4 ms·

This isn't just a Silicon Valley thing. It is happen to whole Japan!!! Or in several countries humanities courses are trying to decipher the "Marriage Strike"

by speeder 10y ago

This isn't just a Silicon Valley thing. It is happen to whole Japan!!! Or in several countries humanities courses are trying to decipher the "Marriage Strike", and so on. The thing is, there are several problems that make having a family hard, and even when you don't want a family, and want just random sex, some problems still get in the way. Personal anecdote, but good example: I am 29 right now. Also right now my interest in having a girlfriend dropped through the bottom, I am less interest now than any point in my life (even in my childhood I was more interested). After some self-analysis I concluded the reason is very simple and obvious: What I would want a girlfriend for? I don't have any money (literally), I still have lots of debts (made to pay student debts), I don't own a house, or a car, or even a bicycle, I spend most of my time trying to sharp my work skills in hopes I can finally get some decent money having my first job (yep, I graduated in 2009, and never had a job!) or by getting some decent contract (I had many contracts, but mostly crappy ones that I took only because I had no other choice, since I am in debt). If I had a girlfriend, she would "get in the way", it would make my life worse, not better, I don't have time even to buy my own food, what would be the point in having someone to share things (including time) with? And I believe this applies to most of my friends and acquaintances too, even the ones in other countries, life is just too fucked up right now to people between 20 and 35... In UK humanities courses even invented a new name for my generation: "Boomerang Generation", the only generation where large numbers are being forced to live with their parents unwillingly, even after attempts to leave home, the generation that in hopes of being proper adults rented some place out, failed to pay, and were forced to return to their parents home, like a boomerang.

aianus 10y ago
Isn't it a lot cheaper to split rent with someone else who lives in the same bed as you? And to cook for two instead of one? The way I see it, the only way being single is cheaper is if you live with family for free.
- speeder 10y ago
  I don't have a job (never had), right now I don't have any contract either. I don't have any income, but I do have debt (including unpaid rents for when I lived away from my parents, in a "startup boom city"), I need expensive medicine (about 100 USD month in a country where mininum wage is 300 USD), who do you think is paying for all that? It is not the government, because I don't even get unemployment benefits, because I was never employed legally in first place.
- h0p3 10y ago
  You are correct about it being cheaper to share the costs of living. However, relationships generally have unique costs we should take into account. You have to invest your time in people (time you might otherwise spend on yourself). Many people feel compelled to spend money in relationships, especially to find and impress the kind of mate they desire. That isn't to say there aren't unique costs in being single either. The point is that relationships aren't obviously as cost-efficient as they may seem at first glance. Sometimes they require real sacrifice.
- adpoe 10y ago
  That's true. But finding a stable romantic partner who you're willing to move in with, and live with, + share all your personal space with is still very hard when you have little time/money, right? (And that applies to both sexes.) And moreover - finding someone you really love and care for and want to move in with is hard even when you're rich. Just look at all the dating sites and services catering to matchmaking for the very wealthy. We might say --> the less time/money you have, the harder it gets. And when all your time is going to career + you're in debt... it's a bad combo for the dating pool, for both sexes.
coldtea 10y ago
>After some self-analysis I concluded the reason is very simple and obvious: What I would want a girlfriend for? I don't have any money (literally), I still have lots of debts (made to pay student debts), I don't own a house, or a car, or even a bicycle, I spend most of my time trying to sharp my work skills in hopes I can finally get some decent money having my first job (yep, I graduated in 2009, and never had a job!) or by getting some decent contract (I had many contracts, but mostly crappy ones that I took only because I had no other choice, since I am in debt). If I had a girlfriend, she would "get in the way", it would make my life worse, not better, I don't have time even to buy my own food, what would be the point in having someone to share things (including time) with? People have had girlfriends (and even families) in much more dire situations, including in the whole developing world. Whether one has debt, or a car, or their own house, is not even much of a factor. >I don't have time even to buy my own food, what would be the point in having someone to share things (including time) with? The reason people pursue it is because generally it's considered inherently nice. If it's not for you, then fine, but it's not like wanting to be with someone has not been part of the human condition (not to mention a biological imperative) since the beginning of time. But it's not a logistical operation, either you're in love with someone and want to be with them, or not. If not, then it doesn't make much sense to ponder whether to get a girlfriend or not.

by speeder 10y ago

aianus 10y ago

Isn't it a lot cheaper to split rent with someone else who lives in the same bed as you? And to cook for two instead of one? The way I see it, the only way being single is cheaper is if you live with family for free.

speeder 10y ago
I don't have a job (never had), right now I don't have any contract either. I don't have any income, but I do have debt (including unpaid rents for when I lived away from my parents, in a "startup boom city"), I need expensive medicine (about 100 USD month in a country where mininum wage is 300 USD), who do you think is paying for all that? It is not the government, because I don't even get unemployment benefits, because I was never employed legally in first place.
h0p3 10y ago
You are correct about it being cheaper to share the costs of living. However, relationships generally have unique costs we should take into account. You have to invest your time in people (time you might otherwise spend on yourself). Many people feel compelled to spend money in relationships, especially to find and impress the kind of mate they desire. That isn't to say there aren't unique costs in being single either. The point is that relationships aren't obviously as cost-efficient as they may seem at first glance. Sometimes they require real sacrifice.
adpoe 10y ago
That's true. But finding a stable romantic partner who you're willing to move in with, and live with, + share all your personal space with is still very hard when you have little time/money, right? (And that applies to both sexes.) And moreover - finding someone you really love and care for and want to move in with is hard even when you're rich. Just look at all the dating sites and services catering to matchmaking for the very wealthy. We might say --> the less time/money you have, the harder it gets. And when all your time is going to career + you're in debt... it's a bad combo for the dating pool, for both sexes.

coldtea 10y ago

>After some self-analysis I concluded the reason is very simple and obvious: What I would want a girlfriend for? I don't have any money (literally), I still have lots of debts (made to pay student debts), I don't own a house, or a car, or even a bicycle, I spend most of my time trying to sharp my work skills in hopes I can finally get some decent money having my first job (yep, I graduated in 2009, and never had a job!) or by getting some decent contract (I had many contracts, but mostly crappy ones that I took only because I had no other choice, since I am in debt). If I had a girlfriend, she would "get in the way", it would make my life worse, not better, I don't have time even to buy my own food, what would be the point in having someone to share things (including time) with? People have had girlfriends (and even families) in much more dire situations, including in the whole developing world. Whether one has debt, or a car, or their own house, is not even much of a factor. >I don't have time even to buy my own food, what would be the point in having someone to share things (including time) with? The reason people pursue it is because generally it's considered inherently nice. If it's not for you, then fine, but it's not like wanting to be with someone has not been part of the human condition (not to mention a biological imperative) since the beginning of time. But it's not a logistical operation, either you're in love with someone and want to be with them, or not. If not, then it doesn't make much sense to ponder whether to get a girlfriend or not.