7 ms·

> Large numbers of hikikomori said they had begun retreating from mainstream society due to relationship issues and after losing or leaving their jobs, the cabi

> Large numbers of hikikomori said they had begun retreating from mainstream society due to relationship issues and after losing or leaving their jobs, the cabinet office said. A significant proportion – 20.6% – said their predicament had been triggered by changes in lifestyle imposed during the pandemic. This really worries me—relationships are vital for so many people to have a happy and fulfilling life and for society to function that increases in the amount of people who simply choose to leave society from what seems to be relationship or economic troubles could have massive negative effects on society as a whole. Is society a happier place when people don't have constructive relationships? Are people themselves happier? Also, this is a bit off topic but does anyone else feel that relationship quality on a societal level has gone down a lot? I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever.

toomuchtodo 4y ago
The interesting question is: what could you change to improve this? What could you do to encourage prioritizing relationship forming, prioritization, and tending/maintenance? Is there anything you could do?
- t0suj4 4y ago
  In my humble opinion lower people's expectations or make them explicit. These days many people have perception that the society is having unrealistic expectations from them. They rather withdraw from society than risking being a disappointment. Japanese culture of indirect communication is making it more pronounced but the rest of the world is moving in the same direction. My other hypothesis is self-confidence crisis.
  - tsss 4y ago
    It's hardly the outcasts who have too high expectations.
- eropple 4y ago
  Causes first (US-constrained): economic atomization and precariousness is the first tentpole. I mention that in a sibling comment. The other is that political sorting and radicalization have rendered parts of the country unsafe for vulnerable populations to live in; my Massachusetts Republican neighbors might be uncomfortable with Pride flags bracketing their Thin Blue Line house, but they're not in danger of their safety unlike my LGBT friends in the South--or, at current rates, my "anodyne liberal" friends, too. Vulnerable populations or those sensitive to the treatment of vulnerable populations are going to leave if they can. They just are. And that takes a pretty big swing at the personal idea of connecting with people through offline methods, too. Hard to believe in community when yours does that. The former has some solutions, though at this point they feel like really beating that dead horse. UBI, national health care, ways to make being not a white-collar worker less immediately terrifying in much of the country. That can help anchor people if they don't feel like they have to go elsewhere to live at least adequately. The latter--I don't know how you convince people to not be weird about vulnerable and marginalized populations. They're probably going to keep leaving, and while there's some found-family effects from that kind of diaspora, it's not the same thing.
  - localplume 4y ago
    You are part of the problem though? You are engaging into political sorting and assuming that because your neighbors are Republican, that they would be uncomfortable with pride flags. Do you even know if they are Republican? How do you know they are not in danger of their safety? What if they are LGBT and support police? What if they are Jewish and support police? So what if they are Republican and support police and they are uncomfortable around pride flags, but its because of their assumptions. The same assumptions and political sorting you are engaging in. Also assuming vast parts of the country are unsafe because they are mostly Repulican, whereas you would be equally likely to be subject to hate crimes in major cities in blue states no? https://abc7ny.com/hate-crime-lgbtq-new-york-city-pride-month/11958809/ https://abc7ny.com/hate-crime-lgbtq-new-york-city-pride-mont... What is terrifying about being a blue collar worker anyhow? Also I fail to see how UBI nad national healthcare would solve it. What would fix it is less hatred and animosity between groups, and less sorting into groups period. Less apocalyptic rhetoric from all groups. The world isn't ending, its actually doing pretty well for the most part. Being proud to be American. And honestly, people should stop flying a pride flag or a thin blue line flag or any other flag, but the one flag which represents all people in this great country: the flag of the United States of America. That is the only true, completely inclusive flag of this country.
eropple 4y ago
> Also, this is a bit off topic but does anyone else feel that relationship quality on a societal level has gone down a lot? I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. I think this is a symptom, not a cause. Personal and economic atomization is largely outside an individual's control, unless they are making Fat Stacks Of Cash. I can't speak to Japan, but I can to what I've seen here in the United States. There are people for whom the trends of moving further away from home have significant benefits--and I as a younger man was one of them, both for social and economic reasons. But they, along with the generally increased precariousness of what used to be a "middle class" and increased reliance on the information economy, are strong pressures towards personal atomization. "Both my girlfriend and I need to work to advance in our careers to become less precarious, but one or the other of us might have to move really far away and stop seeing each other" necessarily reduces investment in other people, at least a little bit. (This isn't saying dual-income situations or women with careers are a negative; far from it. The first weirdo to go on about "men were hunter-gatherers so of course their careers matter more" or whatever can get bopped.) You see the same with friend groups. The friends I primarily knew online are the friends I stay more closely in touch with, because we're still in the same hangouts when one or the other has moved further away. The forces that are out of your control and thus able to pull you away from your social moorings are stronger now than in the past, and the natural coping mechanism for most people is to connect less. I think it's natural for people who feel less connected and increasingly economically vulnerable to be "not happy whatsoever". It is only in the last few years, where I have managed some level of personal wealth (and not just income), that I've been able to entertain putting down roots, and feel more at ease and happier.
