|
hard counter posted:someone else can try to persuade jastiger now
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:29 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:"Japanese people aren't loving at all any more." Or can we just blame hentai?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 09:13
|
|
|
It's fairly common in South Korea also, it's a function of the same issues that are delaying millenials in the USA, only ramped up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 09:15
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:So what's the reason for this? You occasionally read articles about how crazy career-focused Japanese culture is, so is it because people just don't have time/energy to date after working 80 hour weeks? From my (limited) understanding, its the career thing. Casual sex is kind of a weird taboo there, so nobody bones because nobody has the time to get to the part of dating where it's ok to bang. Blaming anime is never a wrong choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 09:54
|
|
|
I read somewhere that it is mostly a case of cultural mores not adapting to economical/social reality. Sex out of wedlock or at least outside of a relationship that's definitely steering towards marriage is considered a no-no by many people. But as the current ideal of a relationship apparently still is one where the man supports the entire family while the woman becomes a housewife, in this economy this means that many women won't date men because they're stuck in lovely jobs/men don't bother dating because they feel that because of their being stuck in lovely jobs means that they don't have the “right“ to. Add to this a crazy amount of work everyone is doing and the culture still being in a weird place considering things like love, sex and romance and you have a good starting recipe for millennials not having sex. (I have no idea about Japan so I'm just parroting what I read somewhere, maybe it's all bullshit idk)
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 10:28
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:People with very thin or no eyebrows are barely recognizable as human. Women's attractiveness is directly proportional to how big their eyebrows are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 11:04
|
|
|
Tony Bologna posted:I carry my cat over my shoulder and pretend to burp him as if he was a human baby. I call him "my Lil' Dootz" and it's an adorable and awesome thing I do. His name is Gordon and it's the best name for a cat as well. That doesn't sound unpopular at all, and is in fact awesome and adorable. You should post a kitty selfie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 14:18
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Do you think anyone is doing this because "gently caress yes, now I get a defective baby!" because that's the impression you're giving off here. There are parents who abuse kids for attention so that wouldn't exactly surprise me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 14:36
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:I read somewhere that it is mostly a case of cultural mores not adapting to economical/social reality. Sex out of wedlock or at least outside of a relationship that's definitely steering towards marriage is considered a no-no by many people. But as the current ideal of a relationship apparently still is one where the man supports the entire family while the woman becomes a housewife, in this economy this means that many women won't date men because they're stuck in lovely jobs/men don't bother dating because they feel that because of their being stuck in lovely jobs means that they don't have the “right“ to. Add to this a crazy amount of work everyone is doing and the culture still being in a weird place considering things like love, sex and romance and you have a good starting recipe for millennials not having sex. Also prostitution probably.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 14:47
|
|
|
I'd also hazard a guess it ties into their cultural views on women and age. 25+ is spinster zone for ladies in Japan. So you as a man are meant to focus solely on school until 18, then solely on uni until 22, then you have a 3 year zone to marry and after that, solely career until old age. Will work! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
huh apparently even western millennials are having fewer sex partners than previously (the least since 1920) though one might argue that the difference between 11 partners (skanky boomers) and 8 (prudish millennials) isn't exactly night and day - but there is a sizable percentage of totally sexless millennials, not quite 45%, that's still statistically significant the articles i scanned blamed the post-crash economy and online dating which emphasizes a quick glance at a person's looks rather than the substance of their character, apparently that's boxing out the less traditionally attractive
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
I don't know if there's any research on it, but would bet a reason is that nowadays you can fill your time with fighting for the elf king, collecting space minerals, etc. in a dark room if you are having trouble fitting in with the sex-havers. Those options didn't really use to exist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
They did, they just required other people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
nm
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
hard counter posted:the articles i scanned blamed the post-crash economy and online dating which emphasizes a quick glance at a person's looks rather than the substance of their character, apparently that's boxing out the less traditionally attractive This is also bad for the more conventionally attractive because it reinforces that they don't have to improve any other aspect of themselves because they can always get a new partner easily just by checking their OKC inbox
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
That's kinda true though, they don't *have* to improve on a lot of that other stuff, and they'll still win in the end. It happens!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
I'm super gross and I have lots of casual sex. The internet and online dating is a modern miracle!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Millennials having fewer partners is sort of an odd statistic to stand on its own, it needs more data for proper interpretation imho and I didn't see any corroborating analysis attached. It's anecdotal I know but a lot of my friends have married or are otherwise in committed, long-term relationships with their 3rd or 4th partner; most of them used some kind of online thing to find each other. It would be unfair to say that getting hitched after having fewer partners implies some kind of lessening of their sex lives compared to boomers. Could be that online dating is actually working for some people in finding that weird someone they get along with really well that much quicker. It's worked for the people I know personally. I'd like to see a tighter, more controlled study here. More sexless millennials is probably a better indicator that some people getting pressured out of dating because of current circumstances, probably escaping elsewhere. Whatever those circumstances are must be turned up to 11 in Japan.  Pick posted:This is also bad for the more conventionally attractive because it reinforces that they don't have to improve any other aspect of themselves because they can always get a new partner easily just by checking their OKC inbox True, as an otherwise desirable person you could probably go many years before realizing that you are the real common factor of all those sour relationships.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Aramek posted:That's kinda true though, they don't *have* to improve on a lot of that other stuff, and they'll still win in the end. The upshot of Marfan's is forever skinny  .
