WoodwindWhistler

Teens are having less sex nowadays? Hm.

Recommended Posts

WoodwindWhistler
m4rble

Who has time for sex when you're on the internet all day?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wonderment

US Teens for president

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joe Parrish

I was so sexless as a teen that I turned some folks back into virgins with my presence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
deactivated account

*politely gets off the lawn* oh my sincerest apologies, i hadn't noticed i had wondered onto you patch of grass ^^" i hope you find it in your heart forgive me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mysticus Insanus

Who has time for sex when you're on the internet all day?

You can cyber... catching two birds with one stone. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tarfeather

I was so sexless as a teen that I turned some folks back into virgins with my presence.

Mmm.. You should turn that into a pickup line!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joe Parrish

I was so sexless as a teen that I turned some folks back into virgins with my presence.

Mmm.. You should turn that into a pickup line!

I've reflowered tons of babes. 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Amedot

Who has time for sex when you're on the internet all day?

You can cyber... catching two birds with one stone. :D

This is honestly one of the greatest things about technology. It's a lot safer for kids (and by kids, I mean people under 18, although kids as young as 10 are cybering), it's all fantasy.... no risk of disease transmission or pregnancy.... you can do this with peers all around the world if nobody in your demographic likes you... Honestly, I admire young people (I still am a "young people" being in my mid-20's but whatever) for being so amazing with technology and social media and communication and all that jazz..

I wonder how they define sex though. Some people define sex as penetrative sex, and in that case it's not telling us if less teenagers are sexually active, or if they're having a very specific type of sexual act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reptillian

Adults are probably having less sex too. As there is evidence of teenss having less sex, future generation may involve less importance for sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jade Cross

I was so sexless as a teen that I turned some folks back into virgins with my presence.

The presence is strong in this one. Or You dont know the power of the sexless side.

Ive been watching too much Star Wars

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m4rble

Adults are probably having less sex too. As there is evidence of teenss having less sex, future generation may involve less importance for sex.

Honestly, I think people might have had more sex in the past out of boredom. Now that we have access to Netflix 24/7 and an endless supply of knowledge online, there's less of a need for it.(Of course we've always had books, but not everyone is too into reading)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
fuzzipueo

Adults are probably having less sex too. As there is evidence of teenss having less sex, future generation may involve less importance for sex.

Honestly, I think people might have had more sex in the past out of boredom. Now that we have access to Netflix 24/7 and an endless supply of knowledge online, there's less of a need for it.(Of course we've always had books, but not everyone is too into reading)

Sure. Why have sex when you can be a couch potato instead? LOL For the record, I think you might be on to something there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evren

I think Amedot's right too. How are they defining sex? Because it could just be that teens are having more non-penetrative sex, than in the past. Especially as sex ed gets more comprehensive, they may decided that penetrative sex just isn't worth the risk. Or they may figure out that it's ok not to like penetrative sex. Even ignoring the terrible sex ed in schools, you can get good, comprehensive sex ed from anywhere in the world if you have a computer and an internet connection. Or it could be part of the thing where we are becoming less and less social, because of technology. I do worry about that, not just because of the sex (as sex is a need for the majority of the population, it is important), but because I think that a lot of people aren't getting the touch and closeness that they need. And when you talk about needing stuff like that, people just look at you really weirdly. People are putting less and less importance on mental and emotional health and more and more on quick fixes and physical well-being. I think their all interconnected, and you can't really have one with out all the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid

We're becoming far less social very very quickly thanks to the internet. Suddenly, just being around people is weird and scary... kids these days have a very hard time with IRL intimacy. They're not used to it.

Good sex information is available online but one thing I've noticed with the younger generation is that they seem to have no idea how to discern real information from garbage. They think blogs are news, they think private ideological websites (think: religious, highly conservative, porn, etc) are the same as unbiased, researched data... I don't for the life of me understand how this happened, but I swear to god kids raised on the internet have no ability to separate good sources from bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evren

We're becoming far less social very very quickly thanks to the internet. Suddenly, just being around people is weird and scary... kids these days have a very hard time with IRL intimacy. They're not used to it.

Good sex information is available online but one thing I've noticed with the younger generation is that they seem to have no idea how to discern real information from garbage. They think blogs are news, they think private ideological websites (think: religious, highly conservative, porn, etc) are the same as unbiased, researched data... I don't for the life of me understand how this happened, but I swear to god kids raised on the internet have no ability to separate good sources from bad.

That's very true. They just take it all as information and all as the same. I also think that people are starting to get social and legal consequences mixed up and that scares me. People are starting to get scared of other people too, it's not a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jade Cross

We're becoming far less social very very quickly thanks to the internet. Suddenly, just being around people is weird and scary... kids these days have a very hard time with IRL intimacy. They're not used to it.

Good sex information is available online but one thing I've noticed with the younger generation is that they seem to have no idea how to discern real information from garbage. They think blogs are news, they think private ideological websites (think: religious, highly conservative, porn, etc) are the same as unbiased, researched data... I don't for the life of me understand how this happened, but I swear to god kids raised on the internet have no ability to separate good sources from bad.

Thats actually not something kids do exclusively. Any part of the population can have access to unlimited amount of data and they will not know the differemce between good and bad info simply because they are ignorant on the matter and lack anyone who can gear them in the right direction or at the very least use their intuition and common sense. Even adults get swayed by false imformation easily, it really wouldnt be all that different that the kids do the same or worst.

Personally, I dont see this lack of physically relating to others as a problem for me. I very much enjoy the level of solitude the technological wall brings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AliceAbernathy

Okay. If living in such a way makes them happy, fine. If not, maybe change things.

We're becoming far less social very very quickly thanks to the internet. Suddenly, just being around people is weird and scary... kids these days have a very hard time with IRL intimacy. They're not used to it.

Good sex information is available online but one thing I've noticed with the younger generation is that they seem to have no idea how to discern real information from garbage. They think blogs are news, they think private ideological websites (think: religious, highly conservative, porn, etc) are the same as unbiased, researched data... I don't for the life of me understand how this happened, but I swear to god kids raised on the internet have no ability to separate good sources from bad.

Liberal sources are no better than conservative sources. The issue is not the internet. The issue is that sometimes people treat each other like shit and that's what makes people scary.

Personally, I dont see this lack of physically relating to others as a problem for me. I very much enjoy the level of solitude the technological wall brings.

Well said! Sometimes, the best friendships a person forms are those online and that's fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid

We're becoming far less social very very quickly thanks to the internet. Suddenly, just being around people is weird and scary... kids these days have a very hard time with IRL intimacy. They're not used to it.

Good sex information is available online but one thing I've noticed with the younger generation is that they seem to have no idea how to discern real information from garbage. They think blogs are news, they think private ideological websites (think: religious, highly conservative, porn, etc) are the same as unbiased, researched data... I don't for the life of me understand how this happened, but I swear to god kids raised on the internet have no ability to separate good sources from bad.

Liberal sources are no better than conservative sources. The issue is not the internet. The issue is that sometimes people treat each other like shit and that's what makes people scary.

What? You're misunderstanding me. I'm talking about obtaining good information and knowing which sources are real information and which sources are, like, porn or other biased nonsense.

And, people have always treated each other like shit, but we were at least used to be around people. Now, folks have no idea how to sit and have a conversation without their phones, and they have no idea how to foster in person, face to face intimate relationships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evren

We're becoming far less social very very quickly thanks to the internet. Suddenly, just being around people is weird and scary... kids these days have a very hard time with IRL intimacy. They're not used to it.

Good sex information is available online but one thing I've noticed with the younger generation is that they seem to have no idea how to discern real information from garbage. They think blogs are news, they think private ideological websites (think: religious, highly conservative, porn, etc) are the same as unbiased, researched data... I don't for the life of me understand how this happened, but I swear to god kids raised on the internet have no ability to separate good sources from bad.

Thats actually not something kids do exclusively. Any part of the population can have access to unlimited amount of data and they will not know the differemce between good and bad info simply because they are ignorant on the matter and lack anyone who can gear them in the right direction or at the very least use their intuition and common sense. Even adults get swayed by false imformation easily, it really wouldnt be all that different that the kids do the same or worst.

Personally, I dont see this lack of physically relating to others as a problem for me. I very much enjoy the level of solitude the technological wall brings.

Im glad it works for you. I want people to be friends with and cuddle, so I don't like it very much. But that's personal opinion of course.

(My sentences somtimes come across as sarcastic, this one isn't meant to be)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kisa the Kit Kat

We're becoming far less social very very quickly thanks to the internet. Suddenly, just being around people is weird and scary... kids these days have a very hard time with IRL intimacy. They're not used to it.

Good sex information is available online but one thing I've noticed with the younger generation is that they seem to have no idea how to discern real information from garbage. They think blogs are news, they think private ideological websites (think: religious, highly conservative, porn, etc) are the same as unbiased, researched data... I don't for the life of me understand how this happened, but I swear to god kids raised on the internet have no ability to separate good sources from bad.

I do! When people had to use libraries, they had to pick their books and the pseudoscience was usually put away in the awkward section in the back or able to not be brought into a high school library.

Bring in Professor Google. Now EVERYTHING is a source. However that doesn't exactly answer your question so here's where it gets interesting. Teachers don't call people out on sources besides wikipedia. I could cite practically anything in a college class and as long as it isn't wikipedia and it is cited correctly, it counts as a source. The issue is that nobody is teaching students how to tell when a source is reliable or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid

That was my assumption from what I've seen... still, I can't believe that all sources count! We were absolutely not allowed to cite magazines, for example, in papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jade Cross
Times have changed and unfortunately not for the better. Even while I was a student, I would see how "investigation" papers had 15 to 20 "sources" and they were all net addresses that had no real in depth analysis or content. And students only regurgitated what they read. Ask them to elaborate and the response was "..............."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kisa the Kit Kat

That was my assumption from what I've seen... still, I can't believe that all sources count! We were absolutely not allowed to cite magazines, for example, in papers.

I think it depends on the teacher but from what I've seen, they never really cared to check whether or not the source was a good source. One time we had to proofread papers for an English class and this was the thing that made me realize I never wanted to teach undergraduates because my classmates were idiots who were citing some really biased shit. I have OCD so I had extra rules for my sources that I put on myself (along the lines of "no blogs") and I was shocked to see some of the shit that they got away with. One guy even was arguing about how abortion was wrong because "it was hurtful to men" and had this MRA site as a source. Like, I get that there's an abortion debate but that's not the point I would have gone with if I was pro life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
m4rble

Times have changed and unfortunately not for the better. Even while I was a student, I would see how "investigation" papers had 15 to 20 "sources" and they were all net addresses that had no real in depth analysis or content. And students only regurgitated what they read. Ask them to elaborate and the response was "..............."

Times have changed for the better in many ways. People just only like to focus on the negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evren

Times have changed and unfortunately not for the better. Even while I was a student, I would see how "investigation" papers had 15 to 20 "sources" and they were all net addresses that had no real in depth analysis or content. And students only regurgitated what they read. Ask them to elaborate and the response was "..............."

I was talking to someone about that last year. They said that college sources were treated very differently than in their day. That they were used to finding two to three very good sources and reading the whole thing, in depth, with notes. While younger people were getting about 10 sources and lightly skimming them to find the parts that supported their arguments. I myself am guilty of the later, and I do it because it saves time, and I don't really want to read through all of the little boring bits about how exactly they went about collecting information. However now I am unsure if I should be trying to do the first version instead, it seems like that would be much more informative and really cement my understanding of the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AliceAbernathy

Times have changed and unfortunately not for the better. Even while I was a student, I would see how "investigation" papers had 15 to 20 "sources" and they were all net addresses that had no real in depth analysis or content. And students only regurgitated what they read. Ask them to elaborate and the response was "..............."

And them all being net sources is a problem how? Books are not inherently superior. Even if they are, books are now published online and stuff from the net is published in books. Ye Olde Merriam Webster is online as is the Oxford Dictionary. Britannica and World Book are also published online. One thing books can not provide are multimedia references. It's hard to find technical white papers in books and speeches/lectures from experts in books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jade Cross

Times have changed and unfortunately not for the better. Even while I was a student, I would see how "investigation" papers had 15 to 20 "sources" and they were all net addresses that had no real in depth analysis or content. And students only regurgitated what they read. Ask them to elaborate and the response was "..............."

Times have changed for the better in many ways. People just only like to focus on the negative.

I was speaking in academic skills terms for students, not in a general sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jade Cross

Times have changed and unfortunately not for the better. Even while I was a student, I would see how "investigation" papers had 15 to 20 "sources" and they were all net addresses that had no real in depth analysis or content. And students only regurgitated what they read. Ask them to elaborate and the response was "..............."

And them all being net sources is a problem how?

The problem is not whether it comes from the net but if its reliable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid

Times have changed and unfortunately not for the better. Even while I was a student, I would see how "investigation" papers had 15 to 20 "sources" and they were all net addresses that had no real in depth analysis or content. And students only regurgitated what they read. Ask them to elaborate and the response was "..............."

I was talking to someone about that last year. They said that college sources were treated very differently than in their day. That they were used to finding two to three very good sources and reading the whole thing, in depth, with notes. While younger people were getting about 10 sources and lightly skimming them to find the parts that supported their arguments. I myself am guilty of the later, and I do it because it saves time, and I don't really want to read through all of the little boring bits about how exactly they went about collecting information. However now I am unsure if I should be trying to do the first version instead, it seems like that would be much more informative and really cement my understanding of the subject.

My partner went back to school and it's been a trip seeing what university classes are like now. Did you know that instead of real work and learning, a large part of many grades is based simply on discussion boards conversations with other classmates? I took a couple classes for her because I wasn't doing anything, and I must say, one needn't actually learn anything, as long as one posts the proper citations and/or chats on the class message boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now