This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Why Should I Care?
I recently greatly enjoyed Naraburns' post on the life of Dylan, so I thought I would give back by putting together my thoughts as someone that empathizes greatly with Dylan, and would probably be picking pineapples right next to him if I didn't happen to be born with some aptitude for shape rotation. To provide some context, I've been in a bit of a malaise for the last few days, having had a rough week at work, and I get into a spiral of fantasizing about quitting my job when the thought hits me - why, exactly, do I even care about the job? Why do I actually care about contributing to society?
As any good economist knows, people at scale generally do what they're incentivized to do. Yet from the point of view of a young man it's increasingly harder to get a bite out of carrots historically used to incentivize men to act pro-socially, while simultaneously most of the sticks and fences previously used to corral people's worst impulses have disintegrated. Viewed from a sufficiently cynical lens, it becomes more and more rational from a self-interest perspective to drop out of the system and become a disaffected bum, and indeed this does seem to be reflected in the male labor force participation rate.
The elephant in the room is, of course, dating discourse. It is absolutely true and subject to much discussion amongst these types of circles that relationship formation and TFR is dropping off a cliff in almost all countries on the planet. Everyone has their own hot take as to what's going wrong and who's at fault; personally, I just think it comes down to incentives.
Men no longer need women for sexual gratification [when HD video porn exists] or domestic labor [when household appliances exist], women no longer need men for physical or economic security [when careers and the state will provide] and there's significantly less status or social pressure for either gender to get into and stay in relationships early, unless you run in religious or traditional circles. It's a similar story for having children; most people, if asked, will at least nominally say that they want children, yet revealed preference is for global TFR collapse. In agrarian societies having children isn't a great burden relatively and they become useful quite quickly, whereas in modern societies having child(ren) will result in significant changes to your lifestyle, and impose notable financial burden [less than what most PMC's might think, but certainty an extant one] for at least twenty years for a very uncertain return; it's a hard sell to the modal person to make sacrifices to their quality of life and economic stability for the sake of very expensive pets [from an economic perspective].
As a result, polarization between the sexes is at an all-time high as a result as neither sex really needs the other, and left to their own devices the observed tendency is that they mostly end up self-segregating. For men that do still want a relationship and marriage, this means it's the hardest it's ever been; in-person ways for singles to meet have all but disappeared, dating apps are perhaps the most demonic application of technology ever invented, and the very high amount of options that most women now hold [including that to eschew dating altogether] heavily disincentivizing making any sort of commitment [to be clear, almost all men would and do act in similar ways given the same breadth of options as well].
I don't agree with the blackpillers, in the sense that I think the majority of people could eventually find a partner if they put in enough effort [which might be an incredible amount depending on the starting point!]. However, it is true that we went from a society where the standard life script ended up with everyone except for a few oddballs partnered up, to one where the standard life script results in most men ending up alone unless they spend an inordinate amount of time and effort on dating or are exceptionally [hot/rich/charismatic/lucky] in some way. Most people really just go with the flow, and hence increasingly more people end up alone.
Even for those who do manage to summit the mountain, the returns on entering into a relationship and marriage seem to be diminished for most men. It's likely to be expensive financially [I'm not convinced by Caplan-style arguments that relationships save you money, the most expensive budget items like housing, childcare and healthcare are largely rivalrous or wouldn't otherwise exist, and it's reasonably well studied that relationships where the woman makes more money suffer] and of course there's little to really secure commitment or incentivize sticking it out if something goes wrong; getting divorced is one of the easiest ways to have your life ruined, after all.
At the end of the day, modern relationship formation is less about the practical benefits as was the case for almost all of human history, and almost entirely about self-esteem and self-actualization; hence the rise of incels [who are bereft of the validation of being desired, not the literal act of sex] and romantasy fiction. How much does it validate me that I have a high status / hot / rich partner willing to have sex and be seen in public with me? Have I now truly found my soulmate, the ideal parent for my children? This is, of course, an impossible standard to meet for the vast majority of people and relationships and hence most people who think this way end up dissatisfied and unhappy - and yet without the illusion of self-actualization what else is there really to gain bonding yourself to someone else with a bond that is not a bond?
