The Tech Economy, Gender, and the Rise of Asocial Behavior: Are We Designing Isolation?
In a recent viral clip, an NYU professor suggested that our modern economy is designed to create a new species of asocial, asexual males — men who are too afraid to approach women in real life.
It sounds dark, even dystopian, but when you examine the intersection of technology, culture, and economics, it’s not entirely far-fetched.
Let’s unpack this — not as social critics, but as developers and designers shaping the systems people now live inside.
🚀 The Economy of Isolation
The idea that our economy rewards isolation is compelling. Consider this:
- Streaming replaces theaters.
- Online dating replaces social spaces.
- Remote work replaces offices.
- AI companions replace emotional connection.
Each shift is marketed as convenience — but what if convenience is the mechanism that slowly erodes our need for human interaction?
These systems make money by reducing friction, but friction is where human connection happens. The joke, the awkward pause, the spark. When friction disappears, so does intimacy.
🧠 Incentives and Unintended Design
Most products aren’t intentionally designed to make people lonelier. But algorithms don’t have morality — they have metrics.
They optimize for:
- Time spent (not time well spent)
- Engagement (not enrichment)
- Clicks (not connection)
In this light, the professor’s statement that “our economy is designed to produce isolation” feels less like a conspiracy and more like a reflection of the system’s incentives. It’s not that anyone sat in a boardroom and said, “Let’s make men afraid to talk to women.” It’s that the metrics we choose naturally lead there.
❤️🔥 Politics, Class, and What We Seek in Partners
Add politics and class into the equation, and relationships become even more stratified.
- Political polarization shapes dating preferences.
- Class divides determine access to spaces where people meet.
- Algorithms feed us people who agree with us, reinforcing ideological bubbles.
When you combine those forces with the digital-first economy, you get a world where emotional compatibility is reduced to data points — and human connection becomes optional, even replaceable.
💡 The Developer’s Dilemma
As builders, we need to ask:
What are we really designing for?
Human-centric design sounds noble, but in practice, it often means profit-centric design with a friendly face.
We claim to make tech more appealing to users, but “appealing” often translates to “addictive.” We’re told to optimize retention, not reflection; engagement, not empathy.
🌍 Rethinking Human-Centric Design
We often talk about human-centric design as making technology more appealing to users — smoother interfaces, stickier engagement, frictionless flows.
But “human-centric” too often means profit-centric: design that maximizes clicks, minutes, and dollars, not meaning, well-being, or connection.
True human-centric design isn’t about making tech irresistible.
It’s about making tech responsible — understanding its ripple effects on relationships, identity, and society itself.
Because if we keep optimizing for attention instead of empathy,
we’re not just designing better products —
we’re designing a lonelier world.
https://worldstar.com/videos/wshh4rxZ5Ta4owOsFk39/nyu-professor-claims-our-economy-is-designed-to-create-a-new-species-of-asocial-asexual-males-who-are-too-afraid-to-talk-to-women-in-real-life
Written by Brian Kim — developer, builder, and thinker exploring the crossroads of technology, behavior, and humanity.
Top comments (0)