If you’ve engaged in contemporary dating, you may have come across the “Are We Dating The Same Guy?” Facebook groups. These groups, restricted to women who pass vetting processes, aim to exchange information about men they are seeing. Emerging platforms such as The Tea, an app allowing women to anonymously discuss and search reviews of men, confirm identities through photo checks and conduct background investigations, are evolving dating whisper networks into more enduring and searchable entities.

The Tea has swiftly garnered attention, climbing to the top of the Apple App Store rankings and reportedly amassing over four million users. Nonetheless, its ascent has been blemished by controversy, including two major security breaches and its withdrawal from the App Store by Apple in all regions.

These groups are regarded as safeguarding environments where women can alert others about harmful or toxic behavior or issue warnings regarding men they are dating. Women share images of men they are involved with and inquire if others are dating him, often uncovering patterns of infidelity or serious offenses. At times, the grievances focus on poor dating manners, such as failing to reply to messages.

Social media frequently showcases screenshots of dating app conversations or TikTok users broadcasting their romantic experiences in real-time. Dating has become increasingly public, resembling a trial. This prompts the inquiry: are these platforms enhancing safety in dating, or merely fostering greater suspicion?

Lalalaletmeexplain, a relationship educator, asserts that these groups were established out of necessity as secure spaces centered on sisterhood and solidarity. They aim to shield women from harm and have genuinely defended individuals against fraud, abuse, and danger. The groups are rigorously moderated, requiring vetting for participation, prohibiting screenshots, and expelling members who violate confidentiality. This framework cultivates a sense of security and community, offering support, and reminding women that remaining single is not a defect.

These groups expedite the process of revealing if a man is seeing multiple women. Men’s dating coach David Chambers acknowledges their appeal, observing the decline of close-knit communities where individuals could evaluate potential partners. He maintains that the groups fulfill a function, despite the possibility of misuse.

However, these groups can also result in unintended consequences. They are not regulated by professionals, and a man might be labeled a “red flag” for trivial matters. Lalala has observed “terrible advice” and “irrational questions” shared, and points out the presence of racist, fetishizing terminology, homophobia, and misogyny. Posts are subjective, dependent on the emotions and interpretations of the poster, which can result in false accusations and reputational harm.

Media attorney Mark Stephens cautions that identifiable posts could be defamatory, and affluent men might resort to libel laws to quell allegations. Chambers highlights that individuals comment on behavior without context, and these spaces may promote paranoia, rendering dating feel riskier.

Stephens argues for the necessity of clearer lines between criminal activity and poor dating practices. Chambers concurs, pointing out that platforms overlook growth or context. Even Lalala, who values these groups, believes stronger safeguards are essential.

As a man, it’s challenging to avoid feeling conflicted. While these groups exist due to the genuine harm caused by men, they can also induce paranoia and distrust. We ought to establish systems that safeguard individuals from true danger, not platforms that treat every mistake as proof. Dating entails risks, but if every error becomes a public examination, it may result in both men and women retreating from dating altogether.