Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Ask to an AI Persona
Travel Buddy
I'm your go-to travel companion, passionate about exploring new destinations and experiencing...
Advisor Smith
With years of experience guiding individuals in their education and career paths, I'm here to...
Fashionista Amy
I'm here to inspire and guide you with a touch of latest trends or advice on personal style.💅👒
Cinematic Lily
With my rich background and passion for the arts, I share insights on films, TV shows, and...
Love Doctor Brad
Welcome to the heart of understanding and transformation. I am your guide on this journey to...
Athletic Chloe
Whether you need tips on improving your game, insights on fitness and nutrition, or just want to...
James The Foodie
From savoring Italian classics to discovering the bold flavors of Japanese cuisine, I explore...
Gamer Bella
With my passion and experience in hobbies and leisure activities, I'm here to offer personalized...
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
38Opinion
some people think we are in a dating, relationship apocalypse, specifically saying, there are more single adults today than ever before, marriage is on the decline, the birth rate is at the lowest point in U. S. history.
Yes! All true.
is there evidence that supports that?
I don't know about the 'relationship apocalypse' term, but yes I have heard all of the others stats, here and there. I can't consolidate them into one article, but I can confirm them.
This article comes to mind, which is very interesting. The Atlantic is notorious for the length of their articles (it will lose most peoples' interest on gag), but I agree with them that many topics just cannot be encapsulated in short verse. This one is very informative.
It is specifically about the sex (or lack of sex) of the high school aged. aka The Sex Recession. Definitely worth a read, if you're interested in this topic.
(It is separate from the 'hookup culture' discussion. Hookups are happening with older adults.)
www.theatlantic.com/.../
You want a arranged marriage like in the past? Why do people think that normal love relationships exist in the past? People marry for financial, political, religious or whatever purpose. Love marriages did not exist in the past. And if you want a long lasting relationships or marriages you should give up on the idea of love. Every married couple I know tell me that love no longer exist in their relationship and this is very normal. If you only seek for love, you can forget long lasting relationships.
That's your takeaway, that you think I want arranged marriages and that will solve everything? Not even close.
It is true that the current us has romanticized marriages of the past (via film, etc.) and that many were extremely pragmatic, but that doesn't mean that love marriage have never existed. They are the goal, the ideal, the carrot that many people hope for. They are also really effing challenging. No doubt about that. But what in life that is really worth achieving is easy? Not much. And we value things higher that we have to work hard for.
The marriages of my parents' generations were often arranged or under duress (no birth control existed), etc. etc. but in North America most people have married for love. Yes 55% of them don't work out, so the odds suck. Almost like driving a car and hoping you don't ever get into a car accident, but you probably will. But will it be a fender bender that you can get past, or a complete wreck.
I know many marriages that were/are real. They all have problems, friction, not every day is smooth, but they all love each other, and they have fought through the hard times and both chosen to be together. Love does exist.
@kim45456
Love in relationships, engagements and marriages fo exist. My parent still love each other and they have been married for 45 or 46 years. I know couples that have been married for 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years, 50-59 years or 60+ years that still love each other. Does that mean every day is without some difficulties no. Love is still around.
Damn that made me think. But i still have hope. There has to be more out there than just a bunch of relationships with no meaning.
There are many people like yourself you want more. Just keep one eye and ear open. 👀
Yay!!! thanks Amanda!! 😁*hug and kiss*
Being together with somebody is built into the species... Thousands of years a selection favoring bonding pairs over single parents. That's right when it's built into the species
Absolutely! We are communal creatures, and surrounding ourselves with others brings safety and security, and apparently fulfillment. As much as people drive each other crazy, and same goes for 55% of marriages that ultimately end, people who do stay together, and have people in their lives, tend to live longer and report higher happiness rates.
Hook up culture is just natural biology. We're made to fuck and move on to the next.
That seems like a simple enough idea, but I can counter it with this:
1. Our ancestors were not monogamous and did have multiple partners, but they also helped to raise the offspring. Because there were no paternity tests, they usually could not tell who the child's father was, so multiple males would help raise the kid in the tribe, which helped to ensure their genes were passed on, and aided in the survival of the group - strength in numbers. Up until just recently, we were not living singly and were more often part of a community, not anonymous strangers who never cross paths again.