With all is said and done, as the mountain grows ever-harder to summit and the rewards for reaching the peak become ever-increasingly a mirage, I think it's an increasingly rational choice for many people to decide not to climb and to try and find contentment at the bottom. That's certainly how I've been feeling lately, at the very least.
This brings me to my next point, where if a first world man decides that they no longer want to conquer the mountain, there's not really much else that buying into modern capitalism can offer them in many cases. It is of course a stereotype that men are happy living in squalor, and that women be shopping, but I've found it to be remarkably accurate; women make up something like 70% to 80% of consumer spending, and in general it's motivation to be a provider that drives many men to work as hard as they can, most of whom otherwise are pretty happy living with a mattress and WiFi.
If one's lost the motivation or opportunity to provide, suddenly most of what remains expensive in modern abundant society doesn't really matter; you don't have to spend money on up-keeping a lifestyle and status symbols to attract a mate, and you no longer need to spend most of your life paying off a house in the best school district you can afford to keep the wife happy and the child as advantaged as possible.
Similarly, the stick of impoverishment is no real threat in any rich welfare state; He who does not work, neither shall he eat is now comically false, food [and non-housing living expenses in general] are pretty trivial to cover if you're smart/frugal about it and if you're not the gibs will probably cover them for you anyways. Housing is a real problem that's been exacerbated near-universally across the world, but if you no longer need to provide for a family or make a lot of money there's still plenty of ways to keep a roof over your head without working too hard; living out of a van, moving to somewhere where the jobs aren't great but living is cheap, or the good old solution of failing to launch.
Anecdotally, my college friend group includes a guy who dropped out to live with his parents and do gig work and a high-powered lawyer who inherited a few million, and despite their significantly different socioeconomic classes still live materially similar lives and are still good friends. Sure, the lawyer can afford to live in a massive house, fly business and collect a bunch of expensive trinkets, but when it comes down to it neither of them worry about their basic needs, and spend most of their leisure time doing the same things; working out, playing the same video games, watching the same tv/movies/anime, scrolling too much on social media and going traveling to similar places from time from time.
Of course being wealthier and more powerful gives you more optionality in the face of adversity, and that's great if you're born into wealth or are exceptional/lucky human capital, but honestly the vast majority of people are never going to have enough power or money to matter if anything really goes wrong with their life, even if they spend their entire lives grinding and buying into the system. "Making it" to middle manager at a big firm or owning a small business doesn't save you from targeted lawfare, developing late-stage cancer where the experimental treatment is going to cost a few million out of pocket, or your home burning down and getting denied by insurance. And of course, no amount of money can save you from the true black swans e.g unaligned superintelligence, gain of function^2 electric boogaloo or nuclear war - how many young people in the first world really believe that they'll be taking money out of their retirement fund and living life as normal in 2080?.
So if the dating market is FUBAR and money has questionable marginal utility, what else is left to encourage men to work hard? Well, people will think you're a loser and low status if you don't work or you work a shitty job, maybe that will work? That's true, and historically granting young man status when they do pro-social things has been a pretty effective motivator.
Yet now we live in a highly globalized society for better or worse. No matter how far you are up your chosen totem poles, status has gone global; it's easy to look up, see who's still above you and feel bad about yourself. Chad is probably just a twitter DM away, in fact! Being unemployed or a gig worker might be low status, but even "good" jobs don't feel much higher status either; it's hard to feel the average software engineer or electrician job is particularly high status when constantly inundated with people who are orders of magnitude more successful. To me, it feels like the endgame is SoKo or China; competition for "high status" becomes more and more ludicrous and absurd, and everyone else sits on the sidelines resigned to feeling like a loser even if their lives are materially still great.
