News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by thatoneuser on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:05AM (#19602532)
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 thats healthier for our society. Banning the apps isn't the right way, but is there some means of adding balance?

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by Mirioron on Monday April 08, 2019 @03:28AM (#19602952)
While dating apps probably have a role to play, I doubt that the problem is limited to them. I think this is a lot of small things adding up over time.

1. Video games give us fulfillment. If the reason you're looking for intimate relationships is fulfillment in life and video games partly fill that hole, then you're less likely to look for intimate relationships. Men tend to make up a much greater share of games that require a large time investment ("hardcore games").

2. Social media gives us some human contact, but it rarely leads to intimate contact. It scratches the itch of human interaction without needing us to leave the room.

3. Porn. The easy access to porn means that there's less of a reason to search for intimate contact. Men tend to be visual. When you're online, then images of a beautiful woman are only a few clicks away. It doesn't come with any of the baggage relationships come with either.

3. Dating apps. Women on dating apps seem to be harsher when judging the attractiveness of men than men are. This leads to a situation where average looking men will find it harder to find intimate partners on these services. They can't really make up for it by being smart or witty either.

4. Relationships are difficult to start. If a man approaches a woman and fails, then (sometimes) he's considered creepy. In many cases it's simply a misreading of expectations. For example, some women think that a man should always approach first, but some women think that unless a woman explicitly shows interest then a man approaching her is creepy. It's risky for a man to start the interaction, so they are more apprehensive. At least this is the impression that I got based on what I've seen online, particularly Twitter.

5. Divorce. In many of the stories you hear about separation and divorce, it's the man that gets shafted. Women are more likely to get the kids and, at least in the stories, they might get a large alimony too. This means that the man would be severely hampered in any future relationships they seek, because some of their income goes to the former spouse.

Some men add these together and then ask themselves "why bother?" Why risk approaching a woman, if instead you could be playing video games? They are as much fun, and hey, chances are that she wouldn't be into you anyway. As a result, some men opt out from this part of society.

I'm sure there are many other small issues like this that I couldn't think of, but these are certainly things that made me question whether relationships are even worth it. Every time you hear about things like "toxic masculinity" or some such it ever so slightly chips away at some men's interest in participating in society. The small chips have added up. Couple that with compelling alternatives on how to spend your time and I think you get the result we have.

You could also argue that we're simply following in the footsteps of Japan.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by Udo on Monday April 08, 2019 @05:36AM (#19603614)
A data point: speaking as someone who would require major surgery to even be considered "average", I think it's indeed an effect that comes from many different factors all pointing one into the same direction (I would also assume there exist women with similar experiences, although not as many as men).

The "why bother" effect became very strong in me after my last long-term relationship failed, and I noticed that my advancing age made it even more difficult to get anyone interested in starting a new thing.

My personal disillusionment reached its peak when I realized that dating and marriage are one of these treadmills that just eats away at your life. People who are physically attractive, well-educated, and wealthy are in my opinion much less likely to feel this drain - both because they have more attractive options to choose from and because they tend to have a more gratifying life in general. Whereas people like me would have to expend a considerable amount of energy just to even get an opportunity, only to end up with a less-than-ideal match (because if I'm "settling" for someone, odds are she's also somehow forced to "settle" with a less-than-ideal partner such as me), and I'd have to spend an inordinate amount of effort just to keep up in the long run. If you're someone who is constantly getting the feedback that you're inadequate, every step of this is degrading. So why do it?

So the realization is that striving for partnership is not worth it for many men (and I suspect for some women, too). It's perfectly possible to lead a fulfilling life without it, once you stop running after the proverbial carrot that society would like to dangle in front of you. Instead of being someone whose primary attribute is being a sub-par partner, I can concentrate on being actually valuable at other things that matter to me.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by ohaideredevs on Monday April 08, 2019 @11:01AM (#19605788)
You hit the nail on the head. The more attractive and wealthy you are, the less effort you have to put into a relationship by default. As cold as it sounds, "If you don't like something, then leave, I can find someone else" is always there keeping your partner on their toes. If you aren't those things - you have to do a ton of things to keep your partner happy, while living under the threat of them leaving. It's stress, and effort.

In general, even happy "normal" relationships are a ton of work. They also anchor you to certain expectations and when you try to change something in life, you risk upsetting your partner. Want to study for an exam? Good luck having scandals about "not enough attention."

Furthermore, a lot of the time your partner won't grow with you. That's why you see a lot of people divorcing once they "make it".

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by watwut on Monday April 08, 2019 @03:49AM (#19603054)
As for 5: men get richer after divorce on average, women poorer. However, women report higher happiness after divorce while men lower. Then again, men are more likely to find new partner faster. Not surprisingly, women who have jobs are more likely to ask for divorce and women who depend on husbands salary less so.

For all the stories about large alimony, such situation not the norm.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by Mirioron on Monday April 08, 2019 @03:54AM (#19603083)
Whether it is or is not the norm isn't even as important. What matters is what people perceive as the norm.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by watwut on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:38AM (#19603302)
Good point. But married men have more sex and unmarried have less of it. And sex now days does not lead to marriage unless you want marriage.

So I would expect divorce issues not to influence causual sex rates, but rather marriage rates.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by Sylamore on Monday April 08, 2019 @12:07PM (#19606465)
Deadbedrooms are a thing as well. Being married limits your (ethical) options if for any reason your partner suddenly decides to no longer engage in physical intimacy.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by watwut on Monday April 08, 2019 @01:58PM (#19607494)
Yes. But right now I am referring to this very set of statistics that says that married have more sex then unmarried.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by thatoneuser on Monday April 08, 2019 @05:21AM (#19603539)
Tbf I would assume if that's true it's because the men feel the need to achieve more. Thus women still do get more on alimony and child support but the men focus more on a career.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by commandlinefan on Monday April 08, 2019 @11:19AM (#19605961)
> Some men add these together and then ask themselves "why bother?"

And, honestly, it doesn't seem like women are terribly upset about this. This seems to be the world (almost) everybody wants.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by arvinsim on Monday April 08, 2019 @01:09PM (#19607034)
That's always the case for the short-term. I am worried about the long-term consequences though.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by Balgair on Monday April 08, 2019 @11:22AM (#19605998)
> but it's like we're breaking aspects of society.

If anything, we're returning to the historical norms. Using genetic analysis of the Y chromosome, ASU researchers were able to conclude that the male:female ratio was about 17:1. Meaning that in human history, one man made 17 women pregnant, on average [0].

[0] https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by pokethetomato on Monday April 08, 2019 @11:56AM (#19606361)
Historical Norms for humanity also involve a lot death and misery. So I'm not sure a discussion about historical norms is needed.

What is concerning is that our current society is breaking apart.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by Balgair on Monday April 08, 2019 @12:12PM (#19606507)
I mean, the internet is on the same level of invention as the wheel, fire, the a-bomb, etc. We should be expecting some pretty monumental changes arising out of it.

Along the lines of sex and reproduction, the real dark-horse is CRISPR-CAS9 and the genetic revolution in general. That's not just readjusting the mating process/markets, it's a wholesale tinkering into heritability and sex as an idea. Eukaryotic sex goes back about 1.2 billion years. Suddenly leaping back to the 'genetic transfer soup' of bacteria is going to rock the boat in way we can't really see today. The entire idea of 'family' and 'child' is up for debate soon.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by chrischen on Monday April 08, 2019 @03:34AM (#19602980)
Dating apps, much like social networking apps like Facebook, reduce our interactions to the shallowest form possible. So it is much better for people to not use these forms and resort to more laborious methods of interaction because these also allow a deeper more honest connection between people. Deeper and more honest connections lead to better understanding and appreciation of each other, which is good for society. Unfortunately we haven't even figured out how to ween people off easy "social interaction" yet, much less dating apps.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by auiya on Monday April 08, 2019 @12:29PM (#19606676)
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 by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:15AM (#19602569)
Enforced communal participation in events — similar to having to file your taxes , you just participate in X number of community events in a X km region from your residence — would help people get off the screens and get outside in a context other than work.

Similar to how In high school you need 40 hrs of community service to graduate

Edit: ok not ‘enforced’ but there should be some sort of government incentive

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by icebraining on Monday April 08, 2019 @05:04AM (#19603441)
Sounds like you might enjoy watching https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lobster
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by anonytrary on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:23AM (#19602615)
The irony is that if you do this for the purposes of finding a date, then the efficient stay-at-home solution is to essentially just use Tinder, which optimizes the process, so we're full circle.

Unless, of course, using Tinder unevenly weights physical attractiveness and going to community events more evenly weights other forms of attraction (which is probably the case), in which case going out more could be better than using Tinder for some people.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by skohan on Monday April 08, 2019 @06:48AM (#19603948)
> using Tinder unevenly weights physical attractiveness and going to community events more evenly weights other forms of attraction

I am very convinced this would be the case.

I remember reading about a study a while ago about relative attractiveness in heterosexual couples (i.e. how the attractiveness of the man compares to that of the woman). The finding was that there was a strong correlation in relative attractiveness in couples who started dating shortly after meeting, and less of a correlation in couples who knew each other for a long time before dating. Both groups of couples reported similar overall relationship satisfaction.

It makes sense if you think about it: if you get together right after meeting, you probably didn't have much to go on besides the superficial. Things like personality take longer to understand. Tinder is like a distillation of the superficial.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:27AM (#19602634)
not efficient in regards that there are many other positive aspects of venturing out and interacting with community. Increased serotonin and feel good emotions of interacting with real people. swiping screens sucks for that. And even if people fail to find a date, which many may do so if were comparing the side conversation of how dating websites have a 80/20 winner take all kind of matching system.... the people who don't find dates may find meaningful friendships and other types or relationships. In the west its sad that 'relationship' is charged with an intimate vibe, there are many other types of relationships humans can create which can be beneficial to ones mental and physical well being.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by yason on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:40AM (#19602697)
What a horrible idea unless you're an extraverted person who'd be likely to join the events anyway.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:57AM (#19602780)
‘What a horrible idea — interacting with other humans face to face - I’d be so uncomfortable’. I see it as a weak social muscle that hasn’t had a lot of workout time and is leaning on a crutch of modern lifestyle staying indoors on screen time. Just like how gradual exercise will make someone stronger , lose weight and take a burden off of the public healthcare system — social exercise will benefit society as well instead of infantalizing and nurturing a generation of socially crippled human beings lol.

As for the extroverted person , maybe they only go to bars to pickup people for quick lays, they don’t contribute to community like helping build a house or work on community plots of land or help paint a mural etc , it could balance it out

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by baroffoos on Monday April 08, 2019 @03:28AM (#19602946)
Mandatory bullshit events forced on people who don't want to be there and then likely some stupid process to prove to the government that you attended the event is a horrible idea.

If you want to encourage face to face events then you need to transform urban spaces to be more walkable and create more public spaces people actually want to hang out at. If I go outside I could walk around for hours and the only people I would see are out there for fitness and do not wish to be disturbed by random chats.

Forcing people to do things is never as effective as making people want to do them in the first place.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:15AM (#19603171)
I think having 50 people meet up at a community center to go volunteer is way more feasible than redesigning urban infrastructure.

I agree forcing is not nice but tell that to all the children who don’t want to go to school haha

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Monday April 08, 2019 @08:24AM (#19604524)
I'm not sure that's true. If you look at where people meet their spouses you often find it was in school or at work (at least here in the states), basically places where they were forced to interact with other people.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by michaelmrose on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:00AM (#19603102)
Nobody wants to erect a massive social infrastructure that diminishes their enjoyment of their time to improve YOUR enjoyment of society. In fact nobody on planet earth wants to be subjected to what YOU or any other person believes they ought to do with their money/time without pay.

Can you imagine how your friends would feel if you stole from their wallet to plan a party and told them you would steal some more if they didn't come?

Is their a particular reason you aren't suggesting organizing more events say in your locality and encouraging rather than forcing people to join?

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:36AM (#19603290)
Dude chill out lol , no one is talking about massive social infrastructure — get a dozen people together in front of some old abandoned land and build something cool. Maybe even just a landscape project with recycled materials from around the worksite. I’m just riffing here on ways to improve society — people may not like doing something but if it’s good for them maybe we should incentivize it .

If it’s a party that had cake which cured a bad recurring disease that I’m too lazy and stubborn to fix then I’d be grateful for those friends

I am doing the above, I do encourage people and really it’s not high on my priority list — it’s just a suggestion about how we could remedy a gaping problem in our modern social fabric

