See Katie Pavlich destroy Climate March hypocrites with their own photos


Fox News contributor, Townhall editor and author Katie Pavlich noticed the utter hypocrisy as well. And gave the “People’s Climate March” loons the business as only she can … using their own photos and actions.

If @Peoples_Climate really wanted to help the environment they'd ditch the paper signs & iphones (they come from a mine you know). Morons.

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

@KatiePavlich @Peoples_Climate : Can you say "hypocritical?"

— William Herman, PhD (@williampherman) September 21, 2014

Yep. And yet another example of a staggering lack of self-awareness.

Take a look:

Are those plastic rim glasses made from petroleum? Yup "@Peoples_Climate: Contra el imperialismo-

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

Are those shoes made w/ petroleum? Yup. "@Peoples_Climate: Yes We Can! A group from Kingston Ontario #PeopleClimate

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

Juggling petroleum in the form of plastic! "@Peoples_Climate: Can u march & juggle at the same time? #PeopleClimate

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

@KatiePavlich @Peoples_Climate I wonder, how much of this stuff if going to end up in landfills after the march?

— David (@TheSalesmanLV) September 21, 2014

Yup. Like the creepy puppet.

@KatiePavlich And the faux leather belt and the duct tape on the sign…

— I Am Wonder Woman (@lrc328) September 21, 2014

Wow @Peoples_Climate, look at those awesome red headphones courtesy of petroleum #ClimateMarch

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

Some excited students from @TheLincolnU! And the awesome @SouthBronxUnite Stop @FreshDirect banner behind them

— People's Climate (@Peoples_Climate) September 21, 2014

Paint, made with petroleum "@Peoples_Climate: Pacific Islanders rise above! #PeopleClimate

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

@KatiePavlich @Peoples_Climate Is that woman on her smartphone? I'm sure that was made with petroleum too. #PeopleClimateMarch

— JamesHXN (@JamesHXN) September 21, 2014

A woman at #ClimateMarch uses her smartphone, a product made from petroleum AND materials that come from a mine

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

Pacific Islanders rise above! #PeopleClimate

— People's Climate (@Peoples_Climate) September 21, 2014

Reality is hard, as usual.

When the #ClimateMarch peeps give up their smartphones and plastic shoes, then I'll start taking them seriously.

— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 21, 2014

Well, probably not even then. Because, you know, they are loony liars. But it’s totally OK guys!

Al Gore flew his private plane and took a private escalade to a march.. so it's cool everyone. #PeoplesClimate

— S.M (@redsteeze) September 21, 2014

Giggling madly.

Instead of “healing the planet,” these hypocrites should heal themselves.


Is this #ClimateMarch sign the least self-aware thing EVER? (Hint: Yes. Yes it is) [photos]

This creepy puppet and interpretive dance from #ClimateMarch will make your sides ache [photos]

It takes under 140 characters to crush the slacktivist absurdity of #PeopleClimateMarch [photos]

Read more:

21 Movies You Should Watch If You Love Food

Kind of gives the term “chewing scenery” a whole new meaning.

1. Chef (2014)

Aldamisa Entertainment


Carl (Jon Favreau) is a chef at an upscale restaurant who feels stunted by the repetitive menu insisted upon by his boss. When he loses his temper and consequently his job, he gets back to his cooking roots making Cuban sandwiches in a food truck with his estranged son.

Most Delicious Scene: Carl’s seductive and simple pasta with pesto.

Where You Can Watch It: Netflix.

2. The Lunchbox (2013)

Sikhya Entertainment


Young, neglected housewife Ila (Nimrat Kaur) in Mumbai sends an extra-special lunch to her husband via the city’s sprawling courier service in the hopes of rekindling the flame. When it is mistakenly delivered to a solitary widower (Irfan Khan), the two begin a sweet though deluded relationship.

Most Delicious Scene: The paneer, in all its iterations.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

3. Chocolat (2000)



Single mother Vianne (Juliette Binoche) and her daughter move to rural France and open a chocolaterie across the street from the local church. Their sweet indulgences and Sunday hours (gasp!) cause a moral uproar, unaided by the arrival of swarthy gypsy Roux (Johnny Depp). But really, how long can people hold out against chocolate?

Most Delicious Scene: Anytime a piece of chocolate passes Johnny Depp’s lips. UNF.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

4. Big Night (1996)

Sony Pictures Home Entertainment


Brothers Primo (Tony Shalhoub) and Secondo (Stanley Tucci) are Italian emigrants who have opened a restaurant in New York. Primo is the sophisticated chef who will not bow to patrons’ pedestrian expectations of Italian fare; Secondo is the smooth-talking manager who just wants to run a good business. When they’re tapped for a special benefit concert, they attempt to compromise and pull out all the stops for their “big night.”

Most Delicious Scene: The unveiling of the timpano.

Where You Can Watch It: Netflix.

5. Jiro Dreams of Sushi (2011)

Magnolia Pictures


This now-classic food documentary follows 85-year-old Jiro Ono, a world-renowned sushi chef completely devoted to his craft. Watching relentless pursuit of perfection is equal parts awe-inspiring, soul-crushing and totally mouthwatering.

Most Delicious Scene: Jiro sushi course “concerto.”

