4 ms·

I’ve seen this graph before and it always makes me very sad - friends and family fade after 40, and everyone ends up spending the vast majority of time alone pa

I’ve seen this graph before and it always makes me very sad - friends and family fade after 40, and everyone ends up spending the vast majority of time alone past 60.

philosopher1234 4y ago
I would reread the chart. Time with friends and time with partner stays the same through 60. You just don’t work as much, and your kids move out. It doesn’t seem so tragic to me.
- Barrin92 4y ago
  that you implicitly reduced family to "partner" says a lot. Not seeing your adult kids or them not seeing you or their grandparents, not maintaining a multi-generational and extended family, as used to be the case until very recently is a sad state of affairs in my opinion.
  - raarts 4y ago
    I agree. I think we have taken a wrong turn when we 'decided' to ditch the extended family. As I get older I increasingly feel the deep wish to live with the ones I love in a group. Including my children and their children. This by the way would solve a lot of societal problems we have, including health care, mental health, financial problems, parental care to name a few.
    - shriphani 4y ago
      One of the greats - Kurt Vonnegut - on this topic: "A few Americans, but very few, still have extended families. The Navahos. The Kennedys." https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/300997-ok-now-let-s-have-some-fun-let-s-talk-about-sex https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/300997-ok-now-let-s-have-so...
  - creakingstairs 4y ago
    I absolutely agree that maintaining a multi generation, extended family is a goal worth having. But the chance of the endeavour succeeding seems to be, anecdotally, around 50%. Some families are just miserable when they are together.
- noisy_boy 4y ago
  Tragic for folks without a friend circle - your main remaining company is basically your partner which, unless you delight in each others company, isn't great.
  - whateveracct 4y ago
    I highly recommend delighting in each other's company.
    - bigDinosaur 4y ago
      You can still lose your partner and you'll always be better off having friends in that case.
      - whateveracct 4y ago
        If I lose my partner, the best thing I could've done is delight in her company and give her my focus for what was her entire life.
        bigDinosaur 4y ago
        Of course you should do that ideally, but you shouldn't use it to substitute for friends.
        da39a3ee 4y ago
        Have you ever had a long-term romantic partner whose company you enjoyed so much that you felt tempted to substitute it for that of your friends, and have this feeling continue consistently, over many years?
  - xref 4y ago
    Have one of those weddings where you say “my spouse is also my best friend” then you don’t need a friend group too
  - 4y ago
mitchdoogle 4y ago
I'd say the only major thing is time spent with friends sharply decreasing, but that happens in the 20s. Family is an odd one since there is also the category of children and partners. I guess family means your parents, siblings, and extended family? In general speech I would say spending time with your partner or kids counts as spending time with your family. I also don't think the difference is that drastic over time. The charts shows people spending about 4-5 hours a day alone in their 30s-40s, and then 7-8 hours alone when they get into their 70s-80s. 2-3 hours extra per day doesn't seem like that much to me, especially when you consider the main reason is retiring from work
threatripper 4y ago
Some things accumulate over your lifetime. You don't need to make the same experience over and over again if you can remember it instead. Also energy goes low for many, so they meet up once per month instead of several times per week, just to save energy and regenerate. Life doesn't really get worse because of it. Time just moves faster and faster.

I’ve seen this graph before and it always makes me very sad - friends and family fade after 40, and everyone ends up spending the vast majority of time alone past 60.

philosopher1234 4y ago

I would reread the chart. Time with friends and time with partner stays the same through 60. You just don’t work as much, and your kids move out. It doesn’t seem so tragic to me.

Barrin92 4y ago
that you implicitly reduced family to "partner" says a lot. Not seeing your adult kids or them not seeing you or their grandparents, not maintaining a multi-generational and extended family, as used to be the case until very recently is a sad state of affairs in my opinion.
- raarts 4y ago
  I agree. I think we have taken a wrong turn when we 'decided' to ditch the extended family. As I get older I increasingly feel the deep wish to live with the ones I love in a group. Including my children and their children. This by the way would solve a lot of societal problems we have, including health care, mental health, financial problems, parental care to name a few.
  - shriphani 4y ago
    One of the greats - Kurt Vonnegut - on this topic: "A few Americans, but very few, still have extended families. The Navahos. The Kennedys." https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/300997-ok-now-let-s-have-some-fun-let-s-talk-about-sex https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/300997-ok-now-let-s-have-so...
- creakingstairs 4y ago
  I absolutely agree that maintaining a multi generation, extended family is a goal worth having. But the chance of the endeavour succeeding seems to be, anecdotally, around 50%. Some families are just miserable when they are together.
noisy_boy 4y ago
Tragic for folks without a friend circle - your main remaining company is basically your partner which, unless you delight in each others company, isn't great.
- whateveracct 4y ago
  I highly recommend delighting in each other's company.
  - bigDinosaur 4y ago
    You can still lose your partner and you'll always be better off having friends in that case.
    - whateveracct 4y ago
      If I lose my partner, the best thing I could've done is delight in her company and give her my focus for what was her entire life.
      - bigDinosaur 4y ago
        Of course you should do that ideally, but you shouldn't use it to substitute for friends.
        da39a3ee 4y ago
        Have you ever had a long-term romantic partner whose company you enjoyed so much that you felt tempted to substitute it for that of your friends, and have this feeling continue consistently, over many years?
- xref 4y ago
  Have one of those weddings where you say “my spouse is also my best friend” then you don’t need a friend group too
- 4y ago

mitchdoogle 4y ago

I'd say the only major thing is time spent with friends sharply decreasing, but that happens in the 20s. Family is an odd one since there is also the category of children and partners. I guess family means your parents, siblings, and extended family? In general speech I would say spending time with your partner or kids counts as spending time with your family. I also don't think the difference is that drastic over time. The charts shows people spending about 4-5 hours a day alone in their 30s-40s, and then 7-8 hours alone when they get into their 70s-80s. 2-3 hours extra per day doesn't seem like that much to me, especially when you consider the main reason is retiring from work

threatripper 4y ago

Some things accumulate over your lifetime. You don't need to make the same experience over and over again if you can remember it instead. Also energy goes low for many, so they meet up once per month instead of several times per week, just to save energy and regenerate. Life doesn't really get worse because of it. Time just moves faster and faster.