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

The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

happiness.hks.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 469 posts

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#221

Post by zeroonetwothree »

sylens wrote: post #44

I wonder how much the polarization of politics contributes to this. I have friends on opposite sides of the political spectrum than me, but were able to basically segment off that area of discussion to enjoy each others company in other areas. It may be because we go back 20+ years with many shared experiences. I would guess many friendships do not have that level of bedrock to ground them, so developments like the r…

People certainly seem to be much pickier the past few years about only being friends with those that have matching political views. I try to avoid political discussions for this reason... though as someone that doesn't belong to either "camp" it's easy enough for me to find common ground with both sides on some issues so I can chat in a way that avoids major conflict.

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#222

Post by zeroonetwothree »

globnomulous wrote: post #126

> has fallen by nearly threefold What on earth does this word salad mean? Fallen by 300%? 200%? 75%? 2/3? All are reasonable interpretations of this incoherent math. > to tolerate the messy work of forming friendships If it's true that people are becoming worse at maintaining friendships and losing some skill or tendency they require, then people are ipso facto also worse at being friends . (And even if there's no ip…

I think it's pretty normal"

threefold = three times = 3x

fallen by 3x means now it is 3x lower, so if the old value was x now the value is x/3

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#223

Post by Braxton1980 »

oddthink wrote: post #56

I don't really get where people with kids found these 6.5 hrs / wk to spend on friendships, or even the quoted current averages of 4 hrs / wk. On a workday, there isn't much time. I roll out of bed at 6:30, get the kids up and fed breakfast and out the door. I finally get actually working at 8:30-9:30, depending on if I exercise or not. Stop work in the 5:30-6 range, switch into making dinner, getting kids to eat din…

>policing screen time

I had a TV in my room since I was 8 (1988) and my parents didn't police anything. Maybe this is a newer concern due to a greater understanding of tech dangers

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#224

Post by em-bee »

hollerith wrote: post #206
dottjt wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not quite sure how I feel about this. I generally hated being dragged to the friends houses of my parents. It was just needlessly boring. On the contrary, it sometimes was okay if that friend had children. I think the issue in the modern day however, is that less people are having children, so there simply isn't the opportunity. For example, I'm the only person in my friend group who has children.

Interesting. Did you also hate it when your parents hosted a party for adults in your home?

that's different. in my home i can disappear into my room and keep myself busy there. when at another place i have to behave, i can't go run around and explore (unless they have a garden and kids are allowed to go outside)

as a parent i would not drag my kids to a place unless there are other kids or i know there is something interesting for them.

but right on topic, the solution is to not live alone with your kids. we are in a multifamily compound where other families have children too, and there is no problem for some of the adults to go out while others stay back and make sure the kids are safe. (they are not providing entertainment but someone is always around should something happen).

this of course is only possible because i did connect to the neighbors. or rather, they connected to us. i always wanted to live in a place like that, but finding this one was pure serendipity. we weren't actually looking. it just happened that the neighbors turned out that way.

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#225

Post by closewith »

zug_zug wrote: post #219
closewith wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These don't represent real or Hollywood friendships at all. > - Completely perfect and devoid of all realities of life Friendships are relationships that stand the test of time and hardship. You work through problems, illnesses including mental health struggles, deaths, employment and money problems, family and relationship problems, legal problems, all sorts. > - No jealousy, no competition, no negative feelings The…

I don't know, that seems like a rather defensive response to me. Perhaps self-reflection is in order. Is the idea that friendship might be transactional too scary a thought to consider head on? Here's some science on the topic that is food for thought: https://www.thecut.com/2016/05/half-of-your-friends-probably...

> Is the idea that friendship might be transactional too scary a thought to consider head on?

Rather than be defensive, it was designed to shock you out of your current thought patterns on friendship, because they are almost delusional. Neither movie idealised friends nor real-life friendships have any of the characteristics you describe, and that is distorting your view of the world.

Pretending real friendship is a Hollywood myth is self-selecting yourself out of one of the most rewarding aspects of life. Don't do it to yourself.

> The study authors gave a survey to 84 college students in the same class,

Come on, time to get offline and go make some friends.

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#226

Post by standardUser »

oddthink wrote: post #56

I don't really get where people with kids found these 6.5 hrs / wk to spend on friendships, or even the quoted current averages of 4 hrs / wk. On a workday, there isn't much time. I roll out of bed at 6:30, get the kids up and fed breakfast and out the door. I finally get actually working at 8:30-9:30, depending on if I exercise or not. Stop work in the 5:30-6 range, switch into making dinner, getting kids to eat din…

Invite your childless friends to come visit you. I'm childless but all of my oldest friends have kids and all of those kids know me. It's probably easier for them to travel and if they stay a few nights you'll have time for both family time and adult time. Plus, I think it's great for kids to interact with adults who are trusted but aren't an authority figure.

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#227

Post by kenjackson »

wonderwonder wrote: post #218
kenjackson wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost all my in-person friends nowadays are parents of kids who my kids associate with. Mostly through sports. You get to kill two birds - support your kids and associate with adults. A few you’ll make good bonds with.

Its all fun and games until the kids have a falling out. Then its clear it was very much a friendship of convenience. I always saw them as such but it was a little upsetting for my wife.

In some cases.

But my wife still meets at least monthly with a group of the moms from our first travel team when the kids were in 3rd grade - almost a decade since they were teammates. There was probably some trauma bonding that occurred.

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#228

Post by Bootvis »

tdrz wrote: post #208
ryandrake wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The article talks about how it’s more of a younger generation phenomenon suggesting older generations still maintain their friendships Yea, this tracks my observations. A lot of adults make connections in their community through their kids and kids' friends. Kids pick their friends and their parents and guardians just go along for the ride, so when the kids play together, it kind of forces the parents to meet and i…

Maybe they are not anti-social, they are just not being social to you! They have no obligation to entertain you even if your kids are playing together.

In the proposed setting I’d say that’s just anti social behaviour. If you need to be obligated to act socially, you’re within a hairs width of antisocial.

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#229

Post by pesus »

tdrz wrote: post #208
ryandrake wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The article talks about how it’s more of a younger generation phenomenon suggesting older generations still maintain their friendships Yea, this tracks my observations. A lot of adults make connections in their community through their kids and kids' friends. Kids pick their friends and their parents and guardians just go along for the ride, so when the kids play together, it kind of forces the parents to meet and i…

Maybe they are not anti-social, they are just not being social to you! They have no obligation to entertain you even if your kids are playing together.

> They have no obligation to entertain you even if your kids are playing together.

This is a really cynical and negative way to view basic human interaction, the cornerstone of our species and civilization. I've been seeing it a lot lately online, and it doesn't surprise me that people are lonely and aren't making friends if they adopt an attitude like that.

Re: The Friendship Recession: The lost art of connecting

#230

Post by rsynnott »

astura wrote: post #194
mikemcquaid wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Scotland. HCOL here is not very H, despite living in the most expensive city. Part of the reason I don’t live in America is I see a lot of people on salaries 2-4x mine who seem to be unable to have time to see their friends.

>Part of the reason I don’t live in America is I see a lot of people on salaries 2-4x mine who seem to be unable to have time to see their friends. This is just a choice though. A choice Americans absolutely love making, but a choice none-the-less. On Reddit some dude was trying to argue that an individual needs $70,000 a year in fixed expenses just to live. Bare minimum. OTOH, I have what I consider an absurdly luxu…

> On Reddit some dude was trying to argue that an individual needs $70,000 a year in fixed expenses just to live. Bare minimum.

... Wait, how the hell did they figure that out? Did they itemise it? Was most of it just going on a very expensive mortgage or something? Are they including retirement savings?

(I've no rent or mortgage, due to having been very lucky with employer equity, but I'm not sure I could spend 60k EUR a year on myself even if I wanted to; there is only so much stuff that you'd reasonably want to spend money on.)

Post reply on HN