Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Language and Sexuality
Vol. 14:2 (2025) ► pp.149–177

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Flirting with categories

Pursuing intimacy by invoking and negotiating gendered sexual scripts

ORCiD logo with link | University of Southern DenmarkOdense, Denmark
Published online: 18 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.24020.and
Abstract
This study explores flirting practices in Danish Tinder chats, focusing on how users employ social categories to pursue intimacy. Drawing on membership categorization analysis and the small story paradigm, and engaging with sexual script theory, it is demonstrated how participants invoke and negotiate standardized relational pairs (SRPs) to playfully position themselves and their potential partners. The research reveals that users creatively deploy asymmetrical SRPs, such as prince-princess, doctor-patient or serviceperson-hotel guest, as metaphorical devices to introduce and explore romantic or sexual scenarios. These practices allow users to navigate the challenges of self-presentation and relationship-building in online dating contexts, balancing humor, creativity, and sexual innuendo. The study demonstrates how participants simultaneously reproduce and challenge traditional gender roles and sexual scripts through their interactions. By examining these micro-level linguistic practices, we gain insight into the broader sociocultural norms and expectations surrounding online dating and intimate relationships in a Danish context.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Flirting is allusion
  • 3.Social functions of sexual scripts
  • 4.Stories as collaborative accomplishments: Projecting activities
  • 5.Membership categorization analysis: Analyzing categorical work in interaction
  • 6.Data
  • 7.Projecting a potential future meeting by invoking gendered scripts
    • 7.1Romanticizing the hypothetical relationship
    • 7.2Want to play doctor? Playing with sexual scripts
  • 8.Doing self-presentation and flirtatious relationship building by shifting domains
    • 8.1Negotiating gender roles: Who delivers the sheets?
    • 8.2Testing the waters: Make some kind of impression
    • 8.3Humoristically metacommenting using visual representations
  • 9.Discussion and conclusion
  • References
References (53)
References
. 2025. So fast on the keys, when do you have time to meet: Interactionally generated invitations in Danish Tinder chats. Discourse, Context & Media 641: Article 100849. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, Carolyn D. 2000. Locating culture in action: Membership categorisation in texts and talk. In Culture and Text: Discourse and Methodology in Social Research and Cultural Studies, Alison Lee & Cate Poynton (eds), 99–113. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bamberg, Michael G. 1997. Positioning between structure and performance. Journal of Narrative and Life History 7(1–4): 335–342. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bamberg, Michael G. & Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2008. Small stories as a new perspective in narrative and identity analysis. Text & Talk 28(3): 377–396. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, Melissa A. 2005. Innocent flirting or sexual harassment? Perceptions of ambiguous work-place situations. Representative Research in Social Psychology 28(1): 47–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Rijk, Lynn & Stommel, Wyke. 2023. Where to start? Initiating post-match chat conversation on Tinder. In Conversation Analytic Perspectives to Digital Interaction: Practices, Resources, and Affordances, Heidi Vepsäläinen, Mikko T. Virtanen & Aino Loviisa Koivisto (eds), 127–147. London: Publishing House of the Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feinberg, Linda Sones. 1996. Teasing: Innocent Fun or Sadistic Malice? Far Hills, NJ: New Horizon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frisby, Brandi N. 2009. “Without flirting, it wouldn’t be a aarriage”: Flirtatious communication between relational partners. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication 10(1): 55–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frith, Hannah & Kitzinger, Celia. 2001. Reformulating sexual script theory: Developing a discursive psychology of sexual negotiation. Theory & Psychology 11(2): 209–232. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Georgakopoulou, Alexandra. 2007. Small Stories, Interaction and Identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, William & Roca-Cuberes, Carles. 2019. Constructing blame for school exclusion in an online comments forum: Membership categorisation analysis and endogenous category work. Discourse, Context & Media 321: Article 100331. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henningsen, David Dryden. 2004. Flirting with meaning: An examination of miscommunication in flirting interactions. Sex Roles 501: 481–489. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hester, Stephen & Eglin, Peter. 1997. Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Washington, DC: University Press of America.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hester, Steven & Hester, Sally. 2012. Category relations, omnirelevance, and children’s disputes. In Disputes in Everyday Life: Social and Moral Orders of Children and Young People, Susan Danby & Maryanne Theobald (eds), 1–25. Leeds: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Housley, William & Fitzgerald, Richard. 2009. Membership categorization, culture and norms in action. Discourse & Society 20(3): 345–362. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, Mie Birk, Herold, Maria Dich, Frank, Vibeke Asmussen & Hunt, Geoffrey. 2019. Playing with gender borders: Flirting and alcohol consumption among young adults in Denmark. Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 36(4): 357–372. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, Kristine, Vilceanu, Olguta & Pontes, Manuel C. 2016. Flirting online and the connection between the use of dating websites and dating applications. Association of Marketing Theory and Practice Proceedings 2016(5) 〈[URL]〉 (May 23, 2025).