Faced with such competitiveness, you can either throw yourself into the maw and try and win an winnable game, or decide to tap out of the game altogether. Sure, there will always be those with immense will to power that will maximize for status, to strive for the stars and win at at all costs, but realistically most people don't have such strength of will. If the only options are play and lose and not play at all, it increasingly feels like the best play is to just drop out of striving for status altogether; it helps if you're no longer invested in dating or careerism, the arenas where status is most instrumental...
This piece ended up being significantly longer than I intended, and really I don't expect any sympathy nor do I have any solutions [much less politically viable and moral ones] to what I see as a deeply society-wide malaise. I have a deep respect for the incredibly autistic open-source emulator developer, the Japanese master sushi chef, and the Amish craftsman, those who still Care about their crafts in the truest sense of the word. Yet one cannot choose to win the lottery of fascinations, one cannot choose to be born into a high-trust society, and one cannot choose to have faith when it does not exist.
At the end of the day, it's hard to argue it's not a triumph of society that the modal first worlder spends most of their time wallowing in comfort and engaging in zero-sum status struggles in a world where so many still suffer. Yet what is great can easily be lost, and modernity as it exists today cannot survive without the buy-in of young men. Maybe it doesn't matter, that in the end us dysgenic neurotics will end up being weeded out of the gene pool, and that future populations will be able to break out of this local minima and take over the world. Perhaps the prayers for the machine god to deliver us salvation will come true and the priests shall finally immanentize the eschaton so that none of this matters.
In some ways it feels like to me that the barbarians are banging on the gates while nobody else notices or cares, as everyone else seems to be whiling away the hours eating bread and going to the circus. But well, if nobody else is manning the walls either, why should I be the one who cares?
This is not the first time I have seen the idea that HD porn obviates sex. While ceding that people have limitless access to porn these days, it still doesnt come close to the real thing!
And eating junk food is no substitute for real meals cooked with healthy ingredients. Some people eat the junk.
More options
Context Copy link
I don’t watch porn but masturbation alone can definitely be better than sex. When you’re by yourself you don’t have to worry about having the right chemistry, about your partner being selfish or getting tired, and if something doesn’t feel good you can just stop, slow down or try something else without being afraid of ruining the mood.
Now, good sex doesn’t compare of course and is a divine experience, but not everyone is so lucky as to be with their ideal sexual partner.
Yeah, but finding that ideal (or a pretty good one with whom you form an emotional bond or simply have some hot experiences) sexual partner is a pretty key part of the human experience. Continuing to look even while failing is too!
More options
Context Copy link
If memory serves your particular experience may not mirror that of the usual heterosexual dude.
I doubt I'm all that far off the heterosexual baseline, and I'd say it's a pretty reasonable description for the porn life as well. After a while it approaches wireheading. You want to feel [GOOD], and these actions allow you to turn on the [GOOD] feeling and sustain it for arbitrary amounts of time. Orgasm is nice and all, but it really isn't the point, the point is, as a book put it once, surcease. Your larger mind, your worries and anxieties, the tension and frustrations of the day, vague unknowns of the future and sharp hurts of the past, all of that flattens right out to smooth, gratified pseudo-flow-state, a delightful little mental loop through desire and satisfaction that's always there when you need it. And all it costs you is time, discipline, investment, human connection...
Thank you for the response. Just to press the point, is the worst that would happen to a hypothetical child that he or she would end up like you? Is that so bad?Posted in the wrong place.
To be clear, I'm describing the life I used to have; I'm not living that way any more.
I don't think I could claim that it's the worst that could happen. My porn addiction was far more manageable and less destructive than, say, what I've seen of the median meth addict. There were pleasures and pursuits beyond mindless self-indulgence. But it was not a good life, and it absolutely was not getting better with time. I observed myself slowly degrading, becoming less in very tangible and concrete ways, losing my humanity and degenerating into something verging on the insectile, as bitter regret and the need to escape that regret grew more and more to define my existence through habitual loops of pointless escapism and empty stimulus-response. Lying awake in the early hours of the morning, I would remember what it felt like to have someone I loved lying next to me, and know for an absolute certainty that I would never, ever have that feeling again, and the pain of that was considerable. At the time, I joked to my family that my purpose in life was to serve as a cautionary example, but the joke wore thin the worse it got. Toward the end, I spent a lot of time fantasizing about being dead. One of my main objectives in my current life is to do what I can to help my children and nieces and nephews avoid ending up in a similar place.
...All this is to say that, in my experience, the question of whether sex is or can be better than masturbation depends on the mentality of the assessor. In my own experience, I know for a fact that masturbation appearing preferable was a consequence of profound dysfunction. I am at least somewhat confident that my own experience generalizes at least to some degree, but this is pretty obviously a question that grounds out at one's values. At a minimum, I'd endorse what you wrote here.
Wow apparently I misclicked because my question was meant for someone else, apologies.
I did wonder about the double-reply...
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Oddly I spent the better part of my considerable commute time this morning reading several of your old posts debunking materialism. I saved them.
@rae if I am correct is a trans woman. Now I don't know to what degree masturbatory practice is consistent among biological males of whatever stripe, but one might assume the "ideal partner" as it was put might be considerably more difficult to locate. A good man is hard to find, etc. Or the other way round as the case may be.
I can't sit in judgment of masturbation as an act, but I would certainly caution any young man against relying on it, and chaturbate or whatever, as any sort of long term answer to the yearning for companionship. For that matter one doesn't have to look far in my part of the world to find men who seek solace in hostesses, call girls, or various other professional services, and I don't see any of them smiling broadly on a regular basis. And finally, I would suggest orgasm itself outside of some Tantric whatnot isn't particularly long-lasting, post nut tristesse is real, and, perhaps sentimentally, ultimately nothing beats (cough) the dozens of micro-interactions that are just spending time with someone you love (or are attracted to), completely outside the context of the boudoir.
After 20 years of marriage the dynamic changes somewhat, but the thesis still holds.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It doesn't need to be better to have a devastating effect, it just needs to be 'good enough'.
More options
Context Copy link
I want to agree with you, but after a lifetime of feeding my animalistic brain porn and more porn, I kinda think porn may be better than sex, at least in some ways. I feel worse after porn, but it's much easier to reach similar levels of sex-high with porn then with real sex. Porn allows your idealized image of sex to dominate, vs the actual thing which is limited by real social interactions and physical sensations. I'm currently trying to ween myself off of porn, in the hopes that doing so will make sex easier and more pleasurable, but it's really hard to do. I've had mixed results so far.
Note: I'm on anti depressants, and have been for decades, which may totally blow my whole equation out of the water. They seem to make it very difficult for me to feel sexual pleasure, especially during sex as opposed to watching porn. So everything I wrote here may not apply to others.
I dunno, find better partners (not like I have any advice on that front; every time I write something here it's because I'm thinking about someone I think would be fun to do this with, and have some first-hand experience with someone who was kinda bad at this)? I can believe the stories of people who don't bother to look for this because they don't find this interesting, but to me it just seems like a waste.
Then again, I suspect this is just a (literally) childish way to look at sex, and literally nobody does this because rational self-interest trumps everything, or whatever. [Which comes back to "well then, if you're going to get married to do that because the sex drive isn't symmetric across the sexes, and aren't doing it because you already have that convergence-drive-love thing going on, isn't that just prostitution with a different name?"]
I guess so, but I'm already pretty confident that if I had my way with who I want it with it would look pretty close to what I think about. Maybe that's why I had a hard time with people who go "ur hormones make u a slave to ur passions" or finding masturbating to random attractive-enough people particularly fulfilling (imagining masturbating them, somewhat paradoxically, yields far better results).
I think nofap would be more popular if they weren't all just a bunch of weeners
More options
Context Copy link
C. S. Lewis wrote a bit in a letter about the appeal of fantasy over real sex which seems appropriate:
Pornography asks far less of us than sex with another person does. If it displeases us we can skip to another bit of porn. We never have to think about pleasing another person, or do something that brings us little pleasure because it brings our partner great pleasure, or think of any needs but our own. Very tempting!
C.S. Lewis remains a remarkable writer of timeless trends.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Come now, when you rig the game like this then of course porn is better than sex. I don't think that's under debate
Not sure I understand what you mean. Or maybe you misunderstood what I meant. I didn't mean, like, the chance of getting laid with a new partner is slim, I haven't had to deal with that for decades either. I just meant that your sense of how hot the sex is (which to me makes a big difference in how pleasurable the sex actually is) is entirely dependent on the other person and potentially conflicting desires or awkward interactions. As opposed to how you can just find porn exactly as you want it at the click of a button.
For me, the pleasure of the sex seems dependent on if I can bench press her or not. This reality means I haven't enjoyed having sex in years. It has nothing to do with not having any sex; or with not having new partners.
I will volunteer and raise my hand and say the reality is porn is just better than my sex. This also doesn't seem like my fault.
Edit since people are taking me very literally: sex does not include bench presses, instead it is a funny euphemism to mean, "i enjoy it if she is not obese." It has the added benefit of ironically warding off accusations that I should go to the gym more. If these women were as active as I am (and I've gone through cardio and weightlifting phases) then I would be able to bench press them.
I mean -- how much do you press anyways? I wouldn't actually get anywhere near 300 these days, but certainly well into fattie territory unless you also only like really tall girls. My current spouse I could have lifted when I was like 14, and she's pretty average height and weight.
To be fair, pressing from a bed is more like a very very unstable JM press than a proper bench press.
Biomachanicaly the pecs are in a more advantageous position, since like a floor press the elbow can't cross the frontal plane. But The delts and particularly the triceps are in a substantially less advantageous position. Assuming your partner is more narrow than you it's also technically close grip. You also don't have a nice ergonomic bar to hold on to, so the wrists are in much greater extension. Finally, you don't have the advantage of a relatively firm platform or leg drive.
If the load is your typical skinny women, it's likely to be somewhat... flopy. Like an earthquake bar. If they are more muscular they can probably hold their body more rigid, but then you have more mass to move. Assuming a random women, you would have to luck out with a gymnast or competitive cheerleader who is being cooperative, in order for it to be anything like lifting straight weight.
Maybe rather than pressing them fully off of you though, it would be more prudent to follow Nelson's advice at Trafalgar and "Engage the enemy more closely." He did seem to have some taste in these things.
He does say that he doesn't actually bench press these girls, so I'm not sure the mechanics there -- I can certainly lift cooperative average-sized women (or children) off the floor by the waist (from a standing position) without using my legs much.
For a bench-press equivalent, maybe they could wear a belt with side-handles, and crouch over one's chest? It would be about like pressing a large kettle-bell, and no need for the woman to be also capable of a plank or whatever. I'm pretty confident I could lift >200 lbs this way, and I'm not as fit as I used to be -- I get the feeling this is a larger lady than he has in mind?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You should visit Japan. You could probably one-arm curl many here.
Post script for the literal-minded: I mean most women here are considerably slimmer than the average American female. Though perhaps Americans are becoming slimmer? This caveat brought to you by Ozempic TM.
PPS: Maybe Helmet is not American. Still.
More options
Context Copy link
Somebody needs to spend more time at the gym! (it isn't that hard to bench press 300)
More options
Context Copy link
Why? What about bench press-less sex doesn't do it?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
As with many things I think the issue is not that it is a perfect replacement, but rather that it reaches some minimal level. So porn is not as good as sex, but it is easier, and because the gauge is getting filled up just enough it makes the effort needed to get sex feel less worth it.
It takes effort to get good things, but once you have them it is totally worth it. But access to very easy quick, but worse, substitutes crowds out the effort needed to get the good version. So porn substitutes for sex, video games substitute for real accomplishment, social media substitutes for actual community and friendship, etc.
