/ (February5 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 2013 Couple privilege: Having it doesn’t necessarily make you an asshole (but it might). SoloPoly. https://solopoly.net/2013/02/05/couple-privilege-having-it-doesnt-necessarily-make-you-an-asshole-but-it-can/ (November13 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Gibson, James J.
    2014 The theory of affordances. InThe People, Place, and Space Reader, Jen Jack Gieseking, William Mangold, Cindi Katz, Setha Low & Susan Saegert (eds), 56–60. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Giddens, Anthony
    1992The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love, and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Goldhill, Olivia
    2018 Polyamorous sex is the most quietly revolutionary political weapon in the United States. Quartz. https://qz.com/1501725/polyamorous-sex-is-the-most-quietly-revolutionary-political-weapon-in-the-united-states/ (December21 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Grinberg, Emanuella
    2016 OkCupid adds feature for polyamorous users. CNN Online, U.S. Edition. www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/living/okcupid-polyamorous-open-relationships-feat/index.html (October3 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Haritaworn, Jin, Lin, Chin-ju & Klesse, Christian
    2006 Poly/logue: A critical introduction to polyamory: Sexualities9(5): 515–529. 10.1177/1363460706069963
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460706069963 [Google Scholar]
  31. Haupert, Mara L., Gesselman, Amanda N., Moors, Amy C., Fisher, Helen E. & Garcia, Justin R.
    2017 Prevalence of experiences with consensual nonmonogamous relationships: Findings from two national samples of single Americans. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy43(5): 424–440. 10.1080/0092623X.2016.1178675
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2016.1178675 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hogenboom, Melissa
    2016 Polyamorous relationships may be the future of love. BBC News, sec. Future. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160623-polyamorous-relationships-may-be-the-future-of-love (June6 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Hyde, Janet S. & DeLamater, John
    2000Understanding Human Sexuality. 7th edition. New York: Mcgraw-Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Iedema, Rick
    2003 Multimodality, resemiotization: Extending the analysis of discourse as multi-semiotic practice. Visual Communication2(1): 29–57. 10.1177/1470357203002001751
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357203002001751 [Google Scholar]
  35. Jenks, Richard J.
    1998 Swinging: A review of the literature. Archives of Sexual Behavior27(5): 507–521. 10.1023/A:1018708730945
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018708730945 [Google Scholar]
  36. Kale, Sirin
    2018 All you need is loves: The truth about polyamory. The Guardian, sec. Life and style. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/sep/25/truth-about-polyamory-monogamy-open-relationships (June6 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Khazan, Olga
    2016 OkCupid adds a feature for the polyamorous. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/01/ok-cupid-is-opening-up-to-polyamorous-relationships/423162/ (October3 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Klesse, Christian
    2006 Polyamory and its ‘others’: Contesting the terms of non-monogamy. Sexualities9(5): 565–583. 10.1177/1363460706069986
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460706069986 [Google Scholar]
  39. 2014 Polyamory: Intimate practice, identity or sexual orientation?Sexualities17(1–2): 81–99. 10.1177/1363460713511096
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460713511096 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kress, Gunther R. & van Leeuwen, Theo
    1998 Front pages: (The critical) analysis of newspaper layout. InApproaches to Media Discourse, Allan Bell & Peter Garrett (eds), 186–219. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Kunst, Alexander
    2019 U.S. online dating by age 2017. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/706499/us-adults-online-dating-site-app-by-age/ (September 16 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Laura
    Laura 2020 Polyamory glossary. Ready for polyamory. https://www.readyforpolyamory.com/polyamory-glossary. (October3 2020).
  43. Leap, William L.
    2015 Queer linguistics as critical discourse analysis. InThe Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton & Deborah Schiffrin (eds), 661–680. Chichester: John Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Machin, David
    2007Introduction to Multimodal Analysis. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. 2013 What is multimodal critical discourse studies?Critical Discourse Studies10(4): 347–355. 10.1080/17405904.2013.813770
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2013.813770 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2016 The need for a social and affordance-driven multimodal critical discourse studies. Discourse & Society27(3): 322–334. 10.1177/0957926516630903
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926516630903 [Google Scholar]
  47. MacKenzie, Donald & Wajcman, Judy
    (eds) 1999The Social Shaping of Technology. 2nd edition. Philadelphia: McGraw Hill Education / Open University.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Mahler, Jess
    2016 Kitchen table polyamory, parallel polyamory, and etiquette. Jess Mahler. https://jessmahler.com/kitchen-table-polyamory-parallel-polyamory-etiquette/ (January21 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Matsick, Jes L., Conley, Terri D., Ziegler, Ali, Moors, Amy C. & Rubin, Jennifer D.
    2014 Love and sex: Polyamorous relationships are perceived more favourably than swinging and open relationships. Psychology & Sexuality5(4): 339–348. 10.1080/19419899.2013.832934
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2013.832934 [Google Scholar]
  50. Milani, Tommaso M.
    2013 Expanding the Queer Linguistic scene: Multimodality, space and sexuality at a South African university. Journal of Language and Sexuality2(2): 206–234. 10.1075/jls.2.2.02mil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.2.2.02mil [Google Scholar]
  51. 2016 Straight-acting: Discursive negotiations of a homomasculine identity. InThe Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity, Siân Preece (ed), 469–483. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Miller, Geoffrey
    2019 Polyamory is growing – and we need to get serious about it. Quillette. https://quillette.com/2019/10/29/polyamory-is-growing-and-we-need-to-get-serious-about-it/ (November3 2019).
