Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 740 posts

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#531

Post by Nav_Panel »

roosterdawn wrote: post #528
Nav_Panel wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's plenty of historical documentation from pretty much any point in American history that supports the following claim: many Americans once took their local communities much more seriously than they do now. Even the "IQ Shredder" concept you linked in the other branch is evidence for this, that people uproot themselves and head into the cities, where they become lonely and fail to meet a partner and have childre…

Certainly, wealth inequality is on the rise, and I think you accurately sum up some of the forces that draw folks towards the city. Cities are places of deterritorialization -- not for nothing, it seems like every city has disdain for gentrifiers, the bridge and tunnel crew, and of course the dreaded transplant. All of these of course contribute to atomization, and the IQ shredder concept seems to account for how the…

> as America has continued to grow up over the past century, it begins to grapple with how to conduct a society inside a universe which is not expanding for everyone the same way it used to

I think this is a good frame and that your post is basically right, but I'm more of the opinion that it's not so much a lack of land itself but a lack of economic opportunity outside of cities that led to this condition.

> does that combine with the almost sousveillance state level visibility everyone has into everyone else's life, vis a vis the only very recent ascent of the "reality show" as a dominant force of cultural production?

I definitely think the internet in general is a big force that's contributed to our lack of local community. Why talk to your neighbors when you can talk to people online, like we're doing now? :'(

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#532

Post by bobthepanda »

mmsimanga wrote: post #184
bobthepanda wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a young person, I just open doors for everyone, because it's a nice thing to do. There's no reason to restrict nice things to people based on gender and it can be viewed as patronizing to do so.

Ah but my question was specific to ladies. You didn't have enough information from my answer to conclude I only open the door for ladies. I open doors for men too.

Why does the question have to be specific to ladies? The answer isn't.

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#533

Post by troughway »

michaelmrose wrote: post #495
troughway wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Maybe tinder isn't reality and many in fact most people meet each other outside of tinder. 78% of women aren't actually chasing the top 20% of men and are in fact available to meet outside of hook ups on tinder. No, Tinder is reality. It's naive to believe that just because it's a platform that facilitates communication and hookup that it's somehow disconnected from reality in it's own little microcosm or niche. All…

The author of the game calls it "a book about scared men who were afraid of women." He also says he himself at the time of writing suffered from mental illness. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/oct/10/neil-st...

>"a book about scared men who were afraid of women."

Sounds about right actually. That's part of the reason why we are in this situation, and part of where the resentment comes from.

Rejection is harsh for (almost) everyone to deal with. It's much easier to stay at home, play video games, masturbate, and blame your lack of on why you are sexless.

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#534

Post by bobthepanda »

corpMaverick wrote: post #170
bobthepanda wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it can be viewed as patronizing.

You are correct. But many men were educated like that. Because that is what a gentleman does. Same way we were taught to open the door to an older (not old) person as a sign of respect.

Things change. A sizable portion of people do not like this anymore. Why not just change to accommodate peoples' wishes rather than be a stick in the mud?

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#535

Post by deathgrips »

codezero wrote: post #457
tharne wrote: post #12

They buried the lede here. > Sexual activity was largely unchanged among unmarried women, along with no notable decline among gay men, researchers reported. Basically sex is following the pattern of wealth. Men as a group aren't having less sex, instead there's a winner take all effect where a small number of men are having a lot of sex with a lot of women while a large number of men are having little to no sex. It'l…

I just want to point out how so many of the responses to this thread (and the thread itself) are much more a lament of "others are doing X and I am not" - and jumping to conclusions as to why that might be. I also want to add that so much going on here is based on really thin anecdata about how other people are fucking on tinder and you aren't. I don't see many people here talking about how they engaged in intentiona…

>You aren't owed a significant other, or sex. Nobody is.

It's so interesting how whenever any man talks about romantic problems he is met with this feminist mantra "you aren't owed sex". Do you honestly think that's what we're talking about? If someone talked about how much it sucks that they don't have car and need to walk to work would you tell them "you aren't owed a car"?

I think people regurgitate this phrase because we can't ever acknowledge that sexual empowerment results in peoples needs not being met. It must be their fault, they must be sabotaging somehow. They must be sexists.