Where You Can Watch It: Netflix.

6. Babette’s Feast (1987)

MGM Home Entertainment

MGM Home Entertainment


Set in a remote 19th Danish century village, two sisters forlorn lead a strict life spent caring for their father, the local minister. Years after missed opportunities to move away and the death of their father, they take in French refugee, Babette Hersant, as their servant. Babette repays the sisters for their kindness with a decadent French meal.

Most Delicious Scene: The feast, of course!

Where You Can Watch It: Hulu Plus.

7. Like Water For Chocolate (1992)



This movie is all about the passionate affair between Tita (Lumi Cavazos), a beauty from a traditional Mexican family who is forbidden to marry, and Pedro (Marco Leonardi), the young stallion who has stolen her heart. If that doesn’t get you, here’s the twist: Everything Tita cooks is infused with her emotions, causing powerful and not always pleasant reactions in all who consume it.

Most Delicious Scene: Tita’s quail in rose petal sauce.

Where You Can Watch It:

8. Waitress (2007)

Fox Searchlight Pictures


Jenna (Keri Russell) is a melancholy and pregnant waitress practicing the art of pie-making at her diner in the hopes of winning the local bake-off and earning enough money to leave her husband. All that changes when a cute new doctor comes to town, and the myriad pies become less a job for Jenna and more a form of therapy.

Most Delicious Scene: “Earl Murders Me Because I’m Having An Affair” Pie.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

9. Ratatouille (2007)

Walt Disney Pictures


Remy (Patton Oswalt) is a rat with a sophisticated palette. When he comes across the kitchen of a fantastic French restaurant, he teams up with the awkward garbage boy Alfredo Linguini (Lou Romano) to bring both their cooking dreams to life. Hijinks ensue.

Most Delicious Scene: When Remy whips up his first soup.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

10. The Trip (2010)

IFC Films


Steve Coogan is asked to tour the finest restaurants of Northern England. When his girlfriend backs out, he invites his best frenemy and fellow comedian Rob Brydon instead. Get ready for incredible cuisine, beautiful countryside, and spot-on Michael Caine impressions.

Most Delicious Scene: Every time Rob orders the scallops.

Where You Can Watch It: Netflix.

11. Eat Drink Man Woman (1994)

The Samuel Goldwyn Company


This movie centers around the dinner table of a widowed, masterful Chinese chef and his three grown daughters in Taipai, Taiwan. Each heavenly Sunday meals brings a fresh clash between the modern, independent daughters and their traditional father.

Most Delicious Scene: The opening sequence. The precision! The steam! THE MEAT.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

12. Haute Cuisine (2012)

The Weinstein Company


Based on a true story, Hortense Laborie (Catherine Frot) is a celebrated chef in small-town France who is suddenly tapped by the President of the Republic to be his personal cook. Though she faces mad shade from the mostly male kitchen staff and more attention from the president, Laborie finds power in her indisputably amazing cooking.

Most Delicious Scene: The president’s midnight tartine snack with black truffles.

Where You Can Watch It:

13. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971)

Warner Bros Entertainment


A poor boy wins a chance to visit the most glorious chocolate factory ever imagined by mere human minds. Even the wallpaper tastes great! Dude who owns it is kind of strange, though.

Most Delicious Scene: THE CHOCOLATE ROOM.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

14. Romantics Anonymous (2010)



The French and their chocolate, amiright? It’s the cute story of the owner of a small chocolate factory and his new chocolatiere, both painfully timid but totally passionate about their work.

Most Delicious Scene: The chocolate tasting.

Where You Can Watch It:

15. Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs (2009)

Amblin Entertainment


Misfit scientist Flint Lockwood (Bill Hader) has created a machine to turn water into food, which goes haywire when it starts converting the water in the atmosphere: It starts raining food! So basically all your childhood—ok, adulthood—dreams come true.

Most Delicious Scene: The ice cream storm!

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

16. Spinning Plates (2012)

Chaos Theory Entertainment


This delectable documentary follows three unique chefs, each serving very different in their own amazing way. From Michelin-rated to backyard BBQs, this movie explores how it doesn’t matter what or where you cook, just that you have a passion for food.

Most Delicious Scene: The twisted artistry of yuba, shrimp, orange, miso.

Where You Can Watch It: Netflix.

17. I Am Love (2009)

Mikado Films


This film is about a Russian woman Emma (Tilda Swinton) who marries into a powerful Milanese family, though haute living leaves her feeling unfulfilled. Enter Antonio (Edoardo Gabbriellini), a talented chef who rewakens her passion for life with—what else?—food.

Most Delicious Scene: The prawns.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

18. Bottle Shock (2008)

Intellectual Properties Worldwide


Ok, it’s about the rise of respectability in California winemaking, but you need something to wash down all these food films! Parisian sommelier Steven Spurrier (Alan Rickman) comes to Cali in 1976 to find the best wine to go head-to-head with its French counterparts in a blind taste test.

Most Delicious Scene: The Judgement of Paris.

Where You Can Watch It: Netflix.

19. Spirited Away (2001)

Walt Disney Studio


When young Chihiro and her family make a pitstop on their way to their new home in the Japanese countryside, they wander into an abandoned amusement park secretly ruled by demons and spirits. When her parents are turned into pigs, Chihiro must find a way to barter with the master of the spiritual bathhouse for all of their freedom.

Most Delicious Scene: When the spirit No-Face is all of us: “Just keep the food coming! I want to eat everything!”

Where You Can Watch It: You can buy it on Amazon.

20. Marie Antoinette (2006)

Columbia Pictures


A dramatic interpretation of the lavish lifestyle of Marie Antoinette in the years leading up to the French Revolution. It’s hard to tell what’s more delicious: all the scandal or all the cake. (JK it’s obviously the cake.)

Most Delicious Scene: So many balls, so many pastries.

Where You Can Watch It: Amazon.

21. Julie & Julia (2009)

Columbia PIctures


The drool-worthy retelling of one woman’s attempt to cook through Julia Child’s Mastering the Art of French Cooking. Start watching for the food, keep watching for Meryl Streep.

Most Delicious Scene: Boeuf bourguinion and raspberry Bavarian cream.

Where You Can Watch It: iTunes.

Read more:

Wake Forest halts Macklemore concert after fans bust through barricade

With his break-out hit, “Thrift Shop,” Macklemore is one of the hottest rappers in the business.

At a concert at Wake Forest, his fans got a little too excited.

They stopped me mid verse, turned the power off and 20 minutes later we were told that we were done. It was never in our control nor did we

— Macklemore (@macklemore) March 23, 2013

ever stop performing. I’m sorry to the students that wanted to see a show. It was a very frustrating night for us. If you feel the same way

— Macklemore (@macklemore) March 23, 2013

holler at your school. That barricade was for 2,000 people and there were over 4,000 there.

— Macklemore (@macklemore) March 23, 2013

His fans still love him:

@macklemore I apologize for wake last night. You were an amazing performer, but the kids at this school can’t handle someone like you.

— Chelsea Price (@chelprice) March 23, 2013

Y’all at wake owe @macklemore and @ryanlewis an apology for being stupid selfish Fucks. Sry guys

— G. Sanda (@Sandapandaa) March 23, 2013

Only Wake would be douchy enough to make @macklemore leave. #ugh #pissed

— Kristin Smith (@kristinhaleigh) March 23, 2013

In related news, some Twitter users were shocked to learn that Macklemore is — gasp! — white:

wait macklemore is white?! WTF😂😂😂😂 #dead

— August 2nd✨ (@xbridistler98) March 23, 2013

hold up Macklemore is white?????

— a b b y (@milkoskians) March 23, 2013

Wait macklemore is white…..? Da fuqqq??!?

— Corey (@CRC_TheFirst) March 23, 2013

Read more:

But Thats None Of My Business

But Thats None Of My Business

Read more:

But Thats None Of My Business

But Thats None Of My Business

Read more:

Users report EarthLink is down; also, it still exists

If you’re having connectivity problems, we feel bad for you, son. Take comfort in knowing you’re not alone, though. Many EarthLink users are reporting outages Friday evening.

@earthlink #earthlink webmail unresponsive – what’s going on? #techsupport

— Joseph Patrick Bulko (@JPBulko) April 5, 2013

@earthlink, any update on the internet connectivity issue?

— Dmitriy Melikov (@dmelikov) April 5, 2013

@earthlink so have you guys gone belly-up? your server is dead as a doornail.

— Luna (@MadDogKlugman) April 5, 2013

Outlook is still successfully polling my #earthlink mail but like others have said, webmail and website are dead. you’d think they’d tweet.

— Luna (@MadDogKlugman) April 6, 2013

Are Earthlink servers down completely now?

— Dorothy R LoCascio (@DorothyLoCascio) April 5, 2013

EarthLink is apparently down around the world and my office is one of the unfortunate few trapped in the 1990s

— Chris C (@Monsterbeard) April 5, 2013

You’re also not alone if you had no idea EarthLink still existed.

Serious to God, they are still in business??? RT @sistertoldjah: RagCon down, down, down #earthlink

— Raging Conservative (@RagCon) April 5, 2013

BREAKING: People apparently still use Earthlink

— John Ekdahl, Jr. (@JohnEkdahl) April 5, 2013

Check out my GeoCities site!RT .@johnekdahl: BREAKING: People apparently still use Earthlink

— ChampionCapua (@ChampionCapua) April 5, 2013

Compuserve ok? MT @johnekdahl: If any of my followers are experiencing Earthlink issues, I might have some AOL CDs in my garage I can send U

— John Davey (@juanitocabrone) April 5, 2013

In the last 1/2 hour, I’ve learned that either earthlink is still in business or I’ve transported back to 1997. #earthlink

— AtlasStumbled (@atlasstumbled) April 5, 2013

@dorothylocascio EarthLink? That’s still a thing?

— amazingsnyderman(@the_snyderman) April 5, 2013

Apparently Earthlink is down, for those of us still living in the Stone Age.

— Jim Bessman (@JimBessman) April 5, 2013

@sharonmoist maybe it’s time to break out the ham radio! #earthlink @earthlink whazzup?? #HamRadio

— Joseph Patrick Bulko (@JPBulko) April 5, 2013

If any of my followers are experiencing Earthlink issues, I might have some AOL CDs in my garage I can send you.

