Element contents
Love in Contemporary Technoculture
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 March 2022
Summary
This Element outlines the environments of loving in contemporary technoculture and explains the changes in the manner of feelings (including the experience of senses, spaces, and temporalities) in technologically mediated relationships. Synchronic and retrospective in its approach, this Element defines affection (romance, companionship, intimacy etc.) in the reality marked by the material and affective 'intangibility' that has emerged from the rise of digitalism and technological advancement. Analysing the (re)constructions of intimacy, it describes our sensual and somatic experiences in conditions where the human body, believed to be extending itself by means of the media and technological devices, is in fact the extension of the media and their technologies. It is a study that outlines shifts and continuums in the 'practices of togetherness' and which critically rereads late modern paradigms of emotional and affective experiences, filling a gap in the existing critical approaches to technological and technologized love.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781108884976Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 31 March 2022
References
Ackerman, J. M., Li, N. P. & Griskevicius, V. (2011). Let’s get serious: communicating commitment in romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(6): 1079–1094.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, T. S. (2012). The Time and the Digital: Connecting Technology, Aesthetics, and a Process Philosophy of Time, Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College Press.Google Scholar
Ballatore, A. & Natale, S. (2015). E-readers and the death of the book: or new media and the myth of disappearing medium. New Media and Society, 18(10): 2379–2394.Google Scholar
Barrs, P. (2011). The Erotic Engine. How Pornography Has Powered Mass Media Communication from Gutenberg to Google, New York: Anchor Canada.Google Scholar
Ben-Ze’ev, A. (2008). Love Online. Emotions on the Internet, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berardi, F. B. (2017). Exhaustion. In Szeman, I., Wenzel, J. & Yaeger, P., eds., Fueling Culture. 101 Words for Energy and Environment, New York: Fordham University Press, pp. 155–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, S. (2019). Liquid love: Zygmunat Bauman’s thesis on sex revisited. Sexualities, 22(7–8): 1094–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bode, L. M. (2005). From shadow citizens to teflon stars: cultural responses to the digital actor (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of South Wales).Google Scholar
Brabant, O. (2016). More than meets the eye: Toward a post-materialist model of consciousness. Explore. The Journal of Science and Healing, 12(5): 347–354.Google Scholar
Bratton, B. (2016). The Stack. On Software and Sovereignty, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [E-book.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, B. (2010). Materiality. In Mitchell, W. J. T. & Hansen, M. B. N., eds., Critical Terms for Media Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 49–63.Google Scholar
Buckingham, D. (2011). Foreword. In Thomas, M., ed., Deconstructing Digital Natives. Young People, Technology, and the New Literacies, New York: Routledge, pp. ix–xi.Google Scholar
Cashmore, E., Cleland, J. & Dixon, K. (2018). Screen Society, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Castells, M. (2009). The Rise of the Network Society, London: Wiley-Blackwell. [Kindle.]Google Scholar
Cavallaro, F. I., Morin, F. O., Garzo, A. et al. (2012). Growing older together. When a robot becomes the best ally for aging well. In Augusto, J. C., ed., Handbook of Ambient Assisted Living, International: IOS Press, pp. 834–851.Google Scholar
Cefai, S. & Couldry, N. (2017). Mediating the presence of others. Reconceptualizing co-presence as mediated intimacy. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 22(3): 1–18.Google Scholar
Christina, B. & Griffiths, T. (2016). Algorithms to Live By. The Computer Science of Human Decisions, London: William Collins.Google Scholar
Ciechanowski, L., Przegalińska, A., Magnuski, M. & Gloor, P. (2018), In the shades of the uncanny valley. An experimental study of human-chatbot interaction. Future Generation Computer Systems, 92: 539–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, E., Bowman, N. & Borchert, K. (2014). Understanding romantic jealousy responses to an ambiguous social network site message as a function of message access exclusivity. Computers in Human Behavior, 35: 535–541.Google Scholar
Comella, L. (2017). Vibrator Nation. How Feminist Sex-Toy Stores Changed the Business of Pleasure, Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Conroy-Beam, D. (2021). Couple simulation. A novel approach for evaluating models of human mate choice, Personality and Social Psychology Review 25(3): 191–228, https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320971258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cunningham, M. R. & Barbee, A. P. (2008). Prelude to a kiss: Nonverbal flirting, opening gambits, and other communication dynamics in the initiation of romantic relationships. In Sporecher, S., Wenzel, A. & Harvey, J. eds., Handbook of Relationship Initiation, New York: Psychology Press, New York, pp. 97−120,.Google Scholar
Dalesandro, C. (2018). Internet intimacy. Authenticity and longing in the relationship of millennial young adults. Sociological Perspectives, 61(4): 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121417753381.Google Scholar
Farman, J. (2012). Mobile Interface Theory. Embodied Space and Locative Media, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Faustino, M. J. (2018). Rebooting an old script by new means. Teledildonics – the technological return to the “coital imperative.” Sexuality & Culture, 22: 243–257.Google Scholar
Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., Karney, B. R., Reis, H. T. & Sprecher, S. (2012). Online dating: a critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(1): 3–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frischmann, B. & Selinger, E. (2018). Re-Engineering Humanity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Garcia, J. R., Ch., Reiber, Massey, S. G. & Merriwether, A. M. (2012). Sexual hookup culture: a review, Review of General Psychology, 16(2): 161–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gatebox (2016). Gatebox – promotion movie. You Tube, www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkcKaNqfykg.Google Scholar
Goertzel, B. Mossbridge, J., Monroe, E., Hanson, D. & Yu, G. (2017). Loving AIL Humanoid Robots as Agents of Human Consciousness Expansion (summary of early research progress), 1–16. https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.07791.Google Scholar
Grace, L. D. (2020). Love and Electronic Affection. A Design Primer, New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Green, R. F. (1979). Troilus and the game of love. The Chaucer Review, 13(3): 201–220.Google Scholar
Guillén, B. (2017). Interview with Jonathan Rossiter. BBVA Open Mind, www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/technology/robotics/we-are-working-on-robots-that-can-reproduce-and-then-they-can-die/.Google Scholar
Guattari, F. & Rolnik, S. (2007). Molecular Revolution in Brazil, Los Angeles: Sexmiotexte.Google Scholar
Hollander, M. M. & Turowetz, J. (2013). “So, why did you decide to do this?” Soliciting and formulating motives for speed dating. Discourse and Society, 24(6): 701–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houser, M. L., Horan, S. M. & Furler, L. A. (2008). Dating in the fast lane. How communication predicts speed-dating success. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(5): 749–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hui, Y. (2015). Towards a relational materialism. A reflection on language, relations and the digital. Digital Culture and Society, 1(1): 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Illouz, E. (2011). Why Love Hurts. A Sociological Explanation, Polity Press: Cambridge.Google Scholar
Illouz, E. (2019). The End of Love. A Sociology of Negative Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Janning, M., Gao, W. & Snyder, E. (2018). Constructing shared “space”: Meaningfulness in long distance relationship communication formats. Journal of Family Issues, 39(5): 1281–1303, https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X17698726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenssen, B. P., Gray, N. J., Harvey, K., DiClemente, R. & Klein, J. D. (2014). Language and love. Generation Y comes of age online. SAGE Open 4(1): 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014525894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaun, A. & Stiernsted, F. (2014). Facebook time. Technological and institutional affordances for media memories. New Media and Society, 16(7): 1154–1168.Google Scholar
Kolozsvari, O. (2015). Physically we are apart, mentally we are not. Creating a shared space and a sense of belonging in long-distance relationships. Qualitative Sociology Review, 11(4): 102–115.Google Scholar
Krzykawski, M. (2019). Eros i techne. Miłość w czasach automatyzacji. [Eros and techne. Love in the time of automatization] Texty Drugie, 5: 35–57.Google Scholar
Lagerkvist, A. (2015). The netlore of the infinite: death (and beyond) in the digital memory ecology. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 21(1/2): 185–195.Google Scholar
Lamont, E. (2017). “We can write the script ourselves”. Queer challenges to heteronormative courtship practices. Gender & Society, 31(5): 624–646.Google Scholar
Larsonneur, C., Regnauld, A., Cassou-Nogues, P. & Touiza, S. (2015). Le Sujet Digital, Dijon: Presses du Réel.Google Scholar
Lenhart, A., et al.(2011). Teens, cruelty and kindness on social network sites. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.Google Scholar
Lepawsky, J. & Kyonghwan, P. (2006). Cyberspace. In Dasgupta, S., ed., Encyclopedia of Virtual Communities and Technologies, Hershey and London: Idea Group, pp. 110–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, D. (2008). Love + Sex with Robots. The Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships, New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Levy, D. (2016). Why not marry a robot. In Cheok, A. D., Delvin, K. & Levy, D., eds., Love and Sex with Robots. Second International Conference, LRS 2016, London, UK, December 19-20, 2016, Revised Selected Papers, Cham: Springer, pp. 3–13.Google Scholar
Luhmann, N. (1986). Love as Passion. The Codification of Intimacy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ma, X., Hancock, J. & Naaman, M. (2016). Anonymity, intimacy and self-disclosure in social media. Proceedings of CHI’16, May 7–12, 2016, San Jose, CA, USA, pp. 3857–3869, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machulis, K. (2021). The proxemics of digital intimacy. In Malinowska, A. & Peri, V., eds., Data Dating. Love, Technology, Desire, Bristol: Intellect, pp. 136–155.Google Scholar
McArthur, J. A. (2016). Digital Proxemics. How Technology Shapes the Ways We Move, New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, L. (2016a). Love machines and the Tinderbot bildungsroman. E-flux. https://www.e-flux.com/journal/74/59802/love-machines-and-the-tinder-bot-bildungsroman/.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, L. (2016b). Love’s algorithm. The perfect parts for my machine. In Amoore, L. & Piotukh, V., eds., Algorithmic Life. Calculative Devices in the Age of Big Data, New York: Routledge, pp. 161–175.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, L. (2018). Repeat after me: the automatic labour of love. Journal of Aesthetics and Culture, 10(3): 23–31.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, L. (2021). Romance in a time of dark data. In Malinowska, A. & Peri, V., eds., Data Dating. Love, Technology, Desire, Bristol: Intellect, pp. 26–38.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, L., Thylstrup, N. B. & Veel, K. (2018). The techniques and aesthetics of love in the age of big data. Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, 10(3): 1–7.Google Scholar
Maines, R. P. (1989). Socially camouflaged technologies: the case of the electromagnetical vibrator. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, June, 3–23.Google Scholar
Maines, R. P. (1999). The Technology of Orgasm. “Hysteria,” the Vibrator, and Women’s Sexual Satisfaction, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Malinowska, A. (2018). The matter of kissing. In Malinowska, A. & Gratzke, M., eds., The Materiality of Love. Essays on Affection and Cultural Practice, New York: Routledge, pp. 85–98.Google Scholar
Malinowska, A. (2019). Obiekty i technofilie [Objects and technofeelias]. Texty Drugie, 5: 18–34.Google Scholar
Malinowska, A. (2020). Sexbots and posthuman love. In Ross, K., ed., International Encyclopedia of Gender, Media, and Communiation, London: Wiley Blackwell (online).Google Scholar
Malinowska, A. (2021). Fast Love. Temporalities of Digitized Togetherness. In Malinowska, A. & Peri, V. Data Dating. Love, Technology, Desire, Bristol: Intellect, pp. 42–57.Google Scholar
Malinowska, A. & Miller, T. (2017). Sensitive media. Open Cultural Studies, 1: 660–665.Google Scholar
Marleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The Primacy of Perception and Other Essays on Phenomenological Psychology, the Philosophy of Art, History and Politics, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Massumi, B. (2002). Movement, Affect, Sensation. Parables for the Virtual, Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Mayr, C. (2020). Symbolic vibration. A meaning-based framework for the study of vibrator consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture, 3(1): 1–19. DOI.10.1177/1469540520926233.Google Scholar
Milgram, P. & Colquhoun, H. (1999). A taxonomy of real and virtual world display integration. In Ohta, Y. & Tamura, H., eds., Mixed Reality. Merging Real and Virtual Worlds, New York: Springer, pp. 5–30.Google Scholar
Mori, M. (2012). The uncanny valley. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 19(2): 98–100.Google Scholar
Morozov, E. (2011). The Net Delusion. The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Mossbridge, J. & Goertzel, B. (2017). Designing an AI to love. Consciousness hacking. Ben Goertzel and Julia Mossbridge. www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQjOT_MLxhI.Google Scholar
Narr, G. (2021), The uncanny swipe. The return of a racist mode of algorithmic thought on dating apps. Studies in Gender and Sexuality 22(3): 219–236, https://doi.org/10.1080/15240657.2021.1961498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nozick, R. (1989). The Examined Life. Philosophical Mediations, New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Öhman, C. (2020). A theory of temporal telepresence: Reconsidering the digital time collapse. Time & Society, 29(4): 1061–1081.Google Scholar
Papacharissi, Z. (2018). Introduction. In Papacharissi, Z., ed., A Networked Self and Love. New York: Routledge. [Kindle.]Google Scholar
Parisi, D. (2018). Archaeologies of Touch. Interfacing with Haptics from Electricity to Computing, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Parisi, D. (2021). Virtual hugs and the crises of touch. In Malinowska, A. and Peri, V., eds., Data Dating. Love, Technology, Desire, Bristol: Intellect, pp. 162–182.Google Scholar
Parisi, L. (2004). Abstract Sex. Philosophy, Bio-Technology and the Mutations of Desire, London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Paterson, M. (2007). The Senses of Touch. Haptics, Affects and Technologies, Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
Patterson, S. (2015). Sexy, naughty, and lucky in love: Playing Ragemon le Bon in English gentry households. In Patterson, S., ed., Games and Gaming in Medieval Literature. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 79–104.Google Scholar
Perniola, M. (2017). Sex Appeal of the Inorganic. Philosophies of Desire in the Modern World, London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Pettman, D. (2006). Love and Other Technologies. Retrofitting Eros for the Information Age, New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
Pettman, D. (2009). Love in the time of Tamagotchi. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(2–3): 189–208.Google Scholar
Pettman, D. (2017a). Creaturely Love. How Desire Makes Us More And Less Than Human, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Pettman, D. (2017b). Sonic Intimacy. Voices, Species, Technics, or How to Listen to the World, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Pettman, D. (2018). Love materialism. Technologies of feeling in the ‘post-material’ world (an interview). In Malinowska, A. and Gratzke, M., eds., The Materiality of Love. Essays of Affection and Cultural Practice, New York: Routledge, pp. 13–24.Google Scholar
Picard, R. W. (1995). Affective computing. M.I.T Media Laboratory Perceptual Computing Section Technical Report No. 321, 1–16.Google Scholar
Piskorski, M. J. (2014). A Social Strategy. How We Profit from Social Media, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Remagnino, P., Foresti, G. L., & Ellis, T. (2005). Ambient Intelligence. A Novel Paradigm, Boston: Springer.Google Scholar
Rheingold, H. (1992). Virtual Reality. The Revolutionary Technology-Generated Artificial World and How It Promises to Transform Society, New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Richards, Riley (2016), ‘Exploration of relational factors and the likelihood of a sexual robotic experience’, in Cheok, A., Devlin, K. and Levy, D. (eds), Love and Sex with Robots. Second International Conference, LSR 2016, London, UK, December 19–20, 2016. Revised Selected Papers, Cham: Springer, pp. 97–103.Google Scholar
Rosa, H. (2015). Social Acceleration: A New Theory of Modernity, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenkrantz, L. (2003). Telegram! Modern History as Told Through More than 400 Witty, Poignant, and Revealing Telegrams, New York: H. Holt.Google Scholar
Sandvick, W. J., Hughes, J. W. & Atkinson, D. A. (1998). Method and device for interactive virtual control of sexual aids using digital computer networks. Google Patents. https://patents.google.com/patent/US6368268B1/en.Google Scholar
Sharabi, L. L. & Dykstra-DeVette, T. A. (2019). From first email to first date. Strategies for initiating relationships in online dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(11–12): 3389–3407, DOI: 10.1177/0265407518822780.Google Scholar
Shaun, B. (2019). Liquid love: Zygmunt Bauman’s thesis on sex revisited. Sexualities, 22(7–8), 1094–1109.Google Scholar
Shaviro, S. (2014). The Universe of Things. On Speculative Realism, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Shopin, P. (2017). Algorithms we love by. Artificial intelligence may offer a playful way out of our stale thinking on romance. Institute of Art and Idea Magazine 71 (February 27), https://iai.tv/articles/algorithms-we-love-by-auid-1216.Google Scholar
Simon, W. & Gagnon, J. H. (1986). Sexual scripts: Permanence and change. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 15: 97–120.Google Scholar
Sone, Y. (2014). Canted desire. Otaku performance in Japanese popular culture. Cultural Studies Review, 20: 196–222.Google Scholar
Sorokin, P. (1982). The Ways and Power of Love. Types, Factors, and Techniques or Moral Transformation, Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press.Google Scholar
Stenslie, S. (2014). Cybersex. In Grimshaw, M., ed., The Oxford Handbook to Virtuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 303–322.Google Scholar
Stevens, J. (1979). Music and Poetry in the Early Tudor Court, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Stone, Y. (2014). Canted Desire. Otaku Performance in Japanese Popular Culture. Cultural Studies Review, 20(2): 196–222.Google Scholar
Storey, J. & McDonald, K. (2014). Love’s best habit. The uses of media in romantic relationships. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 17(2): 113–125.Google Scholar
Strengers, Y. & Kennedy, J. (2020). The Smart Wife. Why Siri, Alexa, and Other Smart Home Devices Need a Feminist Reboot, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Strupp, H. H. (1955). An objective comparison of Rogerian and psychoanalytic techniques. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 19(1): 1–7.Google Scholar
Szczuka, Jessica M. and Kramer, Nicole C. (2016), ‘Influences on the intention to buy a sex robot: An empirical study on influences of personality traits and personal characteristics on the intention to buy a sex robot’, in Cheok, A., Devlin, K, and Levy, D. (eds), Love and Sex with Robots. Second International Conference, LSR 2016, London, UK, December 19–20, 2016. Revised Selected Papers, Cham: Springer, pp. 72–83.Google Scholar
Thompson, J.B. (1995). Media and Modernity: A Social Theory of the Media, Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Thylstrup, N. B. & Veel, K. (2018). Geolocating the stranger: the mapping of uncertainty as a configuration of matching and warranting techniques in dating apps. Journal of Aesthetics and Culture, 10(3): 43–52.Google Scholar
Tokunaga, R. S. (2011). Social networking site or social surveillance site? Understanding the use of interpersonal electronic surveillance in romantic relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 27: 705–713.Google Scholar
Toma, C. L. (2018). Connection, conflict, and communication technologies. How romantic couples use the media for relationship management. In Papacharissi, Z., ed., A Networked Self and Love, New York: Routledge. [Kindle.]Google Scholar
Turkle, S. (2011). Alone Together. Why We Expect More from Technology Than from Each Other, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Urry, J. (2008). Speeding up and slowing down. In Rosa, H. & Sheureman, W. E., eds., High Speed Society. Social Acceleration, Power and Modernity, University Park: Penn State University Press, pp. 179–200.Google Scholar
Weizenbaum, J. (2021). ELIZA – A computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and Machine (1960). In Lewis, Harry R., ed., Ideas That Created the Future, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 271–288.Google Scholar
Woolley, B. (1992). Virtual Worlds. A Journey in Hype and Hyperreality, London: Penguin.Google Scholar
World Video Game Hall of Fame (2018). A History of Video Games in 64 Objects, Dey Street Books [Kindle.]Google Scholar
Van Ouytsel, J., Walrave, M., Ponnet, K., Willems, A-S. & Van Dam, M. (2019). Adolescents’ perception of digital media’s potential to elicit jealousy, conflict and monitoring within romantic relationships. Cyberpsychology. Journal of Psychological Research on Cyberspace, 13(3): article 3.Google Scholar
Youyou, W., Stillwell, D. H., Schwartz, A. & Kosinski, M. (2017). Birds of the feather do flock together: Behaviour-based personality-assessment method reveals personality similarity among couples and friends. Psychological Science, 28(3): 276–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7
- Cited by