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by michaelmrose on Monday April 08, 2019 @12:55PM (#19606915)
Once again nobody wants you to take money out of their pockets to fund parties and give them a little of it back if they attend. People not doing what you expect them to isn't a gaping problem in modern society.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by RandomInteger4 on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:25AM (#19602625)
Sounds like something out of Nazi Germany. I'm all for people engaging with the community, but enforced?
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by Cthulhu_ on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:37AM (#19603291)
Strongly encouraged, then? I mean I do believe social education should be part of one's upbringing - it's not going to happen for a lot of people otherwise.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by RandomInteger4 on Monday April 08, 2019 @10:28AM (#19605502)
Strongly encouraged is a lot better.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:31AM (#19602653)
"dude F that S*, I'm staying home, rolling a bunch of fat ones, and grinding on my level 80 Warlock, then logging on to grind up my PathOfExile smurf" (repeat loop for next 40 years) -- lots of people who are no way voluntarily going to break their comfortable cocoon created by addictive gaming & drugs.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by thatoneuser on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:34AM (#19602664)
Well then that's their choice and they will have to live and die with the consequences.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:38AM (#19602690)
You could say that for offenders and people who are arrested for crimes/drugs fall into prison system — we have systems in place to reintegrate them back into society —- but the phenomenon of how humans can buy groceries for 2 months, stay inside and entertain themselves , you can’t ‘discipline’ that and schedule those people for parole or counseling —- we’re gonna have a big problem in 10-20 years when more and more people stay inside and have less meaningful relationships
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by ericd on Monday April 08, 2019 @03:53AM (#19603075)
If they haven't done anything to hurt anyone else, that's their right. It's part of being free, that you're free to hurt yourself.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by michaelmrose on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:12AM (#19603161)
I've been together with my wife for 18 years, married for 14 and I met her playing the original Everquest.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Monday April 08, 2019 @08:26AM (#19604532)
Such cases are extreme outliers.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by jessaustin on Monday April 08, 2019 @09:09AM (#19604808)
This is unnecessarily dismissive. Since online interactions are more common over time, we would expect marriages (or anything else, really) resulting from online interactions to also become more common over time.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by close04 on Monday April 08, 2019 @10:37AM (#19605596)
They might be but it's possible that the percentage of such interactions that result in a marriage won't offset the lost potential marriages that came from more "classical" forms of interaction. And when I say "lost" I mean when people start focusing more and more on online dating having expectations other than meaningful relationships/marriage.

The question isn't if online interactions can produce meaningful relationships but rather what is the expectation of people that do it this way. Because if the expectation is that online dating is just for one night stands and "fun" then the increase in such interactions won't bring an equivalent increase in marriages.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by wetpaws on Monday April 08, 2019 @09:02AM (#19604769)
Why just not cut the fluff and go straight to government mandated divorces? :)
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by michaelmrose on Monday April 08, 2019 @03:56AM (#19603088)
There is so many things wrong with this statement man where to start.

Laws are fundamentally enforced by ya know force. Taxes are enforced by taking your money by force, taking your freedom by force if you disagree strenuously enough, and taking your life if you fail to submit to losing your freedom.

You can't legally force someone to associate with others because we put that in the constitution centuries ago. It's also codified in the European Convention on Human Rights, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Your idea pisses on rights fundamental enough and universal enough that the entire free world agrees they are a good idea.

If it didn't you would still have to deal with people with social anxiety, people with other obligations including unplanned ones.

Would we have to go to the doctor (if we can afford to go to one) to avoid having our medical or mental safety taken from us? Perhaps go to a government office to plead our case for an exemption or excuse for not going to a party within the right time frame.

But the harshest criticism and the must fundamental is that this solution is a solution to a wholly imaginary problem. It's not substantially harder to interact with the feminine half of the species than it ever was.

In fact its always sucked if you didn't have much social status. Its worse to be low status than it is to be ugly or stupid or both.

This isn't new or shocking. If you want a mate find an individual with shared interests and use that to springboard into dating -> relationship -> partnership. If you don't like where you are at improve your position rather than asking society to fix imaginary problems with the dating and mating game.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by abledon on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:01AM (#19603109)
Thanks for your thoughtful reply — I was thinking more along the lines of ‘schedule 4-7 events through the year’ claim them on your tax return for an extra bonus or something . Maybe the word enforce was too strong — that’s why I’m not a lawyer lol
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by michaelmrose on Monday April 08, 2019 @04:09AM (#19603151)
A government incentive is paid for out of tax payers pockets. It would literally mean taking money out of my pocket, spending most of it on social events, and then giving me the minority of it back.

Opting out would mean I was paying for other peoples parties when I can barely at this point cover medical expenses.

This remains a terrible idea.

Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by agent008t on Monday April 08, 2019 @07:04AM (#19604029)
But doing some public works in the community in lieu of a portion of local/council tax? That could work.
Re:Explaining Sex Rate Changes by michaelmrose on Monday April 08, 2019 @12:57PM (#19606930)
Alternatively you could just not charge that tax then.