— John Ekdahl, Jr. (@JohnEkdahl) April 5, 2013

I’ve got an important post smacking down “feminists” ready to go, #Earthlink!! Just need that pretty little connection… 😉

— Sister Toldjah (@sistertoldjah) April 5, 2013

We want to read that post! Come on, EarthLink.

Read more:

Apple to announce plans for $100 billion cash reserves

Big business news from Engadget:

A slew of successful, high margin products have left Apple sitting on an almost unimaginable amount of money — $97 billion as of its last earnings report — and led to the natural question of just what to do with it. According to a press release just issued, we’ll all find out about “the outcome of the Company’s discussions” tomorrow on a conference call with CEO Tim Cook and CFO Peter Oppenheimer at 9AM ET. What does $100 billion or so of iMac, Macbook, iPhone and iPad money buy?

We’re guessing they won’t be buying many Green Energy companies. We’re also guessing they won’t be keeping them in greenbacks.


Apple Shares Are Surging Ahead Of The Big Cash Announcement: We're less than an hour away from Apple's big anno…

— Tim Martin (@soflaliving) March 19, 2012

Another update from Engadget.

Related news on iPad sales:

Can't wait to see the actual numbers: Apple has 'record weekend' of new iPad sales | The Verge via @verge

— Larry McAllister II (@LARRYTRON) March 19, 2012

Read more:

The ‘quitting Goldman Sachs’ parodies multiply

For some background, go here. ABC:

A blistering New York Times op-ed about Goldman Sachs has inspired parodies all over the Internet, from an angry Darth Vader to “Mad Men’s” favorite ad exec, Don Draper.

The op-ed, written by former Goldman Sachs executive Greg Smith, was a harsh critique of the culture at the Wall Street investment bank. The piece was published early Wednesday and complained about a company with “morally bankrupt” people:

“Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.”

The parody getting the most online action so far is a piece by Darth Vader via the Daily Mash, titled “Why I Am Leaving the Empire.” In the piece, the former Anakin Skywalker laments the “massive, genocidal space machines” that have overtaken his company:

“The Empire is one of the galaxy’s largest and most important oppressive regimes and it is too integral to galactic murder to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of Yoda College that I can no longer in good conscience point menacingly and say that I identify with what it stands for.”

I sense a meme coming RT @sebabbot Star Wars parody of Goldman Sachs OpEd "Why I am leaving the Empire, by Darth Vadar"

— Anthony De Rosa (@AntDeRosa) March 14, 2012

Even more "Why I'm Leaving…" parody resignations, this time from @Slate:

— PostCollegiate Blog (@postcollegiate) March 15, 2012


When I started here, there was an entire refrigerator stocked with coconut water. Now, that fridge holds nothing but agave juice. I don’t care for it.
—Bob Randolph, “Why I’m Leaving Google,” San Francisco Chronicle, March 22, 2012

Add your own, in comments!

Read more:

Democrats push for tax hike with #DoTheRightThing hashtag

The campaign that never ends has spread from the White House to Capitol Hill. While President Obama has been pushing the (brilliantly hijacked) #My2K hashtag for weeks to sell his tax hike on those making over $250,000 (i.e., millionaires and billionaires), Democratic legislators have started urging their GOP colleagues to #DoTheRightThing.

I’m going to #DoTheRightThing and support @housedemocrats call for tax cuts

— Rep. Keith Ellison (@keithellison) December 12, 2012

.@housedemocrats calling on GOP to #DoTheRightThing, extend middle class tax cuts, protect fams & small biz during #fiscalcliff negotiations

— D Wasserman Schultz (@DWStweets) December 12, 2012

I cannot understand why the #GOP will not #DoTheRightThing and protect 98% of hardworking families and small biz owners from tax increases.

— John Lewis (@repjohnlewis) December 12, 2012

Time for the GOP to #DoTheRightThing and stop holding middle class tax cuts hostage in favor of cuts for the wealthiest.

— Congressman Sam Farr (@RepSamFarr) December 12, 2012

I join @housedemocrats in calling for Republicans to bring middle class tax cut extension to the Floor for a vote. #DoTheRightThing

— Steny Hoyer (@WhipHoyer) December 12, 2012

It’s time for @speakerboehner to get serious about the middle class. RT if you’re tired of the uncertainty. It’s time to #DoTheRightThing.

— Ways and Means Dems (@WaysMeansCmte) December 12, 2012

Extending middle class tax cuts is idea both parties support, but GOP is protecting wealthiest. #DoTheRightThing

— Jan Schakowsky (@janschakowsky) December 12, 2012

Another lame hashtag in place of actual negotiations? This sounds like a good candidate for a hijacking.

Tell Congress to #dotherightthing – Don’t raise taxes on anyone! #tcot

— Gustavo Gomez (@GustaviG) December 12, 2012

@nikiinthehouse The only citizens being held hostage are tax payers.All in the name of class warfare & power. Shameless #DoTheRightThing

— Claire Mahoney (@TaggertGirl) December 13, 2012

#DoTheRightThing @barackobama should denounce the union violence and, for once, attempt to bring Americans together.

— Thomas Paine (@Levelheadedness) December 12, 2012

#DoTheRightThing Don’t raise taxes. Cut spending. Reform entitlements.

— Matthew DesOrmeaux (@cynicusprime) December 12, 2012

Tell Dems to #dotherightthing and stop this nonsense with class warfare.Congress should be working on solutions not slogans

— TheBigCheese (@TheBigChezy) December 12, 2012

#DoTheRightThing and get your hands out of my pocket.I run a small business and over 200k tax will not allow me to hire anyone new.

— Paul Riemann (@Priemann) December 12, 2012

#DoTheRightThing: reform entitlements so your children and grandchildren aren’t indebted to China

— Greg B (@gregb94) December 12, 2012

@repbenraylujan Dems should #DoTheRightThing and not use gimmicks to go around the negotiating process.

— Robert Walcott (@Redlegparatroop) December 12, 2012

Democrats: #DoTheRightThing and stop #KickingtheCan down the road right off the fiscal cliff. @barackobama please work and stop campaigning.

— It’s Me, Greg! (@DailyGregYouTub) December 12, 2012

Stop campaigning? Does he know how?

Read more:

How I Rebuilt Tinder And Discovered The Shameful Secret Of Attraction

Why we swipe the way we swipe.

Jenny Chang / BuzzFeed

Suppose you’re a straight woman thumbing through Tinder while waiting for the train, avoiding your homework, or bored at work. A picture of a deeply bronzed man pops up in your stream. How do you swipe? More interestingly, if someone asked you to explain why, how would you answer?

Say that it’s this guy:

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

His location is exotic. He’s doing something that requires a wetsuit. Chances are, he needed a good amount of money to do what he’s doing in the place he’s doing it. But the dark tan, large tattoo, long hair, and name like “Kip” indicate a lifestyle that is probably not that of an investment banker. You can’t really see his face, but surprisingly that doesn’t really matter because the overwhelming reason that hundreds of men and women who swiped “no” in a full-fledged Tinder simulation I unleashed on the internet had nothing to do with attractiveness. Instead, it had everything to do with the type of person Kip seemed to be:

“He probably calls himself a ‘humanist’ instead of a feminist and tries to impress people with how much he ‘made friends with the natives’ when he travels. Barf.” –straight/white

“I love the tattoo, but he seems too skeezy in a way I can’t put my finger on. Scuba is pretentious? Longer greasy hair?” –bi/Hapa/Japanese

“close call, but i hate his sunglasses and also i am imputing all sorts of things about him. like he probably says namaste to the barista at the coffee shop and has a profile picture of him with a bunch of african children” –bi/white

“Lol he’s too old and it looks like the sea is his mistress already I can’t compete with that.” –straight/white

It’s possible these respondents are “overthinking” their response to what, on the surface, is a very straightforward question: Am I attracted to this person or not? Indeed, some would argue that there’s no reason to even explain: You can’t argue with your genitals.

But maybe what we call the argument of one’s genitals is, in truth, incredibly — and both consciously and subconsciously — influenced by the cultures in which we grow up as well as our distinct (and equally culturally influenced) ideas of what a “good couple” or “good relationship” would look like. Put differently, we swipe because someone’s “hot,” but we find someone “hot” based on unconscious codes of class, race, education level, religion, and corresponding interests embedded within the photos of their profile.

Essentially, we’re constantly inventing narratives about the people who surround us — where he works, what he loves, whether our family would like him. And more than other dating services, which offer up comprehensive match dossiers, Tinder appears to encourage these narratives and crystallize the extrapolation process and package it into a five-second, low-stakes decision. We swipe, in other words, because of semiotics.

“Semiotics” is, quite simply, the study of signs. The field of semiotics tries to figure out how we come up with symbols — even as simple as the word in front of you — that stand in for a larger concept. Why does the word “lake” mean that massive blue watery thing? Or how does the stop sign, even without the word “stop,” make everyone understand not to go forward?

But signs aren’t always static in their meaning — it’s all about context. Wearing a camouflage jacket can mean that you’re in the military, a hunter, a punk, a redneck, a misogynist; having a shaved head, as a girl, can connote that you’re a radical, a cancer survivor, or a lesbian.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed


I first noticed this “crystallizing” tendency in Tinder when a friend, let’s call her Katie, starting playing it for fun, three beers in, at a bar. She was thumbing through prospective matches’ profiles (usually comprising six Facebook pictures, authenticated Facebook age, and a brief bio line) for the table, yelling out her immediate reaction: too old, too manscaped, too short, too bald, too Jersey, HOT, too douchey, too finance-bro, too “ew,” too hipster, too boring, too CrossFit, TOTALLY HOT.

Katie’s performance is indicative of a larger truth: that most of the fun of checking people out isn’t actually talking to them, but thinking about whether or not you’d talk to them and how. Katie was using Tinder at a bar, but instead of squinting across the room, she got to look at well-lit pictures of each potential match attempting to present his best self, seeing what phrase he uses to describe himself and a collection of ironic bon mots or general pronouncements (“no offense, but no crazies”).

Tindering thus mimics the relationship of checking someone out on the street, in the classroom, or on the subway, but with the added tactile pleasure of physically swiping the rejects out of your field of vision (and your life). That’s the real difference between Tinder and sites like OkCupid, Match, eHarmony, and J-Date: The end game on those sites is an actual date (and a lot of times marriage!); the end game on Tinder is the web version of a low-stakes bar conversation, which may or may not lead to a date or relationship.

Katie’s verdicts were often based on obvious, glaring “facts” of the profile: A 5-foot-7 male was “too short.” A 39-year-old guy was decidedly “too old” for Katie’s 33 years. Another is bald; she decides him “too” much so. But other swipes relied upon more a more vague, albeit immediate, calculus. To be “too douchey” is to have a bad goatee, a shiny shirt, an unfortunate facial expression, or a certain type of sunglasses. “Too ew” could be any blend of traits that, to white, straight, middle-class Katie, read as repugnant.

But some judgments are too secret — and shameful — to say out loud, or even admit to ourselves. Katie never said “too not-white,” “too poor,” or “too uneducated.” We cloak those judgments in language that generally circles the issue: “Nothing in common,” “he wouldn’t like me,” “I can’t see us together.” Those statements aren’t necessarily lies, but they’re also not always full truths either — and often rely on overarching assumptions about what differences in race, class, education, and religion dictate not only in a relationship, but any interaction, romantic or otherwise.

After watching Katie and tinkering around on the app myself in a game-like fashion, I wanted to see if, relying on anonymity, I could get at the heart of the subconscious snap judgments behind each wipe. Why do we swipe the way we swipe? And are those assumptions “just human,” or indicative of larger, enduring, and possibly destructive cultural divides?

Jenny Chang / BuzzFeed

Since there’s no way to standardize Tinder’s in-app selections for all respondents (and because using and publishing the real identities of strangers poses more than a few concerns), I decided to make my own, somewhat crude simulation. The first step: Scour stock images to find a broad array of profile “types.”

The process proved fraught, as stock images for casually dressed black males, women over a size 4, and anyone who didn’t fulfill stereotypical understandings of what male/female looks like require some unsettling search queries and yield clichéd and borderline racist results (try searching “curvy” or “fat,” for example, and you get a sea of women looking very sad while looking at food or standing on scales).

I winnowed the profiles down to around 30 men and 30 women, processed them through Instagram filters to make them seem more like something someone might actually have on their account, and put them in standard Tinder profile frames. I picked approximate ages and came up with a mix of names — some of which were intended to complicate or amplify the mix of signs in the profile.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed


The result is an approximation, but not re-creation, of what Tinder is actually like. The goal was to correlate each participant’s race, class, education, religion, and sexual preference to their swiping habits. For each Tinder “profile,” regardless of whether they swiped yes or no, the user was prompted to answer “What race/religion/class and education level is this person?” And, if they swiped no, they were asked to write a brief explanation for “why,” with a specific instruction not to simply note, “not attracted.”

The survey circulated via Twitter, Facebook, email, and among friends, amassing 799 seemingly earnest respondents. It’s not divided by the gender of the respondent, but by sexual preferences: If you desire men, you took the male simulation; if you desire women, you took the female one. If a participant identified as bisexual, he or she could take either.

Jenny Chang / BuzzFeed

The most swipeable woman — no matter if the user identified as straight, gay, queer, or bi — was Yasmin, with an 89% swipe-yes rate, a full 10% higher than her closest “competitor.”

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

But why? She signified as middle-class (85% believed so); she seemed as if she had finished a four-year college degree or higher (83%). She looks Christian (42%), spiritual (20%), or agnostic/atheist (17%), and reads as either “mixed race” (48%) or black (40%).

Look closer at this image: Yasmin’s teeth are white and straight and her skin is clear. Her shirt is nondescript, but doesn’t read, at least from what we can see of it, as “cheap.” The contrast between the shirt color and house in the background makes her look crisp and clean. Her overarching look is bourgeois, like a model in an issue of Real Simple.

Her eyes are “smizing,” which makes it seem like she’s actually happy, not just posing for the camera, all of which combines to create a feeling of “genuineness.” Her hair seems only the slightest bit unruly — hey, she’s not uptight! — but is also well-conditioned and cared for. She probably has means; she is content; she is educated; you will have something to talk to her about, and she will be pleasant.

But perhaps the most attractive thing about Yasmin, at least according to the simulation, is that her race is ambiguous. In his new book Dataclysm: Who We Are (When We Think No One’s Looking), OkCupid co-founder and data scientist Christian Rudder asserts that “when you’re looking at how two American strangers behave in a romantic context, race is the ultimate confounding factor.” Working with star ratings and messaging data, Rudder found “two essential patterns” of male to female attraction: First, men tend to like women of the same race; second, men “don’t like” black women.

So why, then, do Rudder’s OkCupid findings not apply to Yasmin? It would appear she’s not black enough. Just contrast Yasmin’s profile with that of Lindsay, whom users read as unquestionably black (97%) and who received only a 43% swipe-yes rate.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Most respondents explained their rejection of Lindsay based on height and race, or, in one straight white male’s words, because of “unconscious racism?” He continues: “Not that I don’t find black women attractive — and not just the Beyoncés of the world, either — but this woman’s aesthetic, which has definite racial and class markers, doesn’t appeal to me at all.”

Here, “aesthetic” seems to mean manipulated hair, more visible makeup, cluttered clothing, and a less-inviting facial expression. And those “definite racial and class markers” make users more likely to see her race. For Yasmin it’s just the opposite: The absence of those racial and class markers make her race recede in importance (only two respondents, both straight white males, cited race as their reason for swiping no).

The same holds true for Xavier, who had the most swipeable male profile.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Xavier received a 79% overall yes rate — 10% higher than the closest “competitor.” Ninety-five percent of users read him as black — a similar percentage to Lindsay — but users also perceived him as well-educated (95% percent thought he’d finished a four-year college or higher) and middle- or upper-class (74%/24%). The business attire makes him look professional, but not overly boastful; he looks directly at the camera and his arms are folded, which makes him seem direct. You could read his lack of smile as menacing, but the shirt and tie soften the effect.

The 21% who swiped “no” were bluntly concerned with race: “Not into black guys” (gay/white), “I think I might be racist” (straight/white), “interracial dating is not for me” (straight/white). Some pointed to race-specific traits without explicitly mentioning race: “his lips are way bigger than mine. I have thin lips and the thought of always kissing gimungous [sic] lips is scary to me,” wrote one bi/white user.

Then there’s the cultural extrapolation: “Man, he’s pretty. And he seems really engaged and confident. But I can’t see him at the next big half Polish, half French, all judgmental family picnic” (white/straight).

But why was Xavier rejected for his race more than Yasmin? Both read as middle-class and educated; both appear clean-cut in their pictures. But Xavier reads as “more” black and he isn’t smiling; black men read, stereotypically, as more threatening than black women. Now, that’s all racist and speculative, but it also seems to mimic how our racist and speculative subconsciousness functions in the split second it takes to swipe a Tinder profile.

Here’s the religious breakdown of the simulation participants compared to national statistics from the 2012 Census:

Jenny Chang / BuzzFeed

The discrepancy is fairly easy to explain — the mostly twenty- and thirtysomethings who took the simulation are less religious than their parents and grandparents. Participants were willing, however, to assign religious beliefs to the profiles they rejected.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed


Take, for example, Junior, who garnered a paltry 7% swipe-yes rate. The stated reasons for rejecting Junior were variations on “he seems old school, like he’d be really patronizing to women” (bi/white) and “He’s overweight/doesn’t seem athletic” (straight/Asian). Eighty-one percent of users also read him as Christian — which could be correlated to the 70% who believed he was Hispanic, an ethnicity often associated with Catholicism. (Importantly, no respondent cited religion or ethnicity as their reason for swiping “no” on Junior.)

Same with Jimmy, who also pulled a 7% swipe-yes rate. Users didn’t like his truck and read him as “Southern” and working-class (84%). Seventy-five percent of users believed he was Christian, despite no physical indications of religiosity. A similar yoking happened with Chase, a man with a nice smile and a cowboy hat, whom 86% of users read as Christian.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

By contrast, here’s Conor — who received a 56% swipe-yes rate. He’s holding a mandolin, he has a beard and long hair, and the reasons for rejection usually had something to do with said beard and the lifestyle it connoted. But only 10% of users thought he was Christian — while 60% thought he was atheist/agnostic, and 20% believed he was spiritual. Even though, like Jimmy and Chase, he’s photographed outdoors, certain hipster signifiers (not looking at the camera, long hair, mandolin) negate that reading.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

When a profile includes obvious signifiers of religious belief, however, the reading process becomes more complicated. Thirty percent swiped “yes” on Kate, and despite signifiers that many interpreted as hipster, many signaled the cross around her neck as indicative of Christianity. A white, bisexual respondent wrote, “I don’t date people serious about their religion”; a gay Hispanic woman called the cross “a huge turn off”; and one who identified as mixed race and straight thought she seemed “a bit arts-y and sanctimonious (spiritual).”

That said, perceived religiousness is not an automatic “no.” Take Johanna, who had an overall yes rate of 64%:

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Eighty-seven percent of users read her as Muslim. The reasons for swiping “no” were almost entirely contingent on her perceived religion and its cultural extrapolations: A white male said, “I wouldn’t want to deal with cultural differences in the bedroom”; a gay Hispanic user said, “I have no patience for religious people. She’s hot, but sadly religion is the biggest turn off for me.”

Overall, however, Johanna had an excellent Tinder swipe-yes rate (58% of straight men, 75% of bi men or women, and 78% of gay women).

Johanna signifies as religious, but unlike Jimmy, Junior, or Conor, she also signifies as middle- or upper-class (71%/26%) and college- or graduate school-educated (64%/26%). Like Chase and Jimmy, she’s photographed outside, but she wears a women’s suit jacket. Even those who swiped “no” on her profile for religious reasons conceded that “she is very cute” and “she’s hot.”

Religion — even religion that would likely preclude a successful relationship — seems to matter less when the subject seems to belong to a higher class and educational level (especially if that subject is gorgeous).

Via Jenny Chang / BuzzFeed

Let’s examine Dave, one of the lowest-scoring male profiles. It’s an ambiguous profile — there are four men, and no sign as to which one is “Dave” — but that’s also the case with many Tinder profiles. But the rage directed at Dave wasn’t primarily due to the inclusion of his friends in the shot. Rather, it was his apparent privilege — communicated via the golf course, the uniform whiteness of himself and his friends, and the apparent gall to use a golfing photo as one’s profile picture — that led respondents to say the following.

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

It was bad. Like, really bad:

“NO NEVER IN A MILLION GODDAMN YEARS. This privileged fuck, first of all, which one is he? Does it even matter? No, because all polo shirts are interchangeable.” –bi/white

For the record, not interested in any of those white frat boys in that picture.” –straight/Asian

“I can’t tell which of these four dudes he is, but I don’t want to date The Man.” –bi/white

“they all look like finance bros which might be the worst subcategory of bro.” –straight/white

“Not sure which one of these guys is Dave, but that doesn’t matter, because they all seem like Republican d-bags. Also: Pleated khakis? No.” –gay/white

“SO WHITE” –queer/Asian

“golf. overabundance of white dudes. who is Dave? Dave is legion. a legion of golf-playing white dude demons.” –pansexual/white

Dave scanned as well-educated (71% believed he’d finished college; 20% thought he’d finished grad school) and definitively upper-class (73% believed as much, the highest of any profile). But unlike other white men of higher class and education level, users also overwhelmingly read him as Christian: a whopping 79%. (Compare with Kieran, another white, well-educated male, whom 64% of users read as agnostic/atheist.) Respondents read Dave’s hobby and whiteness as indicative not only of wealthy, but Conservatism — which is often associated, explicitly and implicitly, with Christianity.

Dave demonstrates how Tinder’s lack of information forces assumptions from its swipers, which is is a perfect example of what makes Tinder so unique and perfect for this experiment. On OkCupid or Match, there would be clear markers of one’s political views. But on Tinder, you have only the presence of a pair of pleated khaki pants to tell you if the person is, say, conservative, “a douche,” and thus unattractive.

No one wants to believe their attractions are racist, or classist, or otherwise discriminatory. We use elaborate phrasing to cover it up or explain it away, but it’s still there, even if not always to the profile’s detriment. The fact that the two profiles with the highest swipe-yes rate were both people of color seems to suggest something about shifting understandings about attractiveness, which makes sense given our respondents (overwhelmingly middle-class, largely white, and mostly urban and suburban denizens of the internet).

But “what we find attractive” appears to be far less about someone’s face and far more about the signs that surround that face. Think, for example, if a woman like Marit, pictured below, had the cheap highlights and unfixed teeth and name of Crystal?

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed

Thinkstock / BuzzFeed


Though still anecdotal, Tinder rejection in this simulation appears to be more about class than race or religion. If a user self-identified as upper-middle-class and identified the male profile before him or her as “working-class,” that user swiped “yes” only 13% of the time; if they identified themselves as lower-middle-class, the swipe rate rose only slightly to 17%.

If those same users identified the profile before them as middle-class, that number rose to 36% and 39%, respectively. The same trend held true when judging female profiles: If the user identified as upper-middle-class and identified a profile as working-class, the yes rate was 26% — compared with 52% if they identified a profile as middle-class.

Whatever the signs that made someone think that a profile was working-class — McKenzie’s fishing pole, Renee’s dye job and pool pose, Ricky’s tattoos and piercings, John’s tank top, Toby’s camo, Jimmy’s truck — the swipe rates plummeted.

Which isn’t to suggest that poor people are ugly. The vast majority of explanations for the no swipes on all of the above profiles pointed to a perceived lack of common interests: “we’d have nothing to talk about,” “I don’t think our politics would mix,” “nothing in common.” Sometimes those assumptions stem from depicted activities — fishing, body modifications — but some are just the way the mind runs wild with class, weaving the narrative that a working-class person probably doesn’t read books for pleasure, or enjoy art cinema, or seek out microbrews, or go on hikes the way a bourgeois, middle-class person does.

Now, the results of a small sample-size Tinder simulation doesn’t mean that we’re all destined to marry within only our own classes. Data on the tendency to marry within one’s class is difficult to come by, but if relying on education level as an (imperfect) proxy for class, then the rate has decreased dramatically over the 50 years. Even as more and more people marry “across” lines of race and religion, fewer and fewer are willing to cross the education/class line.

Tinder is by no means the cause of this decline. It simply encourages and quietly normalizes the assumptions that undergird it. The Tinderspeak of “we’d have nothing in common,” taken to its natural extension, bolsters and reifies the idea of “two Americas” with distinct values and worldviews, two discrete factions with little impetus to support that which doesn’t necessarily personally affect us or our class.

It’s not as if race and religion aren’t still mitigating factors in our decisions about whom we find attractive, with whom we emphasize, or for whom we feel compassion. Race and religion do matter (and might always), but almost only when they intersect with a class identity that isn’t our own.

Ultimately, this admittedly un-randomized sample seems to suggest that the raw idea of attraction — that knee-jerk “thinking from the genitals” decision — has less to do with our unmentionable parts and much more to do with a combination of our deepest subconscious biases and with our most overt and uncharitable personal politics. And if that’s the case, it’s no doubt the reason why Tinder is so popular, addictive, and ultimately insidious.

Read more: