The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness • Hacker News Board

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#961

Post by rubicon33 » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 4:34 PM UTC

somatic wrote: post #754

rubicon33 wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it so incredibly ironic that it was immigrants, fleeing countries utterly lacking in comfort, wealth, or happiness, in search of a better life for themselves and their children, that helped build the comfortable industrialized nation of the United States. It seems life - human existence - is cyclical and has amnesia. We forget too quickly what real discomfort is. Or at least, fail to strike a proper balance.

America was founded by pioneers. Immigrants didn’t start coming for their “better life” until the mid-19th century.

You'll notice, I didn't say that immigrants "founded" America. I said immigrants "helped build" what it is today.

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#962

Post by c0vfefe » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 4:35 PM UTC

The individualism of the Enlightenment and the sexual revolution has gutted the meaning-making institutions of Western society. We threw out the baby with the bathwater, and are by-&-large culturally programmed to pursue individual freedom & self-actualization, while abandoning the truth that humans are tribal creatures.

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#963

Post by camelNotation » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 4:44 PM UTC

jriot wrote: post #552

camelNotation wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have less than five kids, but more than one kid. My kids cause me a lot of stress. The burden of knowing I have to deal with them and their energetic, ridiculous antics every day when I get home really drains me. I don't really have time to exercise anymore because from sun-up to sundown I am dealing with them, so I'm slightly overweight and out of shape in a way I was not before I had kids. My diet isn't as divers…

Appears to be a personal choice. My wife and I have two kids, we are both in the best shape of our lives, eat better than before, and our kids are quite healthy - participating in gymnastics, volleyball, and roller derby.

It's a choice, but also not a choice.

I could pay for a nanny or childcare of some sort for portions of the day and allow myself to focus on things like food quality, exercise, etc. I prefer to sacrifice those things to be with my kids whenever I am not working because I think it is important for me to invest that time now when they are most impressionable. But that preference isn't something I seem to have much control over. It's what I think is right, so I do it. I guess I could choose to do what I think is wrong, but that doesn't seem like a choice as much as a character failure.

Also, my kids are very young. As they get older, I expect to have more time. The early years are the absolute hardest in terms of time. It does get better as they get older and have activities to participate in outside the home.

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#964

Post by magduf » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 4:48 PM UTC

base698 wrote: post #938

toyg wrote: post #760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why people are so against talking to the people that give them a ride. I'm an ethnic minority where I live, but I'm white. Do I want to be dragged into some racist conversation fuelled by Nigel Farage on talk-radio and by made-up stories in The Sun? Nope. Even if I did, would it change anything? Nope - a 20-min cab ride is not enough time to dispel all the crap accumulated over decades of disinformation. If I had a…

Wow, didn't know casual conversation solely existed to dispel app the crap disinformation. I've been doing it wrong this whole time. Before I just thought it was about giving people respect and finding common ground.

When people are right-wing extremists, they can't help but bring up their BS in casual conversation. I've seen it many times. They live in an entirely different reality, where the basic facts simply are not the same as the facts you believe in, because they listen to entirely different sources of information. Talking with them is futile, as the OP said: who has time to try to dispel the crap disinformation, and it's probably not going to be successful anyway because why should they listen to you over the slick-sounding guy who has radio airtime? And what reasonable, intelligent person wants to be dragged into an unhappy political conversation every time he takes a cab ride?

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#965

Post by midwestcode » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 4:48 PM UTC

holler wrote: post #823

If anyone lives in Seattle and is feeling lonely hit me up! I'll grab coffee with you any time. I'm 35 & a few years ago my loneliness spiraled out of control and almost killed me. I had a lot of crap from my late teens -> late 20's and it led me to a dark place. I know what it's like to be in that place. I got sober and turned things around. Now I work remote and have a flexible schedule. Life is good! I love the go…

I'll bite! If you update a way to contact in your description or something, I'll send a message your way. :)

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#966

Post by magduf » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 4:56 PM UTC

Erik816 wrote: post #342

mythrwy wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not everyone's "fit in" group though. It's like saying attend local evangelical church. The people you meet will be potential friends for some types of people. For other types, not so much.

Good point. Although maybe a good percentage of people can imagine finding a social group at one or the other, noting that not all churches are evangelical in either theology or culture. Meaningful shared group experiences are important.

Virtually all churches have some sort of theology that they preach, and if you think it's a bunch of BS, it's not going to go well for you there. You can keep your mouth shut about it, but eventually the fact that you're living a lie will get to you.

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#967

Post by magduf » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 4:59 PM UTC

xenospn wrote: post #114

WhompingWindows wrote: post #2

I felt loneliness acutely this week. I live alone, spend most evenings alone, and on top, work's coding and research has been slow for 2 weeks. Collaborators are at conferences and on vacation, so I had much less work and much less face-to-face contact than usual. Given that I code on my own, distribute analyses via email, and occasionally meet if people are around, I barely talked to people some days this week. Goin…

Adopt a dog. Go to the park twice a day. You’ll feel amazing.

Dogs are a pain in the ass. They smell bad, and make your home smell bad. They require constant attention. Leaving them at home, locked up, all day long while you're at work working long hours is cruel. Your apartment/condo will require you to pay a big fee to get their poop DNA tested, and when you don't pick up their poop, you'll be slapped with a huge fine. Honestly, it's easier having a child: at least children can go to the bathroom by themselves after a few years, and eventually can feed themselves too.

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#968

Post by throwawaymanbot » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 5:23 PM UTC

Be Careful, City-Journal has authors that write for very conservative magazines. So when they decry the decline of "the family" I have to really wonder their motivation.

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#969

Post by AnimalMuppet » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

bscphil wrote: post #838

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is coming a point (it has already passed, in my opinion), where we can no longer justify our purpose for existence as "creating more humans." Two comments. First, within evolution (true, a brutal and inhumane theory), the point of life is exactly to survive and reproduce. It is literally unnatural to deliberately choose to not have children (unless you don't believe in evolution). Second, I presume that you d…

>It is literally unnatural to deliberately choose to not have children Something's being natural or unnatural has no bearing on whether it is right or wrong. I assume that when the OP says "we can no longer justify" they are making a moral claim, which means that saying it's "unnatural" to not reproduce is failing to be relevant.

Fair point.

Also note that my argument was trying to argue within someone else's viewpoint, and it's not a viewpoint that I agree with.

Re: The decline of the family has unleashed an epidemic of loneliness

#970

Post by 4ntonius8lock » Fri, Jun 07, 2019, 5:51 PM UTC

55555 wrote: post #767

soulofmischief wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suicide rates have skyrocketed for middle-aged white men in the US. They are now the highest statistic. [0] It's happening already. • Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the US. • The age-adjusted suicide rate in 2017 was 14.0 per 100,000 individuals. • In 2017, men died by suicide 3.54x more often than women. • White males accounted for 69.67% of suicide deaths in 2017. [0] https://afsp.org/about-suicide/s…

> men died by suicide 3.54x more often than women That's a very interesting statistic considering women attempt suicide 1.2x more than men.

Well there are two possible conclusions from this:

1- Women can't figure out how to effectively commit suicide and fail at the attempt at a rate that is 400% greater than men because they aren't capable - I don't believe this for a minute.

or

2- Women engage more in the cry for help attempt, while men go through with it all the way more often.

Personally I'd go with 2, but I'd be open to hearing any other alternative explanations.

The 'women do it wrong because they want to look pretty when dead' or 'women can't figure out violence' (a version of #1) seem like condescending conclusions drawn to avoid having to deal with the probability of #2, which sounds simpler.