The Tea app and Are We Dating The Same Guy: the new courtroom of dating

If you’ve spent more than five minutes in modern dating, you’ve probably heard whispers about Are we dating the same guy? Facebook groups. Open only to women who must pass verification checks to be admitted, they are designed to share information about the men they date. Now, new platforms like Tea — an app where women can anonymously post and search reviews of men, verify identities with photo verifications, and even perform background searches — is transforming whisper dating networks into something smoother, more searchable, and more permanent.

The tea has exploded in popularity, climbing to the top of the Apple App Store charts and reportedly amassing more than four million users. But its rapid rise has been overshadowed by controversy, including two major security breaches and recent news that the app has been removed by Apple from the App Store in all markets.

These groups are presented as a form of protection, where women can warn other women about toxic or dangerous behavior, or are used to post warnings about men they date. Women upload photos of men they’re seeing and ask, “Is anyone else dating him?” Comments pour in, sometimes revealing patterns of cheating, or even serious crimes. Other times, the complaints are more about poor dating etiquette, such as “he never talks back.”

While browsing social media, it is not uncommon to see screenshots of message exchanges with dating apps or TikTokers are live blogging about their love lives. The meetings have left the private domain and are more akin to a public trial.

I can’t help but wonder: are these platforms making dating safer, or are they just making us more wary?

So, let’s take the matter to court (figuratively, not literally).

The case for

Lalala let me explaina relationships educator who spent years on the front lines of the dating discourse says the groups were created out of necessity. “They were supposed to be safe spaces built around sisterhood and solidarity. They exist to prevent men from harming women,” she explains. “And in many ways, that’s exactly what they are.”

She’s seen posts revealing men who were secretly engaged while dating multiple other women, men accused of sexual assault, and even a man caught trying to hook up with a 15-year-old. “These groups really protected people,” she says. “They saved women from fraud, abuse and men who could have seriously harmed them.”

The groups are closely moderated. Entry requires screening, rules prohibit screenshots of anything you see in the group, and members who violate privacy are banned. This structure creates a feeling of security, especially for women who have had painful romantic experiences. It also promotes community. “You’ll see women giving each other amazing advice,” says Lalala. “They can remind women who feel unworthy of being single that, in reality, there is nothing wrong with them. Sometimes these groups even make women happier about being single.”

And in their simplest form, they save time. Instead of spending months determining if someone is trustworthy, you can post a man’s photo and find out within hours if six other women are also dating him. In a world where dating often feels like a chore, this speed can be reassuring.

Dating coach for men David Chambers sees this call. “We lost the sense of a tight-knit community where you could control people,” he says. “In the past, you met through friends, at work or at church. Someone could vouch for them. That’s pretty much gone now. Everyone is a stranger.” From her point of view, the justification for these groups – to protect women – is entirely valid. “Male bad behavior is a big part of why these groups exist. Anything that’s a good idea is going to be susceptible to misuse as it grows, but for the most part they serve a purpose.”

The case against

But noble intent doesn’t mean there isn’t collateral damage.

These groups are not moderated by qualified professionals. A man may be called a “red flag” because he took too long to respond to a text or didn’t want a second date. Lalala says she’s seen “horrible advice” and “unbalanced questions” being posted. “People aren’t always consistent. Should this really be due to minor quirks or serious red flags?” Lalala adds: “A woman’s long-term ex posted with comments portraying him as condescending. That wasn’t his truth. But it became the narrative.”

She also noticed racist and fetishistic remarks, homophobia and misogyny in certain groups. “I’ve seen black men discussed in a really objectifying way,” she says. And even if the goal is safety, sometimes the effect is the opposite.

Messages are subjective by design. They rely on the feelings and interpretations of the woman posting them, and people can be messy, emotional, or vengeful. “I have seen men falsely accused of being married or of serious crimes,” says Lalala. Confusing bad dating etiquette with abusive behavior could prove devastating when reputation is at stake. Media lawyer Mark Stephens says: “If someone is identifiable, the messages can be defamatory. I’ve seen rich men use defamation laws to silence allegations, even when they may be true. But for ordinary people, defending themselves is expensive. If false allegations spread, the damage is done before you can fight back.”

Even if a man considers suing for defamation, invasion of privacy, or harassment, it is rarely worth the price. “The law is a brutal instrument,” Stephens says. “It’s often best to approach these issues interpersonally. But it’s not easy when the accusations are public.”

Chambers points out that people post about behaviors like ghosting or poor communication without context. “Maybe this person was going through something. Maybe they were actually a good communicator who wasn’t living up to their expectations. This ignores the fact that people change or grow. We want to outsource our judgment because we don’t trust our own. But judging character is something we have to learn to do for ourselves.”

He warns that these spaces can even encourage paranoia. “More anxious people may lack confidence in their own decisions, often because they’ve been hurt. They seek out other people’s opinions, but this can make dating seem more dangerous than it really was.”

So while these groups aim to protect women, they can also breed fear, misinformation, and mistrust.

Expert testimony

So what is the way forward?

Stephens thinks we need a clearer distinction between criminal behavior and what he calls “moral opprobrium” — essentially, publicly shaming people for being a bad date. “There is a big difference between criminality, where there is a public interest in disclosure, and simple bad behavior. The impact of confusing the two is disproportionate.”

Chambers agrees. “If I were dating, I wouldn’t be afraid of being posted, I believe I behave with integrity,” he says. “But I could still be misrepresented. These platforms don’t take growth or context into account. They vilify people in the worst version of someone else’s story.”

Even Lalala, who sees their value, thinks stronger safeguards are needed. “If it’s about sharing information about men, then women contributing should also be vetted. And these should be serious red flags – not just from someone who’s a little flaky.”

The judgment

As a man, it’s hard not to feel conflicted by all of this.

I sometimes behaved badly when I was dating someone. I went through periods in my life where dating seemed overwhelming and I decided to take a step back, without communicating well. If I had been assigned to one of these groups at the time, it might have seemed overwhelming. But that wouldn’t have been the full story. People are complicated. We make mistakes.

I’ve heard stories of women disclosing medical details in these groups, highlighting the fact that the person they are dating has an STI like Chlamydia, the sharing of which is deeply unethical.

And yet, I cannot ignore that these groups exist because men cause real harm. Men can (and do) cheat, lie, assault, and manipulate. Women deserve to protect themselves from it.

What worries me is what happens next. When reputations are put to the test in real time, judged by a jury of strangers, subjectivity is treated as fact. Trust between men and women already seems incredibly fragile, and the presence of these groups will only create more of a divide.

We should create systems to protect people from real harm, not platforms that invite us to treat every ex or bad experience as evidence. Dating will always carry risks, but if every misstep becomes a public trial in the court of public opinion, we move from blame to paranoia — and ultimately, that means men and women will withdraw from dating altogether.