Live data from Hacker News

Explaining Sex Rate Changes

overcomingbias.com

451–460 of 588 posts

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#451
post #391
post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re arguing pedantry and missing the point. Sex is not a need like food and water, you could say the same thing about any degree of human contact whatsoever. And yet we know that humans isolated from other humans generally do not turn out well and sexual isolation is a very significant milestone on that spectrum.

The difference between a need and a desire is not a minor detail (which is what the word pedantry would indicate). Let me explain it for you. need /nēd/ circumstances in which something is necessary, or that require some course of action; necessity. de·sire /dəˈzī(ə)r/ a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen. The very first thing to do is separate out needs from urges (desires…

[deleted]

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#452

Ask a heterosexual woman in that age range about how many awful conversations she's had with men in that age range via dating apps. She won't say "a few", she'll say "A LOT", and be able to show that the vast majority of messages she gets are either very dry or insanely forward (sexually). If you're a great-looking guy and you can't start or hold a good conversation, you can still get laid on the basis of looks. But…

On the other hand, there are multiple experiments with people creating a male profile with a photo of an attractive guy and sending explicitly sexual and vulgar messages as an introduction and still getting a lot of replies and phone numbers. At some point of attractiveness a guy can start the conversation with "I'd love to slide it in you" and the girl will reply with "hihi ok :) 123-456-789" rather than "leave me a…

It sounds like we agree. I said this:

>> If you're a great-looking guy and you can't start or hold a good conversation, you can still get laid on the basis of looks. But if you don't look good, you don't get those grace points

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#453
post #108

Discussions like this drive me crazy. It's not hard to see what it is about society that's making so many people not have sex, and it's not, like, some subtle market effect involving their attractiveness. No matter how much you want find a market effect, it's due to _human stuff_, like people's actual lives and problems, not their behavior in some sex economy. There is nothing even close to an economy around sex. The…

What you're saying isn't rational but it's 100% true. People's relationships aren't part of a market; rather the economy is placing constraints on their relationships. People work further from their homes so they don't have evening hobbies. People don't live close to their parents so single moms and dads are busy with childcare vs meeting each other. That sort of thing.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#454

It's genuinely depressing to think that a large number of guys now has no access to explore intimacy and partnership (or very little). No one's owed sex of course but it's like we're breaking aspects of society. And I think you'd naturally find women are less able to find meaning themselves here so it's not just a men's pity party. I wonder, if this is a dating app phenomenon, if there's anything that can be done tha…

I think if anything dating apps are providing us visibility into changes which are more likely rooted in cyclical economic conditions. I'd be willing to bet you'd see these same changes occur regularly over many centuries.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the article, you write: >If you firmly believe we are blank slates, and the only innate difference between the sexes is body shape, take a look at this thread: But very few people believe this; it's better to characterise the argument as saying that many of the differences we see relating to the dynamics between the sexes are a product of society and culture, and the Reddit thread you linked underneath doesn't rea…

You're correct that most sensible people understand that environmental and inherent biological differences both contribute to behaviors. But the pathological mode of thinking that people are becoming increasingly sensitive to is the willingness to assert environmental causes in the absence of biological or nonsociological evidence. It's precisely this having a default position that makes it an ideological way of thin…

>But my question is, "why?"

Because they view the issue as being conditioned by today's society; while I admit it's not best to jump to such a conclusion without serious critical investigation, I find it tiresome that you call it "ideological" - as if an explanation which specifically seeks to avert any critical view of the development of Western society isn't itself "ideological". Is it the result of the sexism of patriarchal society? Let's find out by consulting sociology, critical theory and philosophy. A critical understanding of the issues wouldn't stop at merely controlling for the pay gap, for instance, it would ask why women negotiate less, why they tend to work fewer hours etc. Roswitha Scholz put it well:

>We have also to account for the fact that under capitalism reproductive activities emerge that are primarily carried out by women. Accordingly, value dissociation means that capitalism contains a core of female-determined reproductive activities and the affects, characteristics, and attitudes (emotionality, sensuality, and female or motherly caring) that are dissociated from value and abstract labor. Female relations of existence — that is, female reproductive activities under capitalism — are therefore of a different character from abstract labor, which is why they cannot straightforwardly be subsumed under the concept of labor.

>[...] Prior to this, women were largely regarded as just another variant of being-man, which is one of the reasons that the social and historical sciences have throughout the last fifteen years stressed the pervasiveness of the single-gender model upon which pre-bourgeois societies were based. Even the vagina was in the context of this model frequently understood as a penis, inverted and pushed into the lower body. Despite the fact that women were largely regarded as inferior, prior to the development of a large-scale modern public, there still existed for them a variety of possibilities for gaining social influence. In premodern and early modern societies, man occupied a largely symbolic position of hegemony. Women were not yet exclusively confined to domestic life and motherhood, as has been the case since the eighteenth century. Women’s contributions to material reproduction were in agrarian societies regarded as equally important as the contributions of men.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#456

In my case, I’ve always found partners (including my wife with whom I’ve been in a strong relationship for 8 years) in gatherings with friends and friends of friends. I would absolutely DREAD today’s dating scene through a screen. Maybe older men do it the old way? I don’t know, this is one revolution I hope regresses. If you’re young and looking, I’d suggest you try to mix and match your circle with your friends’ ci…

How many times have your circles imploded?

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#457
post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as a heterosexual woman who has enjoyed meeting up via dating apps, it's ALWAYS about the conversation that results in an actual date. A less attractive guy can make himself get a foot in the door by using really interesting photos. All you need is the swipe-right then use your confidence and humour to get a date. It works for many of us (women). If it helps to know, a lot of us share screenshots of our conv…

>A less attractive guy can make himself get a foot in the door by using really interesting photos. Which is impossible for everyone. Only a small percentage of people can have "really interesting" photos. If everyone suddenly got photos that today are really interesting the photos would become mundane. >All you need is the swipe-right then use your confidence and humour to get a date. Which is another problem. A lot…

> Only a small percentage of people can have "really interesting" photos. If everyone suddenly got photos that today are really interesting the photos would become mundane.

True, but this isn't the problem we have yet. So start getting more interesting/funny/hot pictures. Once they all become mundane, people will start to look for other things (maybe even normcore pictures)

> A lot of men lack confidence and humor

I agree on this, and it sucks. Low self-esteem does a lot of harm, and yet is so easy to fix because "fake it till you make it" literally solves the problem. Not being funny is also easy to solve by just watching and imitating funny videos, and learning about popular things so you can make jokes about them. But if you have low self-esteem and are told you aren't funny, it probably seems like becoming funny is an impossible feat, and unattainable. Definitely sucks.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out there are still more than enough women for all of us. Joe average actually has little challenge getting a mate same as before. The guy 3 steps down is the one with a problem that isn't manifestly different than its ever been.

Doesn't the data discussed in this threat directly contradict your statement of "there are more than enough women for everyone"? And so does historical data, isn't it the case that many men didn't reproduce historically, which can be seen through genetic analysis? Edit: cursory googling turns up this, for example: https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success (8,000 Years Ago, 17 Women Reproduced for Eve…

A survey about how much sex respondents are having doesn't tell you WHY they are having less sex.

Historical reproduction ALSO isn't useful when contraception is now a prevalent thing the numbers would in no way match. Regarding the last I couldn't find the claim that 4 to 5 women reproduced for every man so I'm just going to assume you misread. I cannot imagine how this could possibly be so unless you meant within a narrow age range considering men can reproduce for most of their lives and women most do so within a narrow range.

Looking at the same graph at the head of the page in 1998ish there was about 20% of the most effected age range who hadn't had sex in a year. It's now 28 and in fact the graph goes up and down and it seems that other age ranges are less effected.

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#459

Reading through the comments, there's a shared narrative that emerges: Tinder, etc. leads to a skewed distribution of access to sexual partners based on attractiveness, which leads to unattractive men not having as many partners, which leads to pick-your-favorite-bad-consequence. And there are a lot of men in this thread feeling worried and depressed about this. While it's certainly true that you get more matches on…

[deleted]

Re: Explaining Sex Rate Changes

#460
post #26

As the article points out, fewer young men are having sex, but roughly the same number of young women are having sex. I wonder if dating apps (Tinder, Bumble, etc.) are leading women to have sex with a smaller cohort of desirable men. Years ago, OkCupid noted that a small percentage of men get an overwhelming percentage of messages from women. With the rise of "swipe right, swipe left" mobile dating apps, where peopl…

This is true, and honestly, has always been true. But its exaggerated by online dating and the relaxation of sex in modern society. I think whats really different, is that lots of young guys are taking note. Many are keenly aware that they are being left out. As I approach my early thirties, its weird to see those same women turn around and marry the men they previously rejected.

The real concern, is why are they marrying those men they used to reject. Feelings and emotions don't go away, and "settling" is very toxic thing to most people. They usually get more resentful about it over time(both the people who settle, and the people who were settled for if they find out).
Post reply on HN