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
hard counter posted:True, as an otherwise desirable person you could probably go many years before realizing that you are the real common factor of all those sour relationships. Ha ha except for me... it's everyone else who is the problem... I'm great. ....
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
i should have been clearer but i wrote that using the indefinite you, sorry for the confusion!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
Ha ha nah I'm just joshin' I like your posting by the way  .
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
Pick posted:The upshot of Marfan's is forever skinny If you have piano skills you've got the whole package then!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Aramek posted:If you have piano skills you've got the whole package then! I don't, but my mother (who I inherited it from) was a professional pianist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
Liszt!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
hard counter posted:More sexless millennials is probably a better indicator that some people getting pressured out of dating because of current circumstances, probably escaping elsewhere. Whatever those circumstances are must be turned up to 11 in Japan. Goons are throwing off the average.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
hard counter posted:Millennials having fewer partners is sort of an odd statistic to stand on its own, it needs more data for proper interpretation imho and I didn't see any corroborating analysis attached. It's anecdotal I know but a lot of my friends have married or are otherwise in committed, long-term relationships with their 3rd or 4th partner; most of them used some kind of online thing to find each other. It would be unfair to say that getting hitched after having fewer partners implies some kind of lessening of their sex lives compared to boomers. Could be that online dating is actually working for some people in finding that weird someone they get along with really well that much quicker. It's worked for the people I know personally. I'd like to see a tighter, more controlled study here. In America one of the major things that drove that number down was AIDS. Most STDs are bacterial. The viral ones most of us have already anyway; everybody has HPV and almost everybody has herpes. The bacterial ones became pretty easy to cure and thanks to condoms and what have you while the baby boomers lived through the 60's and 70's. AIDS didn't get officially seen in America until 1981. The free love era got hammered really hard by a terrifying, incurable STD. Suddenly "just hump whoever, all the time, who cares?" became pretty scary. Online dating isn't much different from dating services, newspaper personals, and whatever except by scale. People that act like online dating is some new scary thing full of monsters seem to forget that newspapers have had personal ads for like...ever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Pick posted:I like your posting by the way yours is good too and i hope these aren't unpopular opinionsToxicSlurpee posted:Online dating isn't much different from dating services, newspaper personals, and whatever except by scale. People that act like online dating is some new scary thing full of monsters seem to forget that newspapers have had personal ads for like...ever. Online dating isn't a totally new thing but its accessibility is unprecedented imho. People as young as 16 can make a profile, thumb through someone's pics, screen someone through chat, then arrange to meet a person well outside their normal circle if they're within driving distance. Anecdotal yeah but it's how my friend's brother met his partner, they're obnoxiously good for one another and they've been together for 10 years now. Being able to date from a bigger pool earlier should help people find each other earlier, especially people looking for something weird. I think it's fair to say situations like that are more common than before and could be suppressing numbers, at least without other data to tell us what's really going on. You wouldn't have had many young people buying ads in newspapers or feeling comfortable enough to meet total strangers before, there used to be some stigma behind that (and early online dating too), but modern online dating is fairly mainstream and really simple - that changes things enough that 11 partners could go to 8. AIDs def had its affects on free love but one stat I didn't mention was that GenX had similar numbers as boomers. The oldest Xers would've been around 11-15 in '81 and they might've had the biggest aids scare. vvvv: neat, good info hard counter has a new favorite as of 01:32 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
hard counter posted:AIDs def had its affects on free love but one stat I didn't mention was that GenX had similar numbers as boomers. The oldest Xers would've been around 11-15 in '81 and they might've had the biggest aids scare. It took a while to kick in. For quite a while it was assumed that it was a gay men only disease. Even when it became apparent that all sexual contact spread it, as could transfusions, sharing needles, etc. it was still considered something only dirty and bad people got. It was associated with immoral sex acts, gay people, and drug addicts pretty heavily which made it Not Our Problem to straight, white, non-poor people. It was the mid to late 80's as well as early 90's when it started killing famous people who were going public about having AIDS that it kicked in to high gear. The biggest turning point was probably Magic Johnson which was 1991. Even then a hell of a lot of people were dead set on insisting that it was because he was secretly loving dudes. The 90's is when it really got taken a lot more seriously. That was when millennials were coming of age; the 80's had a lot of glam and glitz and some trying to cling to the free wheeling attitudes of the past. The 90's wrecked that completely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
