So give people zinc and maca supplements. Isn't it a lot more likely to be increased access to birth control? Which people take for very good reasons, but it disrupts your hormones a lot more than plastic does. That's the point of taking it.
Which would only explain women right? Male sperm counts are down dramatically over the last 20 years.
But is their libido lower? It doesn't seem like lower sperm count necessarily even lowers the birth rate when you only need one to get there. (does it? I've never looked this up.)
I think this is why British crime dramas / police procedurals seem to feel more real (to me, raised in a post-colonial country) - very few people look like temporarily financially embarrassed models slumming it as detectives.
I don't know if this is just what they picked for BBC America, but every single British TV comedy I've ever watched has a cast of 90% white haired elderly people sitting around and being sarcastic at each other. Last of the Summer Wine, Dad's Army, Are You Being Served, etc etc. These were also the only thing my parents watched, so it was a relief when I got to watch normal people TV and saw someone in their 20s.
> Last of the Summer Wine, Dad's Army, Are You Being Served, etc etc.
Those are, depending on taste, some of the worst. And they are also old. There was a lot of good from that era, comedy and other, like fawlty towers, blake's 7 (not comedy), monty python etc. I think gp was referring to modern UK crime shows though? As in the days of dads army and are you being served, american shows also were not like in the article. Or are they showing re-runs of these shows on BBC America now?
Is this a side effect of normalizing porn, that sexuality is more effectively partitioned? I once had a debate in an online forum about legalizing prostitution, and most participants were supportive of it. Then I asked the same group, what about legalizing partial prostitution, like a receptionist that also has sex with the boss as part of the job description. The participants all immediately switched to revulsion at…
Others have explained why certain jobs are "segregated", and how sex work could plausibly fit into that category. But even if it does not, there's nothing we can learn about sex work from the reactions described above. Isn't it strange how most programmers think that specialist barista work is not demeaning, but would quit on the spot if they were instructed to serve morning coffee to the management? Oh wait, it's no…
I don't want to serve coffee... or apply application hotfixes (stuff more typically "administrators" or "ops")... but at my pay rate? I'd do it and question why I'm getting paid $$$$$ to do something that $ can do.
To me the desexualization of mainstream movies is a wonderful trend. If I want to be sexually stimulated I'll watch porn. The "sex" in older movies has no payoff. Its like if they stopped Avengers to spend ten minutes showing Tony Stark filling out insurance forms for damage to Stark Tower. Sure it's in the story but why the hell would I want to look at it?
It's a fake desexualization though. They're not showing anyone doing taxes, but they're also not showing extremely good accountants around the place or joke about the huge tax returns. That bare chest, preferably wet after the shower though, spotted by a woman across the room - obligatory.
It's in other aspects of Marvel too. I actually really enjoyed it with Thor Ragnarok when they seemed to stop pretending it's not a stupid comedy with cartoon violence flavouring. Previous ones were "No, no, we're totally serious. Ignore that half the characters are here for comedy value."
I really like this article, it has made me question a worldview I had 20 minutes ago. I love things that do that. Make me think, make me change my mind, make me learn .
I feel the same way - it kind of screwed up my brain up a bit. Most of the results of this seem obvious when you look around, but seeing this articulated so simply was a major surprise.
Part of me wants to put the blame on the female side for the reduction of sex. Mostly because girls will be slut shamed for doing anything sexual. So girls hold it back. You can't blame them for being conservative in the society we live in. Stop telling the female half of the population that they need to be innocent virgins,sex is normal. The other excuses don't really resonate with me. Roommates? We were having plen…
This makes no sense because women today are more sexually free than they have ever been. In absolute terms women are still often slut shamed, but it's still less than in the past.
That's true but there's the woke / me-too movement now. I have a "friend" that I met from Tinder during early pandemic, we only met once because of it, and then it was purely sexting exchange of pictures and so on.
Last month she started following a local me-too movement FB group that had women sharing about their past harassment experiences and calling out their aggressors, that ranged from total abuse of power, to sexual innuendos over IM.
Last couple of times we texted each other mostly consisted of her showing me past screenshots of chats where someone (from Tinder) would be sexually suggestive, nothing explicit, and would start to tell me how she didn't realize that she was being harassed and that she's being disgusted by them.
Cute article, but may I.offer a simple alternative? Movie makers want to appeal to viewership in homes where there are children, and younger audiences in general. You can't show much nudity or direct sexual themes to minors. That of course doesn't explain why the house in Poltergeist was more normal looking, but that point isn't really bolstered by too much else.
How does this explain the historical trends that are the subject of the article? Are you saying that fewer children were trying to watch TV in the 90s?
It's a drift over time. Also 90s is just the beginning of tv ratings. TV-PG was founded in late 90s and not fully enforced / known at the beginning.
The change happened over many years since the time we could get ratings only from box office numbers and the review feedback took months.
I think this is why British crime dramas / police procedurals seem to feel more real (to me, raised in a post-colonial country) - very few people look like temporarily financially embarrassed models slumming it as detectives.
Eh, kinda. Luther? Sherlock? Global sex-symbol superstars right there. The same forces at play in Hollywood are at work in London, it's just that the best-looking ones move out to California as well.
Not sure if it's a taste thing, but I don't find any single character on Sherlock to be particularly attractive, having just binged on the entirely of the show in the past two weeks.
Wanted to add this RE the shower scene in Starship Troopers: "Two nude scenes were kept in the original version (the co-ed shower and a bedroom scene with Rico and Dizzy), although these were modified in the broadcast version. The cast agreed to do the co-ed shower scene only if Verhoeven agreed to direct the scene naked, which he did. Verhoeven found it strange "Americans get more upset about nudity than ultra-viole…
> A bare breast is more difficult to get through the censors than a body riddled with bullets. I see this point a lot and I think it is a good one but I have some theories on it too. I think that violence (at least to a point) is part of our natural play instincts, think cops and robbers as a kid. We aren’t disturbed when young children mimic violence, we even see it in nature fairly ubiquitously. Animals play fight…
> We aren’t disturbed when young children mimic violence
I hope you don't mean "we" globally? There's quite a few people who do find it disturbing.
> Millennials are a more sober and serious generation for a more sober and serious time. No need to regress. I mean, the US did embark on a multi-decade war. But is our time fundamentally more serious than what the Boomers went through?
A boomer could graduate high school, get a job, buy a car, buy a house, and start saving for retirement. Younger generations have to work 10X as hard for a chance at that kind of middle class lifestyle. When it comes to where you live it's poor job prospects or unaffordable real estate: pick one. Everything goes up but wages. If you're not in the "professional class" by 30-40 years old you're in real trouble. There's…
It didn’t just “happen” with boomers. My parents didn’t have their first home until in their mid thirties, payed 13% interest on their mortgage, worked plenty of shit jobs on the way there, saving etc. Your description of the boomers is idealized and I think not remotely the norm. They enjoyed far fewer material possessions than we do today, and by many measures had fewer money-making opportunities than exist today, and capital wasn’t nearly as free as it is today. When you’re in your 40’s (provided you make smart choices in your 20’s and 30’s) you’ll have far more wealth than the kids of that time will. Part of it is just a function of longevity and saving. Stop expecting to be able to buy a house when you graduate. It wasn’t true for my boomer parents, wasn’t true for me (younger genX), and doesn’t seem to have changed now. If you seriously think you’re a more dour generation with tougher problems, it should be all the more motivation to stop spending money on frivolous services and throw-away possessions and save, save, save. Focus on bringing social and chemical stability to your life and creating a new, stable family. Leverage the myriad money making opportunities out there. I read comments like yours and then read an article in a business rag talking about the disrupted workforce of today, specifically how easy money is giving younger workers more freedom to set the terms of their employment. I would have killed for the low-barrier-to-entry opportunities available today on the Internet when I was in my teens. If you can’t make it in America in today’s environment, it’s a product more of your informal environmental education. Get new teachers - don’t complain, up your game.