jfb: (Default)
jfb ([personal profile] jfb) wrote2004-06-04 08:39 am

(no subject)

From last week's New York Times Magazine, an article on the dating habits of contemporary teens, or rather non-dating habits.
It's not that teenagers have given up on love altogether. Most of the high-school students I spent time with said they expected to meet the right person, fall in love and marry -- eventually. It's just that high school, many insist, isn't the place to worry about that. High school is about keeping your options open. Relationships are about closing them. As these teenagers see it, marriage and monogamy will seamlessly replace their youthful hookup careers sometime in their mid- to late 20's -- or, as one high-school boy from Rhode Island told me online, when ''we turn 30 and no one hot wants us anymore.''
Be prepared to go "Ew" a lot.

Ew

[identity profile] greyaenigma.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 05:13 pm (UTC)(link)
I think I may have to upgrade my ew to holy crap, but then it occurs to me I've always been mystified by the sexual mores of the general public. I think what amazes me most is how few kids seem concerned with STDs -- probably some concept of teen invulnerability mixed with ignorance of how easily they can spread and how gets them.

One of the most interesting things in there was the brief mention that straight kids today act the way people tend to assume the gay population does, and pretty much vice versa.

Doesn't really do a lot to raise my estimation of teens.

Re: Ew

[identity profile] jfb.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 05:56 pm (UTC)(link)
Well, first, don't assume the article is an accurate representation of the general public. Consider things like how the author found his sources (trolling chat rooms, sounds like), who chose to talk to him or not, whether they're telling the truth as they know it, and whether they're right.

Strangely, it hadn't occurred to me to have a low opinion of teenagers because some of them indulge in meaningless (or meant-to-be-meaningless) sexual flings. My take on the whole thing was that we as a society have let them down, by providing the wrong role models, lack of guidance, etc. Typical bleeding-heart liberal stuff.

I feel so old.

I enjoyed the gay/straight thing too, although I thought the best part of all was the historical review--how "normal" behavior for young men and women has shifted back and forth between monogamy and, uh... lepidopterousness... all through the century.

Re: Ew

[identity profile] greyaenigma.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 06:16 pm (UTC)(link)
Lepidopterous would assume breeding, right? Even the most casual of those in his article seem to be avoiding that. And I do find it encouraging how open and aware they are these days about sex, even if I'm a bit distressed about how casual they are about it. Makes me feel old too.

I liked the history lesson myself, although I note that most of the sources seem to be people writing in to a particular magazine, which didn't seem like an entirely characteristic sample. And I admit this article's source's may be suspect, but he did at least talk to teens in multiple parts of the country and seemed to be talking to an awful lot of sources. Certainly not a local hoax. I question whether they're right too, but that's always a question in stories like this -- in fact, shedding light on the inconsistencies in what the sources are saying is even part of the reportage.

Particular quote that stuck out was the guy who couldn't get hookups with girls his age, talking about being able to get underclasswomen "because they look at us like gods, and of course we are". That was pretty sad. It speaks a lot to how this all plays into a complicated game of self-esteem (and in some cases self-delusion).

Re: Ew

[identity profile] jfb.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 06:32 pm (UTC)(link)
That was one of several comments where I would really like to have heard the speaker's tone of voice.

[identity profile] dougo.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 07:03 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't feel like reading a 9-page article right now, but, what's wrong with indulging in meaningless sexual flings? Or was that your point?

[identity profile] jfb.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 07:12 pm (UTC)(link)
The meaninglessness, mostly.

Ah...

[identity profile] talking-sock.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 07:26 pm (UTC)(link)
The warm fuzzy of realizing that you haven't changed in the past ten years :-)

[identity profile] bushmiller.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 06:57 pm (UTC)(link)
Ahahahaha, clearly you old fogies spend no time around college-age people anymore. Kids are "doin' it" much more than they were when I was in college, plus a lot of other kinds of experimentation are back in a big way. Lots of coke floating around college campuses nowadays.

--sean

[identity profile] jfb.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 07:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, I'm not surprised kids are doin' it. I mean, I've seen The Rules of Attraction. I just object to the hanging out at Hooters.

[identity profile] greyaenigma.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 09:39 pm (UTC)(link)
Big deal. We have a lot of Coke stocked in our fridge at work -- at least, before people notice it's there.

I'm sure there's meaningless sex going on in our offices, too. Somewhere. I've already started to try and sort out who's having affairs with which coworker.

[identity profile] bnewmark.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 10:33 pm (UTC)(link)
well, this is kind of old news at this point, but along the same lines of promiscuity by the younger generations.
http://washingtoniennearchive.blogspot.com

[identity profile] michaelpop.livejournal.com 2004-06-04 11:35 pm (UTC)(link)
as a healthy, socially active 23 year old living in the big city, i can say with some degree of authority that those high school kids in the article are the exception rather than the rule.

maybe the indie community is a little more prudish that the abercrombie crowd, but my friends and i really don't discuss sex all that much. sure there's the inevitable inter-group crushes and all that, but it never leads anywhere because our cliques are so small.

[identity profile] jfb.livejournal.com 2004-06-05 08:19 pm (UTC)(link)
Or maybe it's just that at 23, you're OLD LIKE US.

[identity profile] michaelpop.livejournal.com 2004-06-05 08:21 pm (UTC)(link)
i was hoping you weren't going to go there.

*cries*