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

Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

soranews24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 383 posts

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#321

Post by bradlys »

kbelder wrote: post #309
bradlys wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who did get older and went through this - it does not get better. Your hair doesn’t suddenly get thicker. The pounds don’t suddenly become easier to keep off. Your skin doesn’t tighten. Your complexion doesn’t smoothen out. It gets worse. This is just copium we give to men to make them think it gets better. The stats show that it doesn’t get better . If you’re single now and have never been on a date - the…

Sorry. You appear to be in the subset where it didn't get better. For many men, it works the other way. You become smarter. More confident. More emotionally, psychologically, and financially stable. All those make you more attractive. Your prospective partners are the same. Everybody has more experience, and doesn't freak out and act self-destructively like they did when they were 23. People are more aware of what a…

Tell me you haven't dated in the last 10 years without telling me you haven't dated in the last 10 years.

> You become smarter. More confident. More emotionally, psychologically, and financially stable.

Cause all those are relevant for online dating and getting first dates.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#322

Post by otterley »

annyeonghada wrote: post #298
otterley wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bullshit theory with zero evidence or science behind it. I’m on my second marriage now, am about as far from a virgin as the earth is from the sun, and I’m as happy as can be and utterly devoted to and blissfully in love with my wife. Listen, I know you’re probably having difficulty finding a romantic relationship and I know how demoralizing and depressing that can be. I’ve been there - my teens and twentie…

>This is a bullshit theory with zero evidence or science behind it There is lots of evidence that having too many partners damage the ability to form deep love relationship. For men and for women.

Please cite it! (And no, not from the IFS, please.)

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#323

Post by otterley »

anon291 wrote: post #277
otterley wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other than the legal and financial ramifications, it’s not significantly different than any other breakup of a relationship due to poor fit. Don’t read into it too much.

It is significantly different, and while I'm glad you're happy, a second marriage is pretty damning evidence that the loose bond suggested above exists.

No it isn't, because the tight bonds that can be formed in subsequent marriages can be very real. The strength of an interpersonal romantic bond might have some correlation with the age or order in which you met them, but that doesn't mean you can't have even stronger bonds later in life with later partners.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#324

Post by ginko »

rpmisms wrote: post #283
anon291 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't take my platonic friends to the nice French steakhouse downtown, though. Why not?

Because it sends the wrong message. You take a significant other there for special occasions, or you take a date there if you're really interested/really want to get laid.

Or you take your friend there because you both like steak and wine.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#325

Post by GameOfFrowns »

marcyb5st wrote: post #126
Noelkd wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

20 dates with 20 different people?

I don't see the number as that high. I'm at around 10 different people and considering I stopped around 2 months ago because I found one interesting enough that we decided to be mutually exclusive going forward. I use dating apps or met a couple of them at the bouldering gym where I boulder.

>met a couple of them at the bouldering gym where I boulder.

That's why I stopped going to the local boulder gyms. Too many cookie-cutter "non-conformist dudes" who see the gym as their personal hunting grounds, creeping on the girls like a sleazy tennis instructor and bullying beginner guys because they don't like the competition.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#326

Post by GameOfFrowns »

bittercynic wrote: post #206
pphysch wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reductive way to view Western (straight) dating culture: - the women are competing for top ~10% of men, who almost always will have multiple casual partners at any given time because of this - the (other 90% of) men are competing for the top 50% of women It's a mess of poorly defined and misaligned interests. This leads to tension and stereotypes ("all men are assholes! all women are harlots!") and sexual inequal…

There may be some situations where people want to rank potential partners desirability as though it was a scalar that everyone would agree on, but there is no requirement to participate in those situations. For me, and I suspect most people, it seems much better to just do the things you enjoy, be friendly, and find people where there is some mutual interest in spending time together.

>find people where there is some mutual interest in spending time together.

Until the woman has to defend your eligibility against her female friends, comparing you to previous partners, current alternative suitors and male celebrities.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#327

Post by BlargMcLarg »

otterley wrote: post #319
BlargMcLarg wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is a bullshit theory with zero evidence or science behind it. https://ifstudies.org/blog/counterintuitive-trends-in-the-li... https://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexual-history-affect-marita... >And last, but not least, don’t settle! This is horrible advice. You have minimal requirements and fill in the remainder by being human and growing together. "Don't settle" is exactly how people continue to monkey branch to…

First of all, the Institute for Family Studies is not a credible, respected source of scientific information. They're a conservative think tank, funded by religious partisans, that cherry-picks their data in order to make persuasive political arguments. However, I'd be open to peer-reviewed papers from reputable social scientists not affiliated with a partisan entity. Second, it is never horrible advice to suggest to…

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003...