2. If we're best suited to screwing and moving onto the next, then why is there a global loneliness epidemic, rampant anxiety, male suicides are up, and happiness rates declining? I don't buy that they're completely disconnected.
Point 1 isn't entirely true. It's true for some cultures but not for many others. The idea that our ancestors were like that comes mainly from books like "Sex At Dawn" by Cacilda Jethá and Christopher Ryan.
Many experts disagree with their ideas. They jump to conclusions on a lot of things when there are usually multiple explanations. What I think is going on there as well, as well as what I think is going on with the people who argue this, is confirmation bias. That it's what they'd like to believe is the case, not necessarily because it's true.
I was in a discussion recently about the evolution of mating strategies and the people who believe the above like to say that we're most closely related to the bonobos, not the chimpanzees. Chimpanzees have more of a patriarchal structure with a male dominance hierarchy, more females mating with alpha males. Bonobos are more matriarchal and more polyamorous in the way you describe. Some studies show that we're more related to bonobos, others to chimpanzees, and most to both. There's no solid proof to that. Again here I think that's about confirmation bias. If most studies show that we're related to both, that's probably the truth.
The reason I doubt it also is that in those bonobo groups most get laid, there's no male hierarchy. In the chimpanzee groups however, there are males who have sex with a number of the females (alphas), there are males who the females will sometimes allow to have sex with them if they provide resources for them (betas) and there are males who have no sexual access (omegas). People like to argue that this doesn't exist in our culture, but you see the exact same thing in the men here. Guys who have lots of sex with different women, the average guy who is able to have sex if he's good boyfriend/husband material, and incels.
To add to that, there's evidence that only 40% of men throughout history managed to reproduce while 80% of men did. There are hunter-gatherer tribes still living today, and they follow a similar structure where the most skilled hunters have more women whereas the lesser ranking men have less or none.
80% of women*
@englisc I'm not entirely sure what your specific point is here, or if you have one or are speaking generally.
Yes, confirmation bias certainly exists. No one is immune, myself included. But the topic of evolution and changing societal norms is complex, so no one really knows for sure the true reasons for any of this stuff. It's all just theories. Which is understandable. But I think it's better to try and understand it and discuss it, than just dismiss it as being obviously known or irrelevant. It's convenient for men to say that we are just animals (even with that - certain animals are monogamous and certain ones aren't), and it's convenient for women to say that true monogamy is the only answer. What interests me is what is feasible, and what makes people happy and unhappy.
I haven't heard of that Sex at Dawn book but I might be interested. You went back to primates (and I know people do because we can study them) but I like to go a bit less far back in our evolution. We've been in this current basic form for about 5000 years and that seems plenty far back for a good sampling!
I won't repeat myself here, as I've already said it, but I do believe we are a blend of both primal and more evolved. Those who want to discount the brain evolution are not taking into account that we are choosing each other based on many characteristics. Physical advantages are just one. People are becoming weaker and less capable of raw survival and practical life skills, but more advanced as far as thinking, reasoning, logic, etc etc. They're all factoring in to our value and our desires.
The point I was trying to make was basically that it's a lot more complex, and some people like the authors of Sex At Dawn like to claim that they have all the answers when really they come to those conclusions because they're biased. There's also a book called Sex At Ducks by Lynn Saxon where she basically points out all of the holes in their arguments. And there are others that tell a different story too such as The Evolution Of Desire by David Buss, Sperm Wars by Robin Baker, The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins.
While our culture has evolved rapidly, I don't think that we as humans have actually evolved. I think that the culture evolved way too quickly for us to adapt. As you say with humans becoming weaker and less capable, if anything that's because civilisation has allowed the weak to reproduce, which is the opposite of evolution. Civilisation is unnatural and it has taken away natural selection. Civilisation needs social supports in order to keep it afloat - monogamy being one of them. Once these supports are taken away you see the culture begin to fail and a return to the state of nature, and in the dating game I think that's what we're seeing now, because we still have the same old programming.
