4 ms·

> Will teens use [] for sex? > Were they going to have sex anyway? These are nice insertions to add humour, but I feel the "teen" specifier here dates this co

> Will teens use [] for sex? > Were they going to have sex anyway? These are nice insertions to add humour, but I feel the "teen" specifier here dates this comic somewhat (even now, only about a decade after it was published). In a similar way that articles from a few decades ago about gamers being "kids" would seem dated today.

WorldMaker 4y ago
Concerns about teens having sex "too early" or even at all seem timeless to me. Abstinence-only education still exists in large parts of the country and may always exist in some (or pendulum back and forth forever between that and not-that). "Promise rings" were a big deal when I was in high school a mumble number of decades ago, and I just recently, randomly saw some recent "Disney Channel show" with a Promise Ring sub-plot. If anything, this maybe dates you more than the comic and your distance from teen experiences and their parents fretting about them endlessly.
- lucideer 4y ago
  So, there's a few angles here. To add initial context, I'm referring to the general tendency of younger people to have less interest in sex (statistically) than previous generations. Firstly, you're starting with adult concerns rather than teen actualities - these typically lag reality (parents concerns about things their kids do come through a lens tuned based on the culture norms they grew up with). Sure, the comic questions are adult concerns, but the answers purport to address reality - it's the latter that seems dated. Secondly, there's also sub-trends in certain areas of the US of increased subscription to (rather than previous rebellion against) sexually conservative rituals like promise rings. Especially in children of relatively more liberal parents. So, these being prevalent don't necessarily speak to concern for increased promiscuity in younger people. Lastly, I wouldn't rate Disney as a good gauge for young people's genuine tendencies or behaviours. Focus groups aside, the writers aren't young. > If anything, this maybe dates you more than the comic and your distance from teen experiences I don't think so.

WorldMaker 4y ago

Concerns about teens having sex "too early" or even at all seem timeless to me. Abstinence-only education still exists in large parts of the country and may always exist in some (or pendulum back and forth forever between that and not-that). "Promise rings" were a big deal when I was in high school a mumble number of decades ago, and I just recently, randomly saw some recent "Disney Channel show" with a Promise Ring sub-plot. If anything, this maybe dates you more than the comic and your distance from teen experiences and their parents fretting about them endlessly.

lucideer 4y ago
So, there's a few angles here. To add initial context, I'm referring to the general tendency of younger people to have less interest in sex (statistically) than previous generations. Firstly, you're starting with adult concerns rather than teen actualities - these typically lag reality (parents concerns about things their kids do come through a lens tuned based on the culture norms they grew up with). Sure, the comic questions are adult concerns, but the answers purport to address reality - it's the latter that seems dated. Secondly, there's also sub-trends in certain areas of the US of increased subscription to (rather than previous rebellion against) sexually conservative rituals like promise rings. Especially in children of relatively more liberal parents. So, these being prevalent don't necessarily speak to concern for increased promiscuity in younger people. Lastly, I wouldn't rate Disney as a good gauge for young people's genuine tendencies or behaviours. Focus groups aside, the writers aren't young. > If anything, this maybe dates you more than the comic and your distance from teen experiences I don't think so.