<p>Some summaries of data:</p>
<p>[-</a> Chicago Sun-Times](<a href=“http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/health/4594327-423/less-commitment-more-hookups-on-campuses.html]-”>http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/health/4594327-423/less-commitment-more-hookups-on-campuses.html)</p>
<p>Sorry, Iglooo, I wasn’t clear. I was more saying that there weren’t stats and I’ve honestly never seen articles like this WITH stats. It all seems to be hearsay (or sloppy reporting).</p>
<p>Summary of Mini’s article: there’s no data to support that the incidence of hooking up has increased or decreased, but the abstinence rate among 18-19 year olds increased from 17% in 2002 to 25% four to six years later.</p>
<p>And “hook up” means different things to different people so unless the study is explicit about a “hook up” definition, any stats that would be obtained are more or less useless to show whether or not casual sex is increasing or decreasing.</p>
<p>I am sure statisticians have a way of dealing vague definitions. I am sure they often have to deal with murky situations. From mini’s article, it doesn’t sound like hearsay.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>what is wrong with professional ambitions? isn’t that why people should be going to college?</p>
<p>especially with the crappy job market out there?</p>
<p>Yes, but: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The hearsay was in reference to the first article.</p>
<p>And an average of 7 during your college career? That works out to be less than one/semester.</p>
<p>What I noticed about the numbers was they were not too different for man and woman. Women are having casual sex almost as frequently as men. </p>
<p>What I meant to say about NYT article was that while not cited, there must have been well known studies done about this issue with pretty established conclusions. The article wasn’t about whether women were having casual sex. It was about who controls the dynamics of it.</p>
<p>I found this article incredibly sad as well. For both sexes, there is something fundamentally wrong about having such an instrumental view towards other people – that it’s basically to use them to satisfy a biological urge without actually liking them or caring for them. As though they are a trash can or a piece of toilet paper. Where would people learn such attitudes from, though? From their parents? Is this what we’re teaching them in school sex ed classes? It just seems like a very strange conclusion for anyone to arrive at on their own.</p>
<p>HOnestly, it concerns me because these are the kids who are going to be the leaders of tomorrow. If they don’t have any concern or care for one another, how can they be the kinds of officials who care about their constitutents, the kinds of doctors who care about their patients, the kind of teacher who cares about their students? I don’t think they’re going to suddenly develop a conscience and a kind heart once they have that degree in their hands. and if college isn’t about treating each other kindly, then it isn’t really a community, despite what the marketing materials might say.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not even close.</p>
<p>^^ Hooking up is about sex, nothing more and nothing less.</p>
<p>Igloo, why do you assume that ‘there must have been well known studies done about this issue with pretty established conclusions.’ and that statisticians know how to do deal with ‘murky’ definitions? If studies were done, the very basic research designs is flawed. The variables are not defined.</p>
<p>Good lord! Even those questioned can’t differentiate the nuances in the definitions of ‘hooking up’. I don’t think kissing on a dance floor is going to send shock waves through our social fabric. And as Romani mentioned, the data that is provided indicates that hooking up - however defined - happens about once a semester.
And women being in control of the sexual dynamic is not not exactly news either. </p>
<p>They’re selling newspapers for heaven’s sake!</p>
<p>^I guess I am not as cynical as you. I am assuming statisticians did their job of coming up with numbers to represent what’s going on in the society. They did come up with numbers. If the numbers are to be believed and I don’t see why I should discredt them at this point, women engage in casual sex almost as frequently. Good for them if that’s what they want. Why not?</p>
<p>My main concern is the women’s expectations. Both NYT article and Yale senior’s letter do not show satisfied women and makes me ask what were they thinking?</p>
<p>About NYT trying to sell their paper, I didn’t think their introduction was sensational. Let me quote it again</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let me say it again, too. The article wasn’t about if women were engaging in casual sex. That was a forgone conclusion. They were trying to see who is driving the dynamics of it. I wouldn’t be surprised if the reporter spent a good amount of time on campus for the article taking the pulse.</p>
<p>The first paragraph IS sensational. Hooking up has not almost exclusively replaced dating. Dating is not almost extinct.</p>
<p>The NYT has NO data to support the notion that college students are “hooking up” (whatever that means) more frequently, nor does it have any data to support its notion that dating among people my age is almost extinct. Claiming that latter in the opening paragraph, and then arguing the former in the article is sensationalist. What the NYT did is essentially go up to students and ask if they use Instagram and then declare that Facebook is dead because OMGZ everyone is using this new platform! Except even that’s a poor analogy because Instagram was only recently introduced rather than being around for at least two generations.</p>
<p>Well, I have a landline so I don’t consider it extinct. If you are looking for sensation, you should look in the second paragraph; it’s the women who drive the hook up culture.</p>
<p>The Penn student newspaper is inviting students to comment on the article:</p>
<p>[Under</a> the Button » Penn Girls Aren?t Looking To Put A Ring On It](<a href=“http://underthebutton.com/2013/07/penn-girls-arent-looking-to-put-a-ring-on-it/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+underthebuttonfeed+(Under+the+Button)]Under”>http://underthebutton.com/2013/07/penn-girls-arent-looking-to-put-a-ring-on-it/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+underthebuttonfeed+(Under+the+Button))</p>
<p>Let the kids do whatever they want to do. Ethics–inventing right and wrong.</p>
<p>One thing I find weird about this whole discussion is that I think young women are getting mixed messages from society, or perhaps they are distorting those messages. I am a young woman who has never been interested in casual sex, and I’m not even interested in casual dating-- if I can’t see myself potentially marrying you in the near future when we know each other well enough to take that step, I am not interested in playing the game just for the sake of playing.</p>
<p>I get beaten on SO MUCH by people for having this kind of attitude. We are almost infantilized by people in their 30’s these days. It’s no longer the norm, or even entirely socially acceptable, for us to get married or have kids until we are pushing 30. A mid-30 coworker of mine with a two year old who is expecting her second told me that I am “still a baby” and that I shouldn’t plan to have kids until I am at least 30. I should be focusing on my career and “finding myself,” and I should be out having fun! (Aka partying). She is not remotely alone in taking this kind of attitude. You hear it in less inflammatory context too-- theres no sense in tying yourself down in a serious relationship now, soon youll be starting undergrad/grad school/professional school/new career, and dont you want the freedom to travel and meet new people?</p>
<p>I ask you, if we’re not grown up enough to be adults and have adult relationships and balance these things with what else we have going on in life, how else do you expect women to behave? How do you expect someone who takes an extra decade to act like a teenager to act? If they buy into this “I’m too young to think about anything but my resume and having fun” attitude, of course they’re going to have casual sex. And with the older generation scaring the crap out of us about the odds of having a successful marriage these days, women are not eager to rush into the idea.</p>
<p>I really think women are just responding to the world they live in. There was a time where it was not socially acceptable for a woman to balance marriage with a career, or to wait until her 30s or 40s to get married and have kids. Now that we have that freedom I think we have gone to the other extreme and have almost socially outlawed knowing what you want and settling down early. That is confusing. I don’t think it’s any wonder today’s young lady behaves the way she does, and I’m not surprised not all women are satisfied by it. We are not all meant to fit whichever single mold is politically popular at the moment.</p>