Kaspar, Heidi & Landolt, Sara. 2016. Flirting in the field: Shifting positionalities and power relations in innocuous sexualisations of research encounters. Gender, Place & Culture 23(1): 107–119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiesling, Scott F. 2013. Flirting and ‘normative’ sexualities. Journal of Language and Sexuality 2(1): 101–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leudar, Ivan, Marsland, Victoria & Nekvapil, Jirí. 2004. On membership categorization: ‘Us’, ‘them’ and ‘doing violence’ in political discourse. Discourse & Society 15(2–3): 243–266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Licoppe, Christian. 2021. The spectre of ‘ghosting’and the sequential organization of post-match Tinder chat conversations. In Analysing Digital Interaction, Joanne Meredith, David Giles & Wyke Stommel (eds), 155–176. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lykens, James, Pilloton, Molly, Silva, Cara, Schlamm, Emma, Wilburn, Kate & Pence, Emma. 2019. Google for sexual relationships: Mixed-methods study on digital flirting and online dating among adolescent youth and young adults. JMIR Public Health and Surveillance 5(2): e10695.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meenagh, Joni. 2015. Flirting, dating, and breaking up within new media environments. Sex Education 15(5): 458–471. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mortensen, Kristine Køhler. 2017. Flirting in online dating: Giving empirical grounds to flirtatious implicitness. Discourse Studies 19(5): 581–597. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nexø, Louise Anker & Strandell, Jacob. 2020. Testing, filtering, and insinuating: Matching and attunement of emoji use patterns as non-verbal flirting in online dating. Poetics 831: Article 101477. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Page, Ruth. 2010. Re-examining narrativity: Small stories in status updates. Text and Talk 30(4): 423–444. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pinsky, Dina. 2023. Mediated risk: A qualitative exploration of students’ experiences flirting online. Sexualities 28(3): 976–993. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Psathas, George. 1999. Studying the organization in action: Membership categorization and interaction analysis. Human Studies 22(2–4): 139–162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Radley, Alan. 2003. Flirting. In Discourse, the Body, and Identity, Justine Coupland & Richard Gwin (eds), 70–86. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1972a. An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology. In Studies in Social Interaction, David N. Sudnow (ed), 31–74. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1972b. On the analyzability of stories by children. In Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, John Joseph Gumperz & Dell Hymes (eds), 325–345. New York: Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Lecture six: The MIR membership categorization device. Human Studies 12(3/4): 271–281.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. Lectures on Conversation, Volumes 1–2. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel. A. 2007. A tutorial on membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics 39(3): 462–482. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simon, William & Gagnon, John H. 1986. Sexual scripts: Permanence and change. Archives of Sexual Behavior 151: 97–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003. Sexual scripts: Origins, influences and changes. Qualitative Sociology 26(4): 491–497. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Speer, Susan A. 2012. The interactional organization of self-praise: Epistemics, preference organization, and implications for identity research. Social Psychology Quarterly 75(1): 52–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2017. Flirting: A designedly ambiguous action? Research on Language and Social Interaction 50(2): 128–150. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stokoe, Elizabeth. 2003. Mothers, single women and sluts: Gender, morality and membership categorization in neighbour disputes. Feminism & Psychology 13(3): 317–344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010a. Gender, conversation analysis, and the anatomy of membership categorization practices. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 4(7): 428–438. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010b. ‘I’m not gonna hit a lady’: Conversation analysis, membership categorization and men’s denials of violence towards women. Discourse & Society 21(1): 59–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Moving forward with membership categorization analysis: Methods for systematic analysis. Discourse Studies 14(3): 277–303. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wade, T. Joel, Fisher, Maryanne L. & Kenny, Karla. 2023. Flirting. In Encyclopedia of Sexual Psychology and Behavior, Todd K. Shackelford (ed), 1–10. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whitty, Monica T. 2003. Cyber-flirting: Playing at love on the Internet. Theory & Psychology 13(3): 339–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Cyber-flirting: An examination of men’s and women’s flirting behaviour both offline and on the Internet. Behaviour Change 21(2): 115–126. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiederman, Michael W. 2005. The gendered nature of sexual scripts. The Family Journal 13(4): 496–502. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2015. Sexual script theory: Past, present, and future. In Handbook of the Sociology of Sexualities, John DeLamater & Rebecca F. Plante (eds), 7–22. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue