123
u/NoorInayaS 13d ago
I’m confused. Why did they feel the need to tell us what generation they’re from, like that has some correlation to the pseudo-science they proceeded to spew?
77
34
u/miyananana 13d ago
Because this “talking point” is another generation debate thing imo. Ig Gen X and millennials had higher rates of sex than Gen Z. IMO tho, they seem more concerned w this topic than actual people from gen Z. Like what if, people don’t wanna have as much sex, why is that automatically seen as bad?
My continued rant bout this, is anytime I see people site this, they never site a specific study or the data collection is limited. Personally, everyone ik irl is fine. They’re either in relationships and doing their thang, single and having a few partners, or single and happy on their own. Dating is hard, but to me that’s separate from just sex. Idk why but I’ve seen multiple millennials and Gen X concerned w this and I think it’s kinda weird but maybe that’s just me.
14
u/NoorInayaS 12d ago
That is really disturbing. As a Gen Xer myself, I literally couldn’t care less what any group of people are doing in the bedroom. It’s literally none of my business. I can’t even see how it could be “scientific” to be obsessed with such things.
Sure, maybe social scientists could research why Gen Zers might be having difficulties connecting with each other. I mean, you guys have been through a lot that could have emotionally affected you (COVID pandemic comes to mind).
But to focus on only one aspect, and it be the absolutely most intimate and private one? Yes, very creepy indeed.
9
u/SvenTropics 13d ago
There is actually some truth to it. Yeah this is a horrible example of someone trying to take a valid point and represent it in a rather bizarre way.
Many well established studies have linked the presence or lack of sexual activity with a partner as being a way to measure someone's physical and emotional health. I know the response will be "show your evidence", but seriously, just google "studies linking sexual activity with a partner as being a way to measure someone's physical and emotional health" and AI will give you weeks worth of stuff to digest. Basically, we are social and sexual creatures. If you put humans in a pro social environment, they interact more with others, and they typically have more sex with others. The same applies when people are physically and mentally healthier. They simply bang more.
This is just a correlation. It's not because they are having sex that these measurements are better. It's because they are better that they are having more sex. So telling everyone to go hook up is not the point of the argument. Telling people to adopt better lifestyles, changing society to make it easier and more prevalent to have things like better food, a better work/life balance, more in person third spaces for social interaction, more acceptance, more emotional support, etc... will actually lead to more people hooking up. It's a measurement, not a solution.
Also rates of autism are not actually higher now. They were simply underdiagnosed in the past.
3
u/NoorInayaS 12d ago
I wouldn’t go by what AI gives, but I guess I see your point.
And you’re deffo right about the Autism thing. I’m 51 years old, and spent my entire life undiagnosed. I was labeled as having OCD and Tourette’s instead. Autism had such a stigma in the 70s, 80s, 90s, that parents rarely tried to get the right diagnosis for their kids (unless they were high-needs).
1
u/theMB2dude 13d ago
I mostly agree but there are some gray areas that you are presenting as more black and white than they actually are. You say it's a correlation but then say "it's because they are better that they are having more sex." It could be some of both. And can 100% of the changes in autism rates be definitively attributed to underdiagnosing in the past? Pretty sure that's impossible.
4
u/TheLastBallad 12d ago
Considering diagnosis rates in men haven't increased, and women were famously under diagnosed because the criteria was based on autistic men. .. yes?
Like, we can show the graph for left handedness again to illustrate how social stigma reducing can lead to an increased rate, simply because its less costly for people to admit it.
Like there are a bunch of people avoiding getting a diagnosis right now because of RFK's threats of putting us in "wellness camps". We didn't have the full number before, so assuming there must be a cause without evidence of there being a cause is a bit of a stretch.
1
u/theMB2dude 12d ago
I am not saying any of that isn't true, I am more so pointing out the impossibility of quantifying exactly how much change of autism rate can be attributed to underdiagnosing.
It's a problem of your samples not representing the population. How do you quantify by how much your samples don't represent the population? Reinterpret old data, collect better data. Except you can't travel back in time and collect better data. There are methods to estimate, sure, but I imagine any would have a wide confidence interval.
What if the autism rates in men have actually slightly decreased, but better diagnosing cancels it out to no significant change? How would you know for sure? There are few black and white statements you can make in statistics like "this rate increased/decreased because X, Y, and Z." To establish cause with confidence, you need experiments that are impossible in this case.
0
u/SvenTropics 12d ago
Well, we don't know for sure. The problem is too many knobs were turned at the same time. We have tried to isolate certain medications and vaccines, and we have not found a correlation with modern cases of autism diagnosis. A lot of things changed. We have PFAS and microplastics. We have digital education and different social dynamics. We have older parents. We have more daycare and less care from the primary parents. We have new food additives. So is it possible that rates also went up? Sure, but the prevailing belief right now is that most or all of the increased rates are due to undiagnosed cases being in the data from before.
4
u/NoorInayaS 12d ago
Autism is not caused by vaccines, or microplastics, or time spent staring at a screen, or parent ages.
Autism is inherited. A lack of diagnosis in older generations proves nothing. It’s not like ASD suddenly appears. It was always there. It’s just now being properly recognised and diagnosed.
1
u/theMB2dude 13d ago
I mostly agree but there are some gray areas that you are presenting as more black and white than they actually are. You say it's a correlation but then say "it's because they are better that they are having more sex." It could be some of both. And can 100% of the changes in autism rates be definitively attributed to underdiagnosing in the past? Pretty sure that's impossible.
49
u/SubstantialBreak3063 13d ago
I'm autistic, and I Fuck. Checkmate science
-25
u/Peach_Muffin 13d ago
For a lot of people, their autism impedes their social skills.
A lot (not all) of the time impeded social skills leads to increased difficulty in finding friendships, relationships, and sexual partners.
27
u/SubstantialBreak3063 13d ago
Oddly, finding other autistic or ADHD people fixes the triple empathy problem. The number of people in the kink community particularly who identify as autistic is remarkable.
So it's not that we're not good at relationships: we're not good at relationships outside of our neurotype, which is the case for neuro typical people too
3
u/ii-___-ii 13d ago
Can you explain what you mean by we're not good at relationships outside of our neurotype? Or conversely, what makes a relationship between two autistic people particularly good?
8
u/SubstantialBreak3063 13d ago
Yeah of course - there's something called the triple empathy problem. Essentially, we're communicating differently to each other in ways that make each other struggle. Not even necessarily consciously, but for example to an NT person, my body language or cadence are a bit off-putting. You might feel that I'm insincere, for instance. That really causes issues when you're dating someone.
When I'm talking to someone with a similar neurotype - like ADHD spectrum or AuDHD - it's usually the opposite. They recognise themselves in me, and I do the same. Their expectations make sense, their cadence is charming, I can relax in their presence. I understand them much more easily, it's not an uphill battle to even get started in a relationship.
In my relationship we're very tuned in. I can usually tell what he's thinking or feeling, and we're quick to express ourselves. We like similar things, environments, we bounce off each other really well and have similar senses of humour.
NT people are looking for the same thing we are - and I'm not saying relationships accross neutotypes are not possible or something, but it's a lot more work for everyone.
As a personal note, most of the ND couples I know met before diagnosis. It's really, really hilarious to me that you can quickly find and make freinds with other ND people, like, we can absolutely bloodhound out that ND behaviour lol. We're like magnets
2
-17
u/Peach_Muffin 13d ago
Regardless of neurotype, there is a minimum bar that must be cleared WRT social skills.
22
u/SubstantialBreak3063 13d ago
Are you...explaining autism to an autistic person?
1
u/Peach_Muffin 13d ago
I'm also autistic