More options
Context Copy link
Let's assume videogames and porn do not satisfy the reportable (conscious) mind as well as sex does, such that everyone agrees sex is much, much better. Could it still be that they satisfy the mechanistic actuating drive (chemicals and what not) just as well, so that it is still right to say porn and videogames obviate the need for sex?
More options
Context Copy link
"The real thing" is a more complex concept than many people appreciate, and a lot of it happens inside the skull and is heavily mediated by that skull's other contents. It is definitely possible to get to a place where "the fake thing" appears to be strictly superior; general gooner behavior is more or less a superhighway directly to this state. Further, this general pattern generalizes to most of the other pleasures of human existence.
The greatest source of joy in my life by far is my eldest child. Interacting with them, reading to them, the joy they radiate whenever they see me in the morning or when waking from a nap, cuddling with them and singing them to sleep at night are profoundly wonderful experiences that I would not trade for anything. But I remember quite well being quite determined to never have children, because they obviously interfered with all the "fun" I wanted to have playing video games and pursuing various hobbies. I do not think there are words present-Me could say to past-Me to convince them of their error; they thought the way they did because their mind was shaped by their circumstances and experiences, and only a change in circumstances and experiences could deliver a change of mind.
One thought I've had is for alcoholics or drug addicts or really anyone, is there a convincing rationalist answer for why people should quit or not use destructive drugs? Without a higher power, why not abuse substances? If you live your life in isolation and are so inclined, I don't think there is a rationalist reason not to be selfish and NEET? Some times I wonder if belief and faith has a way of finding those who need it most.
"Technological society has succeeded in multiplying the opportunities for pleasure, but it has great difficulty in generating joy." Paul VI in GAUDETE IN DOMINO.
Tautologicallly because they're destructive, but ulimately because the thing they destroy is the benefits offered by the drug. Users end up dependent on drugs simply to return to where they began.
More options
Context Copy link
No rationalist or hedonist of even middling intelligence would ever recommend doing destructive drugs unless on your deathbed.
The downsides are obviously much worse than the upsides, drugs will break your body and mind trying to chase the dragon, and you'll likely ruin all your relationships and die early.
Well, that's the point of this post, isn't it? If being selfish and NEET is what society incentivizes, then eventually that's what you'll get. I have a deep respect for the faithful, but clearly religion is no longer a scalable solution for society at large.
Perhaps in a hundred years all us atheists will be dead and we'll be back to Christianity and Islam battling it out for dominance of the planet.
More options
Context Copy link
https://lukesmith.xyz/articles/modern-freedom-means-being-a-slave-to-impulses/
More options
Context Copy link
If you cannot imagine a life more fulfilling than drugs, then maybe it's really not worth quitting.
I think of the survivor who jumped from the Golden Gate bridge- all their problems suddenly seemed very solvable. What I see in friends and colleagues is a lack of faith (organized religion) that is coupled or leads to a lack of optimism in the world; and I think poor planning for their future (you're saving how much for retirement!). But I guess a Marxist interpretation would be the false lies distort a workers' view to accept their station in life. I guess my point is a strict reasoning and rationalist approach to life can be more harmful given certain personal characteristics and the human capacity of self delusion.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Destructive how? Presumably methamphetamine destroys the body, or is gross, so I should not do it. I suppose if someone is in a social circle with enough social pressure then it might be worth the tradeoff to partake though (see also alcohol).
Being selfish and NEET on the other hand doesn't seem as obviously destructive. Maybe the kids would think so if they replaced the anti-drugs PSAs with anti-Fortnite ones.
Time is a terrible thing to waste. The question to be asked of younger folk not using their time employed or in education is "How are you going to fund your retirement?" Working hard and making money in your 20s / 30s I think definitely beats working as an old person. Banking on the AI miracle seems too low probability to me. The adage I think of is the job you are doing now often leads to what you do in the future. And short unemployment begets long-term unemployment.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link