Predatory Behavior on Dating Apps: How Narcissistic Traits Drive Exploitation — And How Bystanders Become Part of the Problem

Financial Predatory Behavior of Dating AppsThe rise of dating apps has transformed the landscape of modern romance, but it has also introduced various financial predatory behaviors that can lead to significant financial strain for users. Below are some key aspects of this issue:1. Subscription ModelsMany dating apps operate on a subscription model, where users are encouraged to pay for premium features. These features often promise better matches, increased visibility, or enhanced communication tools, which can create a sense of urgency and dependency.2. In-App PurchasesIn addition to subscriptions, dating apps frequently offer in-app purchases for features like boosts, super likes, or the ability to see who liked you. This can lead to users spending more than they initially intended, contributing to financial strain.3. Emotional ManipulationSome dating apps employ tactics that exploit users’ emotional vulnerabilities. For example, they may highlight the success stories of couples who met through the app, creating a fear of missing out (FOMO) that drives users to spend more money in hopes of finding love.4. Hidden FeesUsers may encounter hidden fees that are not clearly disclosed upfront. This lack of transparency can lead to unexpected charges, further exacerbating financial difficulties for individuals already struggling.5. Data Privacy ConcernsMany dating apps collect personal data that can be sold to third parties. This can lead to targeted advertisements and offers that pressure users into spending money on unnecessary services or products.ConclusionThe contrast between the financial struggles of some users and the carefree enjoyment of others highlights a significant issue within the dating app industry. As these platforms continue to grow, it is essential for users to remain aware of the potential financial pitfalls associated with their use.

Predatory Behavior on Dating Apps: The Narcissistic Architecture of Exploitation

Dating Apps, Vulnerability, and Exploitation

Most people don’t join apps like Feeld because they want to be harmed. They join because they’re lonely, curious, rebuilding confidence, or trying to reconnect with parts of themselves that were diminished elsewhere. Many show up open—sometimes more open than is safe—because they’re seeking connection, validation, or the experience of being seen again.

That openness is not a flaw.But it does create risk.

Online dating environments don’t only attract people seeking connection. They also attract individuals who are skilled at identifying vulnerability and exploiting it.

This isn’t speculation. It’s a pattern documented repeatedly in psychological and criminological research.

Dating Apps as High-Risk Environments

Dating apps create conditions that lower friction and accountability: anonymity, rapid emotional escalation, sexual availability, and minimal oversight. Research on technology-facilitated sexual harm shows that these environments can amplify coercion, manipulation, and emotional exploitation—particularly for individuals with prior trauma or insecure attachment patterns (Filice et al., 2022).

Studies examining dark personality traits—including narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism—consistently find that individuals higher in these traits are more likely to exploit online spaces for manipulation, sexual coercion, or emotional control (Gunnoo et al., 2025).

These platforms do not create exploitative behavior.They enable it.

Investigations into app security and privacy have also raised concerns. Public reporting has shown that data exposure, anonymity, and poor safeguards can increase vulnerability to sextortion, emotional leverage, and misuse of intimate information (The Guardian, 2024; Fortbridge, 2024). Advocacy organizations have documented that LGBTQ+ users and trauma-exposed individuals are disproportionately targeted in these environments (AARP, 2021; Australian Institute of Criminology, 2024).

The risk is environmental, not moral.

Behavioral Patterns Associated With Exploitation

What follows are documented behavioral patterns, not diagnoses or accusations. Individually, some of these behaviors can appear in ordinary dating. When clustered and repeated, they correlate strongly with harm.

1. Objectification Over Connection

Individuals high in narcissistic traits are more likely to view partners as sources of validation or ego reinforcement rather than as autonomous people (Campbell & Miller, 2011).

2. Targeting Emotional Vulnerability

Research describes selective vulnerability exploitation: actively pursuing individuals who display insecurity, trauma history, or anxious attachment because they are more predictable and easier to influence (Gunnoo et al., 2025).

3. Rapid Intimacy Followed by Withdrawal

Intense attention, emotional flooding, and sexual escalation followed by abrupt distancing creates intermittent reinforcement—a mechanism strongly associated with trauma bonding (Filice et al., 2022).

4. Eroticized Power Dynamics

Sex becomes leverage rather than intimacy. Studies link narcissistic traits with sexually coercive behavior and control strategies (Widman & McNulty, 2010).

5. Low Accountability, High Replaceability

Online environments allow continuous partner turnover. Social anonymity and disposability reduce consequences, enabling repeated cycles of harm (University of Edinburgh, 2025).

The Human Impact

Exploitation doesn’t just cause emotional distress. It can destabilize psychological functioning in lasting ways:

• Trauma Reactivation – Old attachment wounds are triggered, producing panic, shame, dissociation, or hypervigilance.

• Neurochemical Dysregulation – Cycles of attention and withdrawal activate dopamine and cortisol pathways similar to addiction, reinforcing attachment to harmful dynamics.

• Identity Erosion – Individuals begin doubting their judgment, boundaries, and worth.

• Regression of Progress – A single exploitative experience can undo years of therapeutic work and stabilization.

The damage is not trivial.And it is often invisible from the outside.

When Silence Becomes Complicity

Exploitation rarely exists in isolation. Social environments matter.

Bystander research consistently shows that silence functions as permission. When harmful behavior goes unchallenged, it is interpreted as acceptance (Edwards et al., 2019).

Social networks also provide cover. Peer acceptance and normalization significantly increase the likelihood that exploitative behavior continues (Banyard et al., 2010).

From the perspective of those harmed, unanswered questions emerge:

• Why is this person socially protected?

• Why does no one intervene?

• Am I overreacting?

In this way, inaction can unintentionally deepen harm.

Moral disengagement research shows that people often justify silence through minimization, avoidance, or diffusion of responsibility—allowing them to remain close to harmful behavior without confronting its impact (Bandura, 1999).

Disrupting the System

Prevention does not begin with platforms alone. It begins with social accountability.

• Don’t normalize exploitative behavior.

• Don’t minimize repeated red flags.

• Don’t provide social cover for patterns that harm others.

• Don’t stay silent when silence protects harm.

Exploitative dynamics weaken when social reinforcement disappears.Accountability disrupts cycles that privacy and avoidance allow to persist.

Closing

People seeking connection are not the problem.Vulnerability is not the problem.

The problem is environments—and social systems—that allow exploitative behavior to repeat without consequence.

Naming patterns is not about moral panic or accusation.It’s about clarity, prevention, and responsibility.

Author’s Disclaimer & Professional Boundary Statement

This blog contains personal reflections and first-person accounts of my own experiences, perceptions, and emotional responses. It is not intended to assert objective facts about any specific individual, nor to diagnose, evaluate, or characterize the mental health, motives, or intent of any person.

Although I am a licensed clinician, this writing is not clinical work, therapy, assessment, or professional opinion, and no therapeutic relationship is implied. I am not acting in a professional or evaluative capacity in this forum.

Descriptions of behaviors, dynamics, or patterns are shared solely from my subjective perspective and lived experience, for reflective and educational purposes. Others may experience or interpret the same events differently.

Identifying details have been altered or omitted to protect privacy. Any resemblance to specific individuals, organizations, or circumstances is incidental and not intended to assert factual claims about any person.

References

AARP. (2021). Sextortion scams plague LGBTQ+ dating apps. AARP.

Australian Institute of Criminology. (2024). Risk factors for receiving requests to facilitate child sexual exploitation on dating apps and websites.

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193–209.

Banyard, V. L., Plante, E. G., & Moynihan, M. M. (2010). Bystander education: Bringing a broader community perspective to sexual violence prevention. Journal of Community Psychology, 38(6), 761–774.

Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. (2011). The handbook of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Theoretical approaches, empirical findings, and treatments. Wiley.

Edwards, K. M., Rodenhizer, K. A., & Eckstein, R. P. (2019). Bystander action in situations of dating and sexual aggression: A mixed methodological study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(7), 1307–1332.

Filice, E., et al. (2022). Sexual violence and abuse in online dating: A scoping review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 64, 101753.

Fortbridge. (2024). Feeld app vulnerability analysis and penetration test report.

Gunnoo, V., et al. (2025). The dark triad, dating app use, and online disinhibition in technology-facilitated sexual violence. Journal of Interpersonal Cyberbehavior, 12(1), 44–59.

The Guardian. (2024). Users of ‘throuples’ dating app Feeld may have had intimate photos accessed.

University of Edinburgh. (2025). Online dating exploitation: Vulnerabilities and offender targeting strategies.

Widman, L., & McNulty, J. K. (2010). Sexual narcissism and the perpetration of sexual aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 393–404.