- kodah 4y ago
  I have different degrees of friendships and people move in and out of them. I don't even really actively think about them; the level of friendship at the time largely relies on availability overlap, personal life experience overlap, and other factors. These things, like you mentioned, are more fluid these days. I also think people are more accepting of social reclusion in the information age. It used to be some kind of red flag that very social people would use to wallop non-social people. It took the aggressiveness that people who prefer working in an office often show to remote workers. These kind of societal evolutions will also influence the normalcy of behavior as experiences become more ubiquitous. More people have experienced loss, financial strain, etc
humanistbot 4y ago
> I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. It's the same phenomenon as people thinking that new music, movies, etc. is mostly terrible and the old days were full of nothing but amazing hits. Because we remember the good and forget the bad, both individually and as a society.
- sixQuarks 4y ago
  New pop movies and music ARE shit though compared to the 80s/90s. You can’t tell the difference between songs from the 2010s and today. Most popular movies are rehashed boring superhero/avenger movies that blend into each other. Yes, I’m living up to the stereotype by saying this, but I think it’s true this time.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    > Most popular movies are rehashed boring superhero/avenger movies that blend into each other. Nah, you're not wrong, highest-grossings are indeed in a rut. Top 10 highest grossing in 1990: 2 films that were sequels or otherwise an entry in an existing franchise. 2022? All ten are sequels (even the Chinese propaganda film at entry 9 is a sequel!) There are tons of good movies released every year, but the top-10-by-sales are in fact mostly safe bets on sequels or entries in sprawling franchises, these days. Since those so consistently out-perform better, original films, it's kinda hard to argue that studios should stop. Theater-release films are in kinda a rough spot in the age of streaming and strong competition from TV. Tickets are crazy-expensive and people just don't watch movies in theaters as much anymore, so the lion's share of the money goes to safe, FX-heavy films where the audience basically knows what they're gonna get for their $12 (or, about the cost of having a whole streaming service for an entire month).
  - DocTomoe 4y ago
    We had that in the 1980s as well. No-one remembers "The Brother from Another Planet" (1984) ... but everyone remembers "E.T." (1982). Similarly, the Marvel stuff will mostly shrink together into obscurity, while actual good movies (My money is on "La La Land" as the chick-flick musical and the "John Wick" Franchise as the action cornerstone, "Parasite" for the connoisseurs) will be remembered.
hotpotamus 4y ago
I wasn't around 60-70 years ago, but that is about when my grandparents got married (the 50's). One pair of them divorced in the 70's and the other pair stayed married until my grandmother's death in 2008. I don't think they really liked each other for the last 20-30 years before that though - they rarely spoke to each other. If you're getting your perception of relationships from the popular media of that time, then I'd just say that you should probably look at the media's current relationship ideals and see how well they match up to reality.
dQw4w9WgXcQ 4y ago
> I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. It's because many women have bought into the lie that getting it all and bridging every perceived equality gap will somehow make them happy. Of course, when women are unhappy, their men are more likely to be miserable as well. Men are equally to blame for being passive and enabling these systems of inherent discontent. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-rights-happiness-wellbeing-gender-gap https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-...
- albatross13 4y ago
  [flagged]
- malfist 4y ago
  So are you saying that for women to be happy they have to....go back to the kitchen?
  - imbnwa 4y ago
    Could also have the implication that high-committal economic participation in the post WWII-era was/is also bad for men. It was always a raw deal, but it was also the only general marker of success/achievement/prosperity.
  - StrangeATractor 4y ago
    I've been seeing a lot of talk like GP on HN lately. I'm starting to wonder if it's organized.
    - albatross13 4y ago
      I bet it's that darn hacker named ebaumsworld
    - hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
      > I'm starting to wonder if it's organized. While I strongly disagree with that GP post, baseless speculation invoking conspiracy theories, just because you disagree with an opposing point of view, is one of the primary reasons I don't use Twitter. Please don't bring that to HN.
hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
> I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. My guess is you are definitely not Gen-X, and your feeling isn't supported by data: https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-us-divorce-rate-has-hit-a-50-year-low https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-us-divorce-rate-has-hit-a-50-.... As a "towards the tail end" Gen Xer, basically it seemed like half my friends had divorced parents. The best explanation I've seen for this huge spike in divorce rates in the 70s and early 80s was a disconnect between men's views of marriage and the change in women's views of marriage as a result of women's lib. That is, many men of that era were raised in environment where husbands were "boss", they were expected to be the provider and women were expected to be subservient and manage the home. After women's lib, even women who would not label themselves as "feminists" still had an expanded view of women's role in a marriage, and this came in direct conflict with men's expectations. I've seen the subsequent reduction in divorce rates explained as a younger generation (a) getting married much later, and (b) having more balanced expectations of marital roles (even if they don't always act this way). Today, divorce rates are highly correlated with income and education levels.
Quarrelsome 4y ago
> Is society a happier place when people don't have constructive relationships? Are people themselves happier? As someone that struggles with trust issues due to childhood psychological trauma I have some experience with the intentional solitude perspective. I think the maths is that you get a more consistent outcome. You may be sacrificing the highs of relationships but you're also dodging the lows of if/when that falls apart. If you can scratch your social and physical itches in other ways (e.g. the internet can provide some of the most basic social interaction needs) then entering into relationships just feels like an unnecessary double-sided risk (to them and you).
- csande17 4y ago
  > the internet can provide some of the most basic social interaction needs This is an underappreciated point. Thanks to the Internet, you're probably still having social interactions even if you're spending all day in your bedroom. Those interactions are cheaper and more convenient, and they do come with significantly less risk; it's way harder for a psycho ex to destroy your life if they don't know your real name and you can prove you've never physically interacted. Like, is it really worth it to schedule a whole evening and get dressed up and spend a few thousand yen on transit tickets and overpriced drinks, just to see a few people's faces in 3D instead of 2D? I'm not sure why we're so surprised when some people decide the answer is no.
  - brobdingnagians 4y ago
    This is more of a philosophical musing, but your comment did make me think-- is it also a reflection of the shallowness of a lot of contemporary social events and rituals? People used to get together, do a barn raising, work together, have debutante balls, welcome boys into manhood, have community spiritual occasions and rituals, and so on. A lot of modern social events are lacking in the meaning, anticipation, and social depth as before-- some people who crave it most still go out, but maybe it just isn't meaningful enough to pull in those whose personality doesn't lean towards social butterfly-ness.
- x-complexity 4y ago
  Hard agree with the parent comment: In terms of dice, it's the equivalent of swapping out a 100-sided die (1-100) with a 10-sided die (41-50 or 51-60, depending on how you view the Internet). You're assuring yourself some minimum that you can hit, in sacrifice of the highs you could've gotten otherwise. (This comes from someone who is extremely fearful of negative outcomes. It didn't help that my school practiced corporal punishment on us when I was still a child, just for getting answers wrong. (Note: Not from the US.))
malfist 4y ago
> relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling You say this, while every comedian from that era makes jokes about how much husbands and wives hate each other
- humanistbot 4y ago
  The key joke and catchphrases for one of the most popular television shows of the era (The Honeymooners) was about a husband threatening to physically assault his wife ("One of these days, Alice, right in the kisser! Bang, zoom, to the Moon!)
- MisterBastahrd 4y ago
  Imagine living in a world where you can only wear a black t-shirt with comfort fit blue jeans. Since the beginning of time, that's all anyone has ever worn and nobody has questioned it. Then one day, someone starts selling a red shirt in limited quantities. Man, wouldn't it be really great to be wear one? Someone else sells slim fit jeans. Wow, all the choices... People tend to act on their unhappiness when they have additional choices that they can make, and deal with the situation as it is when they can't. Divorce used to be damned near heretical due to the vows involved until the baby boomers with their enlightened self-interest came of age and decided that marriage needed to be as disposable as their milk jugs and tampons.
- barrysteve 4y ago
  And comedians today complain about losing half their money in divorce settlements (bill burr) and describe how expensive it is to date older women (chris rock). I don't necessarily take comedians as gospel.
dw_arthur 4y ago
50 years of living under "there is no such thing as society" is what has happened. That's why you see some people trying to retreat into nuclear families and wall themselves off. That can end up being their own hell if it goes wrong.
kitsunesoba 4y ago
I think it's arguable that opportunities to build substantiative constructive relationships of any kind has been on a sharp decline over the past several decades. For most of us, the bulk of connections we make are those made by way of circumstance — the people we meet in class, at the workplace, etc. While school connections have a decent chance of becoming more deep and real, it's much more unlikely for those at the workplace, particularly as job workloads have increased (meaning less downtime during work hours to talk) and it becoming more common for people to change jobs many times during their lives (not as much point in getting to know coworkers deeply when you'll probably be somewhere else in a couple of years). Some have been able to make connections outside of work through group hobbies, but this is difficult to manage for the many who find themselves with little free time and/or too exhausted in the little free time they have to want to go out and do these things. Really, what the pandemic has done more than anything has revealed how fleeting and insignificant most of our connections are.
anotherman554 4y ago
"I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever." It's possible this is true. But here's a little anecdote. 70 years ago is 1953. The American sitcom "Happy Days", produced in 1973, makes this era look great. I know British writer Alan Moore has said he's seen the TV show Happy Days, and things in Britain in his childhood were nothing like "Happy Days". The country was struggling with how the world had changed post World War 2. I imagine Japan was going through some serious stuff as well.

toomuchtodo 4y ago

The interesting question is: what could you change to improve this? What could you do to encourage prioritizing relationship forming, prioritization, and tending/maintenance? Is there anything you could do?

t0suj4 4y ago
In my humble opinion lower people's expectations or make them explicit. These days many people have perception that the society is having unrealistic expectations from them. They rather withdraw from society than risking being a disappointment. Japanese culture of indirect communication is making it more pronounced but the rest of the world is moving in the same direction. My other hypothesis is self-confidence crisis.
- tsss 4y ago
  It's hardly the outcasts who have too high expectations.
eropple 4y ago
Causes first (US-constrained): economic atomization and precariousness is the first tentpole. I mention that in a sibling comment. The other is that political sorting and radicalization have rendered parts of the country unsafe for vulnerable populations to live in; my Massachusetts Republican neighbors might be uncomfortable with Pride flags bracketing their Thin Blue Line house, but they're not in danger of their safety unlike my LGBT friends in the South--or, at current rates, my "anodyne liberal" friends, too. Vulnerable populations or those sensitive to the treatment of vulnerable populations are going to leave if they can. They just are. And that takes a pretty big swing at the personal idea of connecting with people through offline methods, too. Hard to believe in community when yours does that. The former has some solutions, though at this point they feel like really beating that dead horse. UBI, national health care, ways to make being not a white-collar worker less immediately terrifying in much of the country. That can help anchor people if they don't feel like they have to go elsewhere to live at least adequately. The latter--I don't know how you convince people to not be weird about vulnerable and marginalized populations. They're probably going to keep leaving, and while there's some found-family effects from that kind of diaspora, it's not the same thing.
- localplume 4y ago
  You are part of the problem though? You are engaging into political sorting and assuming that because your neighbors are Republican, that they would be uncomfortable with pride flags. Do you even know if they are Republican? How do you know they are not in danger of their safety? What if they are LGBT and support police? What if they are Jewish and support police? So what if they are Republican and support police and they are uncomfortable around pride flags, but its because of their assumptions. The same assumptions and political sorting you are engaging in. Also assuming vast parts of the country are unsafe because they are mostly Repulican, whereas you would be equally likely to be subject to hate crimes in major cities in blue states no? https://abc7ny.com/hate-crime-lgbtq-new-york-city-pride-month/11958809/ https://abc7ny.com/hate-crime-lgbtq-new-york-city-pride-mont... What is terrifying about being a blue collar worker anyhow? Also I fail to see how UBI nad national healthcare would solve it. What would fix it is less hatred and animosity between groups, and less sorting into groups period. Less apocalyptic rhetoric from all groups. The world isn't ending, its actually doing pretty well for the most part. Being proud to be American. And honestly, people should stop flying a pride flag or a thin blue line flag or any other flag, but the one flag which represents all people in this great country: the flag of the United States of America. That is the only true, completely inclusive flag of this country.

eropple 4y ago

> Also, this is a bit off topic but does anyone else feel that relationship quality on a societal level has gone down a lot? I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. I think this is a symptom, not a cause. Personal and economic atomization is largely outside an individual's control, unless they are making Fat Stacks Of Cash. I can't speak to Japan, but I can to what I've seen here in the United States. There are people for whom the trends of moving further away from home have significant benefits--and I as a younger man was one of them, both for social and economic reasons. But they, along with the generally increased precariousness of what used to be a "middle class" and increased reliance on the information economy, are strong pressures towards personal atomization. "Both my girlfriend and I need to work to advance in our careers to become less precarious, but one or the other of us might have to move really far away and stop seeing each other" necessarily reduces investment in other people, at least a little bit. (This isn't saying dual-income situations or women with careers are a negative; far from it. The first weirdo to go on about "men were hunter-gatherers so of course their careers matter more" or whatever can get bopped.) You see the same with friend groups. The friends I primarily knew online are the friends I stay more closely in touch with, because we're still in the same hangouts when one or the other has moved further away. The forces that are out of your control and thus able to pull you away from your social moorings are stronger now than in the past, and the natural coping mechanism for most people is to connect less. I think it's natural for people who feel less connected and increasingly economically vulnerable to be "not happy whatsoever". It is only in the last few years, where I have managed some level of personal wealth (and not just income), that I've been able to entertain putting down roots, and feel more at ease and happier.

kodah 4y ago
I have different degrees of friendships and people move in and out of them. I don't even really actively think about them; the level of friendship at the time largely relies on availability overlap, personal life experience overlap, and other factors. These things, like you mentioned, are more fluid these days. I also think people are more accepting of social reclusion in the information age. It used to be some kind of red flag that very social people would use to wallop non-social people. It took the aggressiveness that people who prefer working in an office often show to remote workers. These kind of societal evolutions will also influence the normalcy of behavior as experiences become more ubiquitous. More people have experienced loss, financial strain, etc

humanistbot 4y ago

> I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. It's the same phenomenon as people thinking that new music, movies, etc. is mostly terrible and the old days were full of nothing but amazing hits. Because we remember the good and forget the bad, both individually and as a society.

sixQuarks 4y ago
New pop movies and music ARE shit though compared to the 80s/90s. You can’t tell the difference between songs from the 2010s and today. Most popular movies are rehashed boring superhero/avenger movies that blend into each other. Yes, I’m living up to the stereotype by saying this, but I think it’s true this time.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  > Most popular movies are rehashed boring superhero/avenger movies that blend into each other. Nah, you're not wrong, highest-grossings are indeed in a rut. Top 10 highest grossing in 1990: 2 films that were sequels or otherwise an entry in an existing franchise. 2022? All ten are sequels (even the Chinese propaganda film at entry 9 is a sequel!) There are tons of good movies released every year, but the top-10-by-sales are in fact mostly safe bets on sequels or entries in sprawling franchises, these days. Since those so consistently out-perform better, original films, it's kinda hard to argue that studios should stop. Theater-release films are in kinda a rough spot in the age of streaming and strong competition from TV. Tickets are crazy-expensive and people just don't watch movies in theaters as much anymore, so the lion's share of the money goes to safe, FX-heavy films where the audience basically knows what they're gonna get for their $12 (or, about the cost of having a whole streaming service for an entire month).
- DocTomoe 4y ago
  We had that in the 1980s as well. No-one remembers "The Brother from Another Planet" (1984) ... but everyone remembers "E.T." (1982). Similarly, the Marvel stuff will mostly shrink together into obscurity, while actual good movies (My money is on "La La Land" as the chick-flick musical and the "John Wick" Franchise as the action cornerstone, "Parasite" for the connoisseurs) will be remembered.

hotpotamus 4y ago

I wasn't around 60-70 years ago, but that is about when my grandparents got married (the 50's). One pair of them divorced in the 70's and the other pair stayed married until my grandmother's death in 2008. I don't think they really liked each other for the last 20-30 years before that though - they rarely spoke to each other. If you're getting your perception of relationships from the popular media of that time, then I'd just say that you should probably look at the media's current relationship ideals and see how well they match up to reality.

dQw4w9WgXcQ 4y ago

> I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. It's because many women have bought into the lie that getting it all and bridging every perceived equality gap will somehow make them happy. Of course, when women are unhappy, their men are more likely to be miserable as well. Men are equally to blame for being passive and enabling these systems of inherent discontent. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-rights-happiness-wellbeing-gender-gap https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/may/18/womens-...

albatross13 4y ago
[flagged]
malfist 4y ago
So are you saying that for women to be happy they have to....go back to the kitchen?
- imbnwa 4y ago
  Could also have the implication that high-committal economic participation in the post WWII-era was/is also bad for men. It was always a raw deal, but it was also the only general marker of success/achievement/prosperity.
- StrangeATractor 4y ago
  I've been seeing a lot of talk like GP on HN lately. I'm starting to wonder if it's organized.
  - albatross13 4y ago
    I bet it's that darn hacker named ebaumsworld
  - hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
    > I'm starting to wonder if it's organized. While I strongly disagree with that GP post, baseless speculation invoking conspiracy theories, just because you disagree with an opposing point of view, is one of the primary reasons I don't use Twitter. Please don't bring that to HN.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago

> I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever. My guess is you are definitely not Gen-X, and your feeling isn't supported by data: https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-us-divorce-rate-has-hit-a-50-year-low https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-us-divorce-rate-has-hit-a-50-.... As a "towards the tail end" Gen Xer, basically it seemed like half my friends had divorced parents. The best explanation I've seen for this huge spike in divorce rates in the 70s and early 80s was a disconnect between men's views of marriage and the change in women's views of marriage as a result of women's lib. That is, many men of that era were raised in environment where husbands were "boss", they were expected to be the provider and women were expected to be subservient and manage the home. After women's lib, even women who would not label themselves as "feminists" still had an expanded view of women's role in a marriage, and this came in direct conflict with men's expectations. I've seen the subsequent reduction in divorce rates explained as a younger generation (a) getting married much later, and (b) having more balanced expectations of marital roles (even if they don't always act this way). Today, divorce rates are highly correlated with income and education levels.

Quarrelsome 4y ago

> Is society a happier place when people don't have constructive relationships? Are people themselves happier? As someone that struggles with trust issues due to childhood psychological trauma I have some experience with the intentional solitude perspective. I think the maths is that you get a more consistent outcome. You may be sacrificing the highs of relationships but you're also dodging the lows of if/when that falls apart. If you can scratch your social and physical itches in other ways (e.g. the internet can provide some of the most basic social interaction needs) then entering into relationships just feels like an unnecessary double-sided risk (to them and you).

csande17 4y ago
> the internet can provide some of the most basic social interaction needs This is an underappreciated point. Thanks to the Internet, you're probably still having social interactions even if you're spending all day in your bedroom. Those interactions are cheaper and more convenient, and they do come with significantly less risk; it's way harder for a psycho ex to destroy your life if they don't know your real name and you can prove you've never physically interacted. Like, is it really worth it to schedule a whole evening and get dressed up and spend a few thousand yen on transit tickets and overpriced drinks, just to see a few people's faces in 3D instead of 2D? I'm not sure why we're so surprised when some people decide the answer is no.
- brobdingnagians 4y ago
  This is more of a philosophical musing, but your comment did make me think-- is it also a reflection of the shallowness of a lot of contemporary social events and rituals? People used to get together, do a barn raising, work together, have debutante balls, welcome boys into manhood, have community spiritual occasions and rituals, and so on. A lot of modern social events are lacking in the meaning, anticipation, and social depth as before-- some people who crave it most still go out, but maybe it just isn't meaningful enough to pull in those whose personality doesn't lean towards social butterfly-ness.
x-complexity 4y ago
Hard agree with the parent comment: In terms of dice, it's the equivalent of swapping out a 100-sided die (1-100) with a 10-sided die (41-50 or 51-60, depending on how you view the Internet). You're assuring yourself some minimum that you can hit, in sacrifice of the highs you could've gotten otherwise. (This comes from someone who is extremely fearful of negative outcomes. It didn't help that my school practiced corporal punishment on us when I was still a child, just for getting answers wrong. (Note: Not from the US.))

malfist 4y ago

> relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling You say this, while every comedian from that era makes jokes about how much husbands and wives hate each other

humanistbot 4y ago
The key joke and catchphrases for one of the most popular television shows of the era (The Honeymooners) was about a husband threatening to physically assault his wife ("One of these days, Alice, right in the kisser! Bang, zoom, to the Moon!)
MisterBastahrd 4y ago
Imagine living in a world where you can only wear a black t-shirt with comfort fit blue jeans. Since the beginning of time, that's all anyone has ever worn and nobody has questioned it. Then one day, someone starts selling a red shirt in limited quantities. Man, wouldn't it be really great to be wear one? Someone else sells slim fit jeans. Wow, all the choices... People tend to act on their unhappiness when they have additional choices that they can make, and deal with the situation as it is when they can't. Divorce used to be damned near heretical due to the vows involved until the baby boomers with their enlightened self-interest came of age and decided that marriage needed to be as disposable as their milk jugs and tampons.
barrysteve 4y ago
And comedians today complain about losing half their money in divorce settlements (bill burr) and describe how expensive it is to date older women (chris rock). I don't necessarily take comedians as gospel.

dw_arthur 4y ago

50 years of living under "there is no such thing as society" is what has happened. That's why you see some people trying to retreat into nuclear families and wall themselves off. That can end up being their own hell if it goes wrong.

kitsunesoba 4y ago

I think it's arguable that opportunities to build substantiative constructive relationships of any kind has been on a sharp decline over the past several decades. For most of us, the bulk of connections we make are those made by way of circumstance — the people we meet in class, at the workplace, etc. While school connections have a decent chance of becoming more deep and real, it's much more unlikely for those at the workplace, particularly as job workloads have increased (meaning less downtime during work hours to talk) and it becoming more common for people to change jobs many times during their lives (not as much point in getting to know coworkers deeply when you'll probably be somewhere else in a couple of years). Some have been able to make connections outside of work through group hobbies, but this is difficult to manage for the many who find themselves with little free time and/or too exhausted in the little free time they have to want to go out and do these things. Really, what the pandemic has done more than anything has revealed how fleeting and insignificant most of our connections are.

anotherman554 4y ago

"I feel that the majority of relationships and marriages say 60-70 years ago were happy and mutually fulfilling, but now anecdotally it seems that most people are not happy whatsoever." It's possible this is true. But here's a little anecdote. 70 years ago is 1953. The American sitcom "Happy Days", produced in 1973, makes this era look great. I know British writer Alan Moore has said he's seen the TV show Happy Days, and things in Britain in his childhood were nothing like "Happy Days". The country was struggling with how the world had changed post World War 2. I imagine Japan was going through some serious stuff as well.