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Mortensen, Kristine Køhler
    2015 Informed consent in the field of language and sexuality: The case of online dating research. Journal of Language and Sexuality4(1): 1–29. 10.1075/jls.4.1.01mor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.4.1.01mor [Google Scholar]
  54. Motschenbacher, Heiko
    2017 Sexuality in critical discourse studies. InThe Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, John Flowerdew & John E. Richardson (eds), 388–403. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315739342‑27
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739342-27 [Google Scholar]
  55. 2019 Language and sexual normativity. InThe Oxford Handbook of Language and Sexuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Myers, Greg
    2010The Discourse of Blogs and Wikis. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Norman, Don
    2013The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. O’Halloran, Kay
    2011 Multimodal discourse analysis. InBloomsbury Companion to Discourse Analysis. Ken Hyland & Brian Paltridge (eds), 120–137. London: A&C Black.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. OkCupid
    OkCupid 2020 Non-monogamy on OkCupid – OkCupid help. https://help.okcupid.com/article/163-non-monogamy-on-okcupid (April1 2020).
  60. Perez, Caroline Criado
    2019Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men. New York: Abrams Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Pogensky, Ryley
    2013 OkCupid petition: Extend the gender and sexuality options. Change.org. https://www.change.org/p/okcupid-extend-the-gender-and-sexuality-options (June29 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Rich, Adrienne
    1980 Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian existence. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society5(4): 631–660. 10.1086/493756
    https://doi.org/10.1086/493756 [Google Scholar]
  63. Ritchie, Ani & Barker, Meg
    2006 ‘There aren’t words for what we do or how we feel so we have to make them up’: Constructing polyamorous languages in a culture of compulsory monogamy: Sexualities9(5): 584–601. 10.1177/1363460706069987
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460706069987 [Google Scholar]
  64. Rosenfeld, Michael J. & Thomas, Reuben J.
    2012 Searching for a mate: The rise of the internet as a social intermediary. American Sociological Review77(4): 523–547. 10.1177/0003122412448050
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412448050 [Google Scholar]
  65. Rubel, Alicia N. & Burleigh, Tyler J.
    2020 Counting polyamorists who count: Prevalence and definitions of an under-researched form of consensual nonmonogamy. Sexualities23(1–2): 3–27. 10.1177/1363460718779781
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460718779781 [Google Scholar]
  66. Rubin, Jennifer, Moors, Amy, Matsick, Jes, Ziegler, Ali & Conley, Terri
    2014 On the margins: Considering diversity among consensually non-monogamous relationships. Journal für Psychologie22(1): 19–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Rudder, Christian
    2014Dataclysm: Love, Sex, Race, and Identity – What Our Online Lives Tell Us About Our Offline Selves. London: Broadway Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Schippers, Mimi
    2016Beyond Monogamy: Polyamory and the Future of Polyqueer Sexualities. Kindle Version. New York: NYU Press. 10.18574/nyu/9781479801596.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479801596.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  69. Sheff, Elisabeth
    2014 How many polyamorists are there in the U.S.?Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-polyamorists-next-door/201405/how-many-polyamorists-are-there-in-the-us (October3 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Sheff, Elisabeth & Hammers, Corie
    2011 The privilege of perversities: Race, class and education among polyamorists and kinksters. Psychology & Sexuality2(3): 198–223. 10.1080/19419899.2010.537674
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2010.537674 [Google Scholar]
  71. Sheff, Elisabeth & Tesene, Megan M.
    2015 Consensual non-monogamies in industrialized nations. InHandbook of the Sociology of Sexualities, John DeLamater & Rebecca F. Plante (eds), 223–241. New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑17341‑2_13
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17341-2_13 [Google Scholar]
  72. Shepherd, Dawn
    2016Building Relationships: Online Dating and the New Logics of Internet Culture. Lanham: Lexington Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Shucart, Brendan
    2016 Polyamory by the numbers. https://www.advocate.com/current-issue/2016/1/08/polyamory-numbers (January18 2020).
  74. Smith, Aaron
    2016 15% of American adults have used online dating sites or mobile dating apps. Pew Research Center. www.pewinternet.org/2016/02/11/15-percent-of-american-adults-have-used-online-dating-sites-or-mobile-dating-apps/ (October10 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Smith, Aaron & Duggan, Maeve
    2013 Part 2: Dating Apps and Online Dating Sites. Pew Research Center. www.pewinternet.org/2013/10/21/part-2-dating-apps-and-online-dating-sites/ (October10 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Sun, Huatong
    2020Global Social Media Design: Bridging Differences Across Cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780190845582.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190845582.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  77. [treena_kravm] 2018 Please stop using nesting partner when you really mean primary partner. reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/polyamory/comments/9gdzrn/please_stop_using_nesting_partner_when_you_really/ (August10 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  78. [UsernameForSexStuff] 2018 OkCupid making changes to non-monogamous profiles. reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/polyamory/comments/8n28i2/okcupid_making_changes_to_nonmonogamous_profiles/ (January31 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Van Leeuwen, Theo
    2012 Critical analysis of multimodal discourse. InThe Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, Carol Chapelle (ed), 1–6. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0269
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0269 [Google Scholar]
  80. Wachter-Boettcher, Sara
    2017Technically Wrong: Sexist Apps, Biased Algorithms, and Other Threats of Toxic Tech. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Webb, Stephanie
    2017 “There Will Be More Cookies”: A Discursive Exploration of Polyamorous Identity in a Monogamous World. (Unpublished) PhD dissertation, University of Denver.
  82. Wolkomir, Michelle
    2019 Swingers and polyamorists: A comparative analysis of gendered power dynamics. Sexualities23(7): 1060–1079. 10.1177/1363460719876845
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460719876845 [Google Scholar]
  83. Wong, Curtis M.
    2014 OkCupid begins rolling out new gender, sexuality options. Huffington Post. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/17/okcupid-new-gender-options_n_6172434.html (October3 2017).
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error