@englisc I agree. I haven't heard the connection to dating and marriage, but I understand what you're saying. I'll think about this...
@englisc @AmandaYVR While I understand this perception and beliefs of authors and their interpretations of experiments are used here and that is good but these are largely secondary sources. When i'm mainly giving a genera conclusion I refer to primary sources. Which are plainly primary evidence results from the exact form of research. And the jist of it is in science we look at the closest possible ancestor we have we observe them mating observe how they do things does the male leave or nurture the wife and kids? And from my understanding my area of science isn't exactly biology or the study of animal behaviour but they generally mate and leave to the next girl. But at the same time it's very valid to say that could be because they changed through evolution they adapted to this approach now. What I find is when evolve enough and change your gene pool big enough a process of diffusion happens whereby this new gene pool becomes ineffective from the next offspring and what happens is your body starts to go back the the old gene pool but still keeps the new one.
And so it could be why this is happening.
@englisc
"While our culture has evolved rapidly, I don't think that we as humans have actually evolved. I think that the culture evolved way too quickly for us to adapt. As you say with humans becoming weaker and less capable, if anything that's because civilisation has allowed the weak to reproduce, which is the opposite of evolution. Civilisation is unnatural and it has taken away natural selection." - Totally agree.
"Civilisation needs social supports in order to keep it afloat - monogamy being one of them. Once these supports are taken away you see the culture begin to fail and a return to the state of nature, and in the dating game I think that's what we're seeing now, because we still have the same old programming." Hmm. Interesting. Thinking...
@daniel3035
Well we can study "the closest possible ancestor we have we observe them", definitely, but we haven't been them for a very long time (anyone know how long? I know that we've been in this same basic form for about 5000 years so it's got to be waaay longer than that), so again, they are a much older version of us. But I am definitely an evolutionist, not a creationist, so I'm not going to push too hard against this, because I do believe in studying them.
"What I find is when evolve enough and change your gene pool big enough a process of diffusion happens whereby this new gene pool becomes ineffective from the next offspring and what happens is your body starts to go back the the old gene pool but still keeps the new one.
And so it could be why this is happening." Really? Is this true? Wow. I have never heard this, a reversion. That kind of blows the whole thing wide open. I mean if that's the case, than anything can be in a state of reversion and it makes you think what is, and what will be in the future. There is the concept of 'reversion to the mean' but I've never heard that applied in this kind of context. Interesting.
I agree it does seem to work out that way.. like the old saying goes... one bad egg can ruin a carton.. (being the person)
Yes, it makes you think, hey? In one way it's like, well to each his own, do as you please (as long as you're being honest about it.) But in another, it's having a ripple effect in society, creating distrust and bitterness, people feeling unappreciated, and that is not good.
Thank you for understanding
That is one sexy wall of text.
Thank you, Boppy. Based on our previous exchanges, I'm going to figure that's not sarcasm. That is one damn fine compliment.
Well... people do have sex because that is what they want. So, dunno about that part, but I appreciate the care you took in writing this.
Yes, people want and like sex. I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to not have it or to give it up and feel content. But the rewards are short term. The more difficult question is what do people want long term, and what will make them happy.
Sure. And sex makes lots of people happy. It's fulfilling and exciting.
If guys and girls are having sex with people that they don't really know, and they are happy, and they are not hurting anyone or being dishonest about their intentions, then more power to them. I think it's their choice and I don't believe in judging or standing in their way.
But if people are doing this, and feel unhappy and unfulfilled, or if one of two people is doing this and the other person is hurt or upset by the lack of honesty about their intent, that's where it becomes a problem. Not just for the individual but for society. And that seems to be where things are at, or going, right now. If everyone was happy, great. But girls are being criticized for having sex too easily or with too many guys (and if and why is debatable), and many guys are complaining about feeling discarded and unappreciated (those are obviously not the same guys that are having fun having lots of casual sex.) I'm not judging, I'm just commenting on what seems to be happening, how people are feeling.
Sis... humans are animals. Pretending otherwise is doing yourself a disservice.
You don't know me well. If you think I'm ignoring the primal part of humans, you're mistaken. I'm pretty much a centrist in that regard, actually. I don't say, "Ok, everyone pair up, have one partner from [puberty], and be monogamous for life." That's not realistic. More than half of people will fail the challenge. But we are also more than just animals. Our brains are massive, much, much bigger than other animals, proportionally. We have evolved past them. You can't discount that either.
Nor can people ignore the rampant anxiety, high suicide rates, loneliness epidemic, etc. etc. There is no one answer.
Right. There's no one answer.
I have never created a poll here which begs the question... are the results broken down by age or just an aggregate?
Just an aggregate, separated by gender only.
Glad, i made it to the conclusion. 👀❤️
Yes. I made you a star 💫
Sure you did 💋
You and I share many thoughts, M.
Not only just thoughts, A
I don't do hookups and I do date, so dating will survive at least as long as I do.
You should start replicating (ala some sci-fi movie) so that you even up the numbers. Proportions are a bit off these days.
I'll admit, I only skimmed the first few paragraphs, but I'm interested in love and hookup culture doesn't interest me in the slightest.
Excellent article, if somewhat verbose, Ms. YVR.
Thanks.
I’m working on that, lol.
But also, I reject this 280–character limit world. I like depth.
As do I.
I wonder if the 1950s were really as bad of a time to live compared to today?
Well I've done done research about that, and I think many people would be surprised to hear it was not the bastion of idealism and happiness that was conveyed.
Comparing peoples' ideas about marriage and fidelity in the 1950s to now, we are actually a more morally strict society today. There was infidelity back then (moreso with males, because they had opportunities and females did not, being tied to the home and kids), but there was also a certain amount of acceptance of it. Monogamy has been an ideal we tried to achieve for only about the past 50-60 years. Prior to that in history, it was known and common that people had side partners. Prior to birth control, women really couldn't and not get found out, but after that development, infidelity rates between the sexes have pretty much evened out. And yet...
There was a lot of expectation which can be burdensome, but also it is said that clearly defined roles can be a sense of comfort and stability. Back then, the women didn't have nearly as much choice, as to work or not work, and when they did enter the workplace they were in subservient roles. But the ones who wanted their homemaker and mother role, for them and for the husbands and fathers who also wanted their roles, overall this probably created less anxiety. Uncertainty creates confusion and the inability to plan and predict, and this creates anxiety. As well, self-sufficiency, not being able to depend on others, as we once did... these all create anxiety, and eventually wears a person down (thus all the chronic unexplained medical conditions that seem to have one root in common - stress.) So some people idolize and romanticize the 1950s, and others condemn it for its strictness and limitations it placed on personal freedoms. I suppose both are correct.
Men and women have a bane to each other since the beginning of life
I say it's better for them to not start a relationship and just be friends with benefits
Scanned over it. Seems interesting I'll read later.
Good mytake
Thank you, Kara.
I’m still coming to grips with my sexuality.
Well good luck with that. In many ways it's not an easy time, the world feels in turmoil, but in others, you are growing up in the best time that has ever been - your generation is apparently the most progressive, inclusive, least focused on race, and most open to sexuality and all sorts of differences. You are growing up in a time when free expression reigns (for better or worse). As long as you continue to be a kind and good-hearted person, speak your mind and do your best to encourage positive change. The future is yours.
Of course I’m starting get comfortable with who I am.
Take it slow, don't rush it, be careful, and no matter what you hear on this site and anywhere else, don't let it get you down too much.
I don't know what you're referring to specifically, but I'll just put this out there - NickiB is bi and open here. She's an absolute sweetheart, one of the nicest people on the site, and she's very positive about both girls and guys. There are many people who will condemn anything outside of traditional cultural norms but there are also many who will support.
You like to make yourself pretty 4 girls.
It's fun after all. Intense and beautiful and... just perfect.
Never stop smiling, girl. The world is your oyster.
Chivalry is dying a slow tragic death...