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#536

Post by koonsolo »

geodel wrote: post #449
tarsinge wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s only my anecdotal experience but part of the reason for me is that a lot of men are not even trying (edit: anymore) and simply more or less consciously gave up. In my days even as a nerd I tried to fit in, go to parties, bars, tried to hang with popular guys, or just do interesting thing (my hack was playing in a band, but doing art or skateboard, was ok too, you see the point). Nowadays I feel like you either h…

I think it is quite reasonable approach that these men are taking. I'd think of myself in that category. With society going in direction where social norms are evolving faster than many have mental bandwidth to deal with, it would be wise to just save time, money and energy to acquire that fake attractiveness. May be men have also taken cue from pop song 'You are beautiful just the way you are...'

My wife works with both men and women to fix their problems with finding a good relationship, and what you describe is the most common way of thinking among those men.

Most of them are too stubborn to deviate from "they just have to accept me the way I am".

Seriously, getting a nice haircut, dressing nicely, grooming yourself and smelling good has nothing to do with your personality.

In this sense, men have it way easier than women, because men can influence their chances significantly without much effort. And that doesn't mean "fake", it means presenting yourself.

It's pretty simple basically, if you want a woman to pick you, you have to offer her something. And the same will be true for the women, who you will expect to offer you something.

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#537

Post by [deleted] »

ravenstine wrote: post #295
krapp wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Someone" didn't give the name a bad rep, and I'm not the one changing its definition. The entire incel movement changed the definition by giving itself a bad rep. If you want to take 'incel' back and try to reclaim its neutrality and separate it from the toxicity of the culture, you'll have as much luck as someone trying to claim the alt-right movement isn't really about racism, even though racists have been all ove…

"Incel" isn't a movement.

[deleted]

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#538

Post by deathgrips »

electricviolet wrote: post #298
Mizza wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incels call this "hypergamy": https://incels.wiki/images/thumb/c/c8/C57f84720fff59cf295616... Although misogynistic incels are obviously abhorrent, I believe that they're probably right in their assessment of their own social status. It just seems like rather than trying to better themselves, they turn it into outward hatred. I've also seen calls by right-wing thought leaders for "enforced monogamy," which obviously…

Have you considered that those who prefer monogamy and those who prefer sleeping around / being a "slut" simply have different personalities? Just because your monogamous friends are happy and fulfilled doesn't mean your slutty friends would be happy if they lived the same way. Humans are varied.

>Just because your monogamous friends are happy and fulfilled doesn't mean your slutty friends would be happy if they lived the same way.

This isn't backed up by research which seems to suggest that the more sexual partners you have, the worse your relationships are in practically every dimension.

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#539

Post by throawaythe90s »

ponker wrote: post #139
Mizza wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incels call this "hypergamy": https://incels.wiki/images/thumb/c/c8/C57f84720fff59cf295616... Although misogynistic incels are obviously abhorrent, I believe that they're probably right in their assessment of their own social status. It just seems like rather than trying to better themselves, they turn it into outward hatred. I've also seen calls by right-wing thought leaders for "enforced monogamy," which obviously…

If sex and wealth are both things that are desired by people and unequally distributed, then “sex redistribution” will likely becomes a political concept the way that wealth redistribution is today.

It's really not that crazy of a concept, and it was attempted by Solon:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solon#Solon_and_Athenian_sexua...

> Solon established publicly funded brothels at Athens in order to "democratize" the availability of sexual pleasure.

Whether fact or ficion, this discussion has been going on a long time.

Re: Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows

#540

Post by poulsbohemian »

tharne wrote: post #12

They buried the lede here. > Sexual activity was largely unchanged among unmarried women, along with no notable decline among gay men, researchers reported. Basically sex is following the pattern of wealth. Men as a group aren't having less sex, instead there's a winner take all effect where a small number of men are having a lot of sex with a lot of women while a large number of men are having little to no sex. It'l…

>Basically sex is following the pattern of wealth. Men as a group aren't having less sex, instead there's a winner take all effect where a small number of men are having a lot of sex with a lot of women while a large number of men are having little to no sex.

Might I offer an observation? As women have become the greater number of degree achievers and have entered the work force in greater numbers, combined with the availability of birth control, they simply have greater agency than in the past and thus can be ever more selective. So this statement on wealth cuts both ways for men and women.

Secondly, ask any single female friend about their dating experiences. It's very clear there are many men who really have no idea how to interact with women in the context of a health, adult relationship.

Post reply on HN