Love & AI Algorithms in the World of Jane Austen

WOULD AI MAKE A GOOD MATCHMAKER?

Jane Austen, Neurodiversity & the Limits of the Algorithm

Jane Austen’s romantic tales have captivated generations—with countless adaptations exploring her finely tuned understanding of human nature. As Valentine’s Day approaches, I want to explore her work through a modern, neurodivergent lens, combining my love of literature, inclusion, and my fascination with AI.

Like today’s dating apps, Austen’s worlds are filled with social codes, assumptions, and judgments. But what happens when we introduce neurodiversity into this landscape? And what can it teach us about the strengths—and limitations—of algorithmic matchmaking?

COURTSHIP AS A HUMAN ALGORITHM

In Austen’s time, courtship followed a highly structured logic—almost algorithmic. Romantic decisions were often made using visible markers: class, income, family connections. In Pride and Prejudice, Lady Catherine de Bourgh attempts to engineer a “perfect match” for Mr. Darcy based on these surface-level criteria.

Modern dating apps, driven by AI, do much the same—pairing people by quantifiable inputs. But what if your values, communication style, or neurotype don’t fit the default model? Neurodivergent individuals, who may experience love, trust, and connection differently, often find themselves misunderstood by both society—and its algorithms.

EMMA WOODHOUSE: A 19TH CENTURY DATING APP?

In Emma, the titular character tries to curate romantic matches based on her internal “logic”—only to find her assumptions are flawed. This mirrors AI systems that rely on pattern recognition but miss the human nuance.

Neurodivergent people—whether autistic, ADHDers, or dyslexic—may not always follow social scripts. Like Emma, AI often misinterprets what matters most. Love isn’t linear. It doesn’t always match the expected formula—and that’s where both Emma and AI get it wrong.

WHEN SWIPING MISSES THE POINT

Today’s swipe culture replicates the rigid filtering of Regency-era society. First impressions dominate, and if you don’t “present” in a way the algorithm expects—your match might be swiped away before they’ve had the chance to see who you really are.

Neurodivergent individuals often communicate or connect differently, and this can be misread by both humans and machines. But Austen reminds us that love grows through depth and shared transformation—as in Persuasion, where Anne Elliot reconnects with Captain Wentworth after years apart. Human connection needs time and space to unfold—not just clicks and stats.

WHY NEURODIVERSITY MATTERS IN AI LOVE STORIES

Algorithms often fail to account for the beauty of cognitive difference. Emotional intelligence, humour, spontaneity—these aren’t easily measurable. But they’re vital in relationships.

Neurodivergent minds bring unique perspectives to communication, empathy, creativity, and loyalty. Just as Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth grow by learning from their misjudgments, AI must learn to grow from its own biases—and we must design systems that are flexible enough to include diverse ways of loving and connecting.

WOULD JANE AUSTEN USE A DATING APP?

She might be intrigued by the mechanics. She might even admire the data—but she would almost certainly mock our overreliance on formulae. She would see the irony of letting a machine make our most emotional decisions.

And if she met a neurodivergent character today? She’d probably write them as the misunderstood protagonist—the one who sees love more clearly than the crowd.

CONCLUSION: LOVE DEFIES THE CODE

Austen and AI both seek to optimise love. But Austen’s message is timeless: love thrives in the unmeasurable. It grows in the places algorithms don’t reach. For neurodivergent individuals—and really, for all of us—this is a powerful reminder: our value isn’t in how we fit a pattern, but in how we surprise it.

In the end, love isn’t a code to crack. It’s a story to live—unexpected, inclusive, and deeply human.