hard counter posted:AIDs def had its affects on free love but one stat I didn't mention was that GenX had similar numbers as boomers. The oldest Xers would've been around 11-15 in '81 and they might've had the biggest aids scare. That's my era, I was 14 in '81 and was right there in the middle of it since I lived very near SF. My recollection of the scary AIDS panic was that: a) it didn't really go mainstream until a few years later, when 'normal' people were getting it from blood transfusions and suddenly the average Joe gave a poo poo because it wasn't just those gross gay people. Maybe '84, '85-ish? b) folks kept right on loving strangers like usual, they just lied about it, and c)you could finally buy condoms in the store like anything else and didn't have to ask some miserable old bastard behind a counter for them. I'd like to see the distribution curve of the sexhavers in 1970, 1990 and currently, my half-assed guess would be that most people have the same rough number of partners as always, but now a larger percentage of younger folk are nearly sexless, bringing down the average.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:That's my era, I was 14 in '81 and was right there in the middle of it since I lived very near SF. My recollection of the scary AIDS panic was that: I figured it was around there, I don't remember too much aids panic in the early-mid 90s myself except for the odd hazy memory of radio hosts calling for the destruction of all gays on mainstream stations. I feel like I was too young to remember the worst of it so I assumed Gen X as teens and twenty-somethings in the early 90s would've had it instead, that's right when they're acquiring pre-marriage life experience. By the time I was a teen it was reported that things weren't so bad so long as you always use protection, full loving stop. JnnyThndrs posted:I'd like to see the distribution curve of the sexhavers in 1970, 1990 and currently, my half-assed guess would be that most people have the same rough number of partners as always, but now a larger percentage of younger folk are nearly sexless, bringing down the average.  Until I read up on it I had assumed millennials were the most promiscuous since the casual 'hook-up culture' of their relationships has been a subject of discussion. Turns out we're just the most accepting of what consenting adults do to one another - I would still feel more comfortable if the study actually focused on questions like how much you have sex and the like rather than with how many people because technically a lot of the people I know are bringing down the average despite being in loving relationships. Def needs more nuance. Still, it's sad that a larger percentage of millennials are celibate, probably not by choice, compared to others.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
hard counter posted:Still, it's sad that a larger percentage of millennials are celibate, probably not by choice, compared to others. Most definitely. I still think it has a lot to do with simple economics rather than 'oh those lovely Millenials' like you hear so much. Almost everywhere there are jobs, the rents are loving atrocious, everywhere rent is cheap tends to be devoid of opportunities, nobody wants to bring someone to their parents' house to gently caress, and lack of opportunity + intimate contact with others leads directly to crippling depression, which perpetuates the cycle. The Boomers had it easy - rents even in cool places were quite cheap and entry-level jobs were plentiful, us X-era had it somewhat worse, but there were very few of us compared to the vast number of millennials/boomers so you could usually get out of the house ok if you weren't a total fuckup, but the situation now is really rough for young people and I feel bad for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
It can't be that bad. No "get up and go" is these kids problems. Back in my day....
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
My theory that is also true: women of any age would rather gently caress someone who has never liked anime than someone who has at some point in their lives liked anime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:My theory that is also true: women of any age would rather gently caress someone who has never liked anime than someone who has at some point in their lives liked anime. But what if the woman likes anime
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Then gently caress her
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Closed-Down Pizza Parlor posted:But what if the woman likes anime I didn't think this far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
Closed-Down Pizza Parlor posted:But what if the woman likes anime Then she's 10. Because she likes cartoons. And cartoons are for children. Don't gently caress kids you weirdos.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Twitter is an excellent tool for breaking news, amber alerts, and police, traffic and weather-related updates. It's banal for everything else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 01:29 |
|
|
Das Boo posted:Twitter is an excellent tool for breaking news, amber alerts, and police, traffic and weather-related updates. It's banal for everything else. It is also an excellent source of false and misleading information about rapidly developing situations. Too many news organizations don't emphasize enough that certain tweets are unverified accounts and treat them as fact, and then just pretend they never happen if/when they end up not being true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 20:21
|
|