>"I find that premarital sex or premarital cohabitation that is limited to a woman's husband is not associated with an elevated risk of marital disruption. However, women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship have an increased risk of marital dissolution."

https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271303

>"A truism in psychology is that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. This is no less true in the realm of sexual behavior. Indeed, one of the strongest predictors of marital infidelity is one’s number of prior sex partners (Buss, 2000). Deception about past sexual promiscuity would have inflicted greater costs, on average, on men than on women"

There's plenty more. We can keep this up all day. There's very little to support your idea of partner count or marriage count having little influence, and quite a lot to support the opposite.

>It is never horrible advice to suggest to someone that they try to minimize their unhappiness

The problem with your "advice" is that it sets up exactly that perfection part, even if your intentions are different. It also discredits the idea of growing together, when in reality most people do just fine with any partner which meets some set of minimal values, followed by growing together and overcoming obstacles. "Minimal" does not include any of the things you mention, rather it comes to realistic terms that shooting for the stars is a bad idea and growing together is far more important than being an instant husband/wife.

Relationships require work and investment. "Never settle" has translated into "there is always better" for many. It's the same thing that happens when children become adults. They grow less tolerant of things, and with that comes less willingness to see past their initial judgment.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#328

Post by cstrahan »

systemsignal wrote: post #279
warning26 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Modern America, by and large, does not have the shared spaces and sense of community where these interactions could occur. Yet another unfortunate output of the US's completely broken focus on cars. Cars require intentionality -- there's no room for spontaneous interactions when you have to choose your destination and then spend 10min driving there.

America is focused on cars because it’s huge

America is huge, but I think this is more to do with the specifics of how each city is built, where some are better than others.

I sold my car when I moved to D.C -- no one needs one, unless you commute outside of D.C. My social life grew exponentially when I moved. The city has dependable cross walks and (especially compared to Dallas standards) absolutely gargantuan side walks. As a bonus, those sidewalks don't abruptly and inextricably end for random stretches of the street. Public transportation is great. As a result, people are out and about where they can have random encounters with each other, on the way to parks filled with people hanging out and mingling.

I'm not saying this is the epitome, but it's leagues better than places like Dallas where random sections of the city feel really sketchy, walking on the sidewalk (anywhere other than in the suburbs) feels like gambling with your life (given that sidewalks are about 2 feet wide and next to high speed traffic), electronic cross walks often don't work, there's huge stretches of nothing from place to place (so even if you could walk, you'd have little reason to, given that you'll be walking alone without a soul in sight -- unless you count the people in their cars passing by -- and with nothing worth seeing along the way), etc.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#329

Post by trevorboaconstr »

2143 wrote: post #256
ParksNet wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern America does: they're called Bars, Nightclubs, Saloons, HonkyTonks, Festivals, Beaches. I met my wife at a Meetup for 20-somethings hosted at a Brewery (Bar). I'm from Australia, and meeting women at these venues in America is much easier than in my home country - large Australians cities have such a huge influx of young Indian male migrants, that the gender ratios at many of these venues are inequitable.

You were atleast mildly annoyed by Indian migrants in Australia. But you went to America. Which is ironic on multiple levels but atleast you met your wife :) (btw, didn't you see Indians in America?)

Outside of major metro areas? No, not at all. Asian Indians makeup less than 1.5 percent of the US population. And, like most immigrant groups of the past, tend to congregate in closer knit communities and social circles. That aside, American dating circles in general are highly segregated.

Re: Many single Japanese people in their 20s have never been on a date – survey

#330

Post by [deleted] »

burntoutfire wrote: post #258
Dracophoenix wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider that it's more expensive to have children have children as well. It's not so much too little material wealth as it is too little wealth to sustain the "normal" childhood. Not so long ago, kids existed as cheap labor and a retirement account. One didn't need to treat them like human beings much less provide literacy or schooling to them. Whatever functional uses they had before have been replaced by machines…

My grandparents had 2 and 4 children respectively in communist Poland in the fifties in sixties, while living in what nowadays would be classified as abject poverty (e.g. a 6-person family living in 400 sq ft flat). Being very, very poor and having to work 6 days a week didn't stop them from starting families. It's all about what you value in live and for them children were top priority, so they made it happen, even…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN