The rise of hookup culture in contemporary America appears to be closely bound up with the rise of freedom as an ultimate value.1 In my essays on cultural existentialism, I have attempted to show the centrality that this “ultimate value” has come to occupy today–as witnessed by the view of the self as “unencumbered”–as well as its interconnectedness to what I have called preference satisfaction.2 The phenomenon of hookup culture as a contemporary subculture, especially among the demographic of young adults, is a poignant example of this.3 Hookup culture itself is an instance of a broader set of changes involving relationships, which I will not attempt to address here. For the time being, I offer the following brief and preliminary thoughts.
Let me start by saying a few things about the idea of freedom, which undergirds this phenomenon. Again, following Robert Bellah, freedom in America is largely understood as “being left alone by others, not having other people’s values, ideas, or styles of life forced upon one, being free of arbitrary authority in work, family, and political life.”4 One important upshot of this is that “if the entire social world is made up of individuals, each endowed with the right to be free of others’ demands, it becomes hard to forge bonds of attachment to, or cooperation with, other people, since such bonds would imply obligations that necessarily impinge on one’s freedom.”5 That is, when we commit ourselves to others–whether in the traditional case of family, in personal friendships, or in romantic relationships–it reduces our freedom. Such relationships place restrictions on us, we can no longer do whatever we want; our commitment to others comes with certain duties and responsibilities.
Enter the phenomenon of hookup culture.6 By “hookup culture” I refer to the subculture in which people who have never met or have minimal knowledge of each other, meet up and engage in sexual activity of some form. And this sexual activity is understood as free from any form of commitment or restriction.7 This was once confined largely to college campuses.8 But with the onset of advancing technologies, such as high-speed internet and smartphone apps, it has emerged as a potential everyday option for anyone with a smartphone, and has become characteristic of the life of many young adults.9 User-profiles on apps like Tinder (and this is no less true of social media in general), tend to be about portraying oneself in a certain way. Ideas of self-creation and self-definition abound, often structured (in this case) to appeal to various or idiosyncratic sexual preferences. Yet another instance of cultural existentialism on full display.10
For many generations alive today, “getting to know someone”–over the course of months, or years–is what preceded sexual activity. Traditionally, marriage, such as that recognized by the Catholic Church–the oldest continuously operating institution in the West–was held to be the exclusive domain in which sexual activity took place.11 To this day, the Catholic Church teaches that marriage is not fully valid (or binding) until it is consummated.12 Sexual contact was predominantly viewed as a kind completion; an apex or summit of spousal commitment. “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”13 Thus, what was hegemonic in the past has become, at least for many young adults today, extremely rare. This suggests a kind of “inversion” of romantic love.
The inversion embodied in hookup culture is one that the sexual act itself becomes–instead of the highest point of contact between lovers–the merely introductory point of contact. Sex is no longer the completion or apex of a relationship, but its mere prelude–often a potential prelude–as much of hookup culture is characterized by activity that does not lead to actual committed relationships.14 What was, in the past, the most intimate expression of oneself to the beloved has become a point of contact between strangers. If a relationship develops, it develops after many repeated sexual encounters.
This inversion is taken a step further when we realize that traditionally romantic love was understood to be an end in itself, and here we witness that few things today escape the clutching tentacles of instrumentality. I have spoken a lot recently about preference satisfaction, and indeed the particulars of hookup culture are a further instance of this. Here, individuals use each other as instruments of their own desire for sexual gratification. The context of commitment–what in the past constituted a basis for the sexual act–has been removed from the equation. Here a person–often a stranger–becomes an object of one’s personal search for satisfaction, unencumbered from duty or responsibility. Each reduces the other to the status of a tool, an extension of each other’s preferences, a means to an end. Love–or more appropriately a simulacrum of love–if it emerges at all, becomes a product of utility. Like happiness, love is transformed–inverted–into preference satisfaction.15
Notes:
1. This is, in fact, a peculiar understanding of freedom. At least if we consider the historical understanding of the concept, which is no small task. The question of whether or not the idea of freedom inherent in the contemporary American psyche is misplaced, is a topic I would like to address in the future.
2. See my essays, Introduction to Cultural Existentialism, Cultural Existentialism: The Absurdity of American Individualism, and Cultural Existentialism: Instances and Instrumentality.
3. Notice the term “poignant” is a metaphysically loaded one. Poignant–from what, from whose–perspective? Who says hookup culture is regrettable? Who can pass that kind of judgment on the preferences of another person? Are we not free individuals–free to live our lives as we see fit–just as long as we do not impinge on the rights of others? This more or less summarizes the modern viewpoint that holds freedom as an ultimate value. It is not my intention here to challenge this viewpoint, but simply to invoke it as a further instance of what I have been talking about. Challenges to this viewpoint will have to be postponed.
4. See Robert Bellah, et al., Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life.
5. Ibid.
6. I want to make clear that most of what I know about hookup culture has come from individual contact–that is, conversations–with young adults that claim to have engaged in hookups and related activities. Thus, my research and understanding of this subject has not (as yet) primarily been one rooted in reading and digesting a given body of literature, but rather, actual conversations with actual people. The brief reading that I have done on the subject has reinforced what I have learned from these conversations with young people.
7. Of course, this can occur between people who already know each other, but in this essay I want to focus on those that do not. My reason for this is because those who know each other possess at least a degree of commitment, in the form of at least being acquaintances, while strangers do not.
8. See Kathleen A. Bogle, Hooking Up: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus.
9. The technologies of contraception and abortion have also aided this phenomenon, in that they seek to either prevent or undo pregnancy. Thus, the absolute freedom of the individual is maintained. In the case of pregnancy, a child places limits or restrictions on the freedom of the mother, and (one can hope) father. And this, it seems, is the main argument for abortion: pregnancy will “ruin the life” of a young girl. That is, it will greatly limit her freedom. The underlying logic of this is that a life characterized by commitments, restrictions, obligations–duties–is not a life worth living. This is mirrored in the fact that many doctors recommend abortions to parents of unborn children diagnosed with special needs. The plausibility of all of this lies in the idea of freedom as a metaphysical absolute.
10. For a better understanding of what I mean by cultural existentialism, see my essays: Introduction to Cultural Existentialism, Cultural Existentialism: The Absurdity of American Individualism, and Cultural Existentialism: Instances and Instrumentality.
11. Obviously this was an ideal, and not always a reality. Nor was this view limited to Catholics, but was adopted by Protestant denominations as well.
12. See, for example, The Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1640.
13. See Ephesians 5:31.
14. Some people appear to engage in hookups as a way to eventually enter into a committed relationship. Others appear to have no intention of doing so, and view it largely as a game of unrestricted sexual gratification.
15. See my essay, Happiness: A Brief Contrast.