I have noticed that after normalizing anything, counterculture areas of California will always have something even more unfamiliar trying to get tolerated and representation
But I don’t see what you’re referring to
I think there is a disinterest in illicit raves because the market has reached parity and beyond for the experience that the market actually enjoyed. If it fails to do that or the illegal raves are better again, I think there is still interest in that, far bigger than whatever was happening in the 90s
To me the giveaway is the decline in sexual experience among young people. This is like a top line KPI for youth culture and socialization since when people have a lot of positive social interaction and mutual bonding experiences they tend to have sex.
Loads of people have commented on these trends. I’m not pointing out anything new, but I do think a lot of people don’t see it because it’s hidden behind a facade of very visible socially liberal movements that garner attention out of proportion to their numbers. These folks do not represent the mean or the median of the culture.
If you are in the Bay Area or LA or really any metro California city that isn’t a deep suburb your experience might be different. These areas have always been more liberal than the average and enduringly so. The SF Bay was where gay people could go back when there was not just a strong taboo but in many cases real persecution.
Edit: with the last election I think the conservative zeitgeist is going to finally crest, and probably inspire a backlash that will start the pendulum going the other way. Things like politics are the lagging end. There’s also a backlash brewing against social media including dating apps, which are one of the drivers for both youth alienation and promulgation of reactionary attitudes. Right wing cultural fear mongering has excellent memetic fitness on social media.
> the decline in sexual experience among young people
Can I push back just a bit. I'm the parent of a teenager and we've had the talk. The kids are alright. When I was a teen I felt everyone felt pressure to be sexually active. While the boys carried the brunt of peer pressure it was the girls who had to deal with the actual fallout. Todays teens are dealing with a lot right now. And my impression is they have a healthier relationship with sex then our generation ever did. Girls have agency, and outside of the social media chucklefucks it's taboo to be serial sexual harasser and be treated with any sort of respect.
I don’t disagree. I’m a dad of girls too and things are better for them today as long as we can hold off the idiots who want to LARP The Handmaid’s Tale.
But that kind of intersects with my next point. There is this vast number of basically hikikomori out there, not to mention lots of mostly boys with very screwed up images of sex from early and uncritical consumption of porn and “masculinity” grifter bullshit. It’s from among these groups that every sort of toxic authoritarian movement is drawing its support.
There’s a lot more unhealthy antisocial stuff out there, and overall I think it’s worse. It’s become more extreme. There isn’t a middle. Young people are either healthy today or they are fucked.
Sex happens in private (mostly, and I'm not judging those who prefer otherwise) and people lie about it. A lot.
But a more publicly observable and, obviously, very adjacent indicator is kissing.
Time was, you'd see a lot of people kissing in public. Not just quick ones either. Pretty normal to walk past bars and there'd be a couple (or more than one) making out by the smoking area. Same in bars beyond a certain time of night, same in a lot of city parks. Sometimes even on the subway. Teenagers walking home from nights out or drinking in the park. (Legal here in the UK and not frowned upon like in the US). In the middle of club or festival crowds.
And whether you think that's cool or gross, there's notably less of it around, and that's been a trend for quite some time.
Maybe the 70s through 90s was an anomaly, it would have been heavily frowned upon before that, but something certainly changed in the mid/late 00s.
Okay this is an interesting topic but I think you are conflating several things.
The decline in sexual experience is occurring in California metros too. Its really interesting how the behaviors have shifted and surprising to me. But people are bonding, social, far less exclusionary, inclusive to things they’ve never heard of - unless you’re the wrong star sign, ironically, or political party.
I date 20-somethings, it’s just different than what I see with people I grew up with. I would say chronic anxiety and demisexuality are common, the most notable to me, and drive a lot of these shifts. But the libidos are there, their age-peers don’t know what they’re doing with really offputting habits or aren’t as interested either. I just cant extrapolate a real exclusionary streak from conservative leanings. Your algorithm is just cooked right now.
You say people are bonding in a less exclusionary manner, but that doesnt mean they aren't bonding less as well.
The chronic anxiety you mention, as well as the pervasive loneliness and depression I observe, seems to indicate a lack of healthy and supportive social bonds.
Good point. The subset of 20-something year old women I date are social and have lots of anxieties, but it doesn’t really inhibit their ability to have a support system.
I can see that there are plenty of other people who would have more difficult doing this by nature of not attracting positive attention and interest by default.
> unless you’re the wrong star sign, ironically, or political party.
These things are very different and do not belong in the same list, and I've noticed that when people do put them together, they're often trying to make the point that political party is just another arbitrary inherent attribute like race, rather than a serious reflection of someone's character. Can you explain why you think they belong together?
When I was young, people had different political opinions and would still be friends and party and do things together. Only some odd fellows would make a fuzz and try to exclude somebody for politics, usually the opposite happened.
When we're older, then political affiliation starts reflecting more on a persons character. Then we've all been through (or should have been through) the different situations where politics have a real world impact on our lives that we can understand and relate to.
When you were young, political differences were more likely about how much tax rich people should pay. Now, political differences are more like who should go in the gas chambers. You can respectfully disagree with people who think the tax rate should be 20% instead of 30%. You cannot respectfully disagree with people who think you belong in a gas chamber.
Because they are just arbitrary attributes rather than a serious reflection of someone's character?
Just because certain media outlets brainwashed you into thinking that Republican == Nazi (they all backpedaled after the election ended by the way) doesn't mean it's true. Go talk to actual people with blue collar jobs. You'll find that their character is quite all right actually.
Whatever you think political party association is, it's not arbitrary. It tells you something about someone's character. People choose political parties based on their personality type to a significant degree, which is not the case for star signs. You don't have to believe that the parties are different, but surely you believe that people don't choose a party by flipping a coin.
I don't think this is entirely true. Most people are normal, but if I'm a woman dating a young conservative man. That conservative has a non-zero chance to actually believe shit like "your body, my choice." Probably don't want to be dating that guy. It's not a guarantee, but a danger signal.
Upvoted you, because opinions should be safe to voice even if one disagrees with them. This does appear to be a common concern. I also happen to know many families that vote Republican where the woman also happens to "wear the pants".
100% of modern misogynistic rhetoric and all the new erosion of women’s rights is coming from the right. Ignoring that fact is just stupid. “Wearing the pants” doesn’t mean shit when they also vote a rapist into office.
Let's say that's true: all misogynistic rhetoric is coming from the right. This does not also mean that anyone on the right is automatically a misogynist.
I know, you'll have a knee-jerk reaction to the above. Let me illustrate the point. 100% of "white people are oppressors" rhetoric comes from the left. By your logic, no white person should vote Democrat. Ah, but you'll say that not everyone on the left is hung up on this, not everyone is actually an oppressor, and we can all get along. Well, the same point applies to the right and misogynists then, doesn't it?
Just because certain media outlets brainwashed you into thinking that Blue Collar == Republican (they all backpedaled after the election ended by the way) doesn't mean it's true. Go talk to actual people with blue collar jobs. You'll find that their character is quite all right actually.
You don't even believe this yourself, and are just trying to come up with a pithy comeback. Sorry, this one fell flat. The celebration of the Republican triumph definitely does not look like backpedaling. To pretend otherwise is to ignore reality.
Underneath this comment is a dead one that should probably not be dead. I don't have the power to vouch for it, so I recommend that person should make a new account to avoid auto-dead.
I have noticed that after normalizing anything, counterculture areas of California will always have something even more unfamiliar trying to get tolerated and representation
But I don’t see what you’re referring to
I think there is a disinterest in illicit raves because the market has reached parity and beyond for the experience that the market actually enjoyed. If it fails to do that or the illegal raves are better again, I think there is still interest in that, far bigger than whatever was happening in the 90s