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 the Are We Dating The Same Guy? Facebook groups. Open only to women who must pass vetting checks to be admitted, they are designed to share information about men they’re dating.  Now, new platforms like The Tea — an app where women can anonymously post and search reviews of men, verify identities with photo checks, and even run background searches — are turning dating whisper networks into something slicker, more searchable, and more permanent.

The Tea has exploded in popularity, climbing to the very 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 the recent news that the app has been removed by Apple from the App Store in all markets.

These groups are pitched as a form of protection, where women can warn other women about toxic or dangerous behaviour, or used to post warnings about men they’re dating. Women upload pictures of men they’re seeing and ask: “Anyone else dating him?” The comments flood in, sometimes revealing patterns of cheating or even serious crimes. Other times, the complaints touch more on poor dating etiquette, such as “he never texts back.”

Scrolling on social media, it’s not uncommon to see screenshots of dating app message exchanges or TikTokkers live-vlogging their love lives. Dating has moved out of the private realm, becoming more akin to a public trial. 

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

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

The case for

Lalalaletmeexplain, a relationships educator who’s spent years on the frontline of dating discourse, says the groups were built out of necessity. “They were intended to be safe spaces built around sisterhood and solidarity. They exist to stop men from hurting women,” she explains. “And in many ways, that’s exactly what they are.”

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

The groups are tightly moderated. Entry requires vetting, rules forbid screenshots of anything you see in the group, and members who breach confidentiality are banned. That structure creates a sense of safety, particularly for women who have been through painful dating experiences. It also fosters community. “You’ll see women giving each other incredible advice,” says Lalala. “They can remind women who feel unworthy for being single that actually, there’s nothing wrong with them. Sometimes these groups even make women feel happier to be single.”

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

Men’s dating coach David Chambers sees that appeal. “We’ve lost the sense of close-knit community where you could vet people,” he says. “In the past you’d meet through friends, work, or at church. Someone could vouch for them. That’s mostly gone now. Everyone’s a stranger.” From his perspective, the justification behind these groups — protecting women — is completely valid. “Poor behaviour by men is a big part of why these groups exist. Anything that’s a good idea will be open to misuse as it grows, but for the most part, they serve a purpose.”

The case against

But noble intent doesn’t mean no collateral damage.

These groups aren’t moderated by trained professionals. A man might be labelled a “red flag” because he took too long to reply to a text or didn’t want a second date. Lalala says she’s seen “awful advice” and “unhinged questions” get posted. “People aren’t always consistent. Should this really be about minor quirks, or about serious red flags?”  Lalala adds: “One woman’s long-term ex was posted with comments about him being patronising. That wasn’t her truth. But it became the narrative.”

She’s also noticed racist and fetishising language, homophobia, and misogyny in some groups. “I’ve seen Black men discussed in really objectifying ways,” she says. And while the goal is safety, sometimes the effect is the opposite. 

Posts 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’ve seen men falsely accused of being married, or of serious crimes,” says Lalala. Conflating poor dating etiquette with abusive behaviour could prove devastating when reputations are at stake. Media lawyer Mark Stephens says, “If someone is identifiable, posts could be defamatory. I’ve seen wealthy men use libel laws to silence allegations, even when they may be true. But for ordinary people, defending yourself is expensive. If false claims spread, the damage is done before you can fight back.”

Even if a man does consider suing for libel, invasion of privacy or harassment, it’s rarely worth the cost. “The law is a blunt instrument,” says Stephens. “It’s often better to tackle these things interpersonally. But that’s not easy when the accusations are public.”

Chambers points out that people post about behaviour like ghosting or poor communication without context. “Maybe that person was going through something. Maybe they were actually a good communicator who didn’t meet that individual’s expectations. It doesn’t account for people changing or growing. We want to outsource our judgment because we don’t trust our own. But judging character is something we need to learn to do ourselves.”

He warns these spaces can even encourage paranoia. “People who are more anxious can lack trust in their own decisions, often because they’ve been hurt. They seek out others’ opinions, but that can make dating feel more unsafe than it really is.”

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

Expert testimony

So what’s the path forward?

Stephens believes we need clearer lines between criminal behaviour and what he calls “moral opprobrium” — essentially, publicly shaming people for being a bad date. “There’s a big difference between criminality, where there’s public interest in disclosure, and just bad behaviour. The impact of conflating the two is disproportionate.”

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

Even Lalala, who sees their value, thinks there need to be stronger guardrails. “If this is about sharing information about men, then the women contributing need to be vetted too. And it should be about serious red flags — not just someone being a bit flaky.”

The verdict

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

I’ve behaved badly at times when I’ve dated. I’ve gone through periods in my life when dating has felt overwhelming and I’ve decided to take a step back, without communicating well. If I’d been posted in one of these groups back then, it might have looked damning. But it wouldn’t have been the full story. People are complicated. We make mistakes. 

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

And yet, I can’t 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 that. 

What worries me is what happens next. When reputations are on trial in real time, judged by a jury of strangers, subjectivity gets treated as fact. Trust between men and women feels like it’s already incredibly fragile, and the presence of these groups is only ever going to create more of a disconnect.  

We should be creating systems to protect people from genuine harm, not platforms that invite us to treat every ex or bad experience as evidence. Dating will always carry risk, but if every misstep becomes a public trial in the court of public opinion, we move from accountability into paranoia — and ultimately that means men and women will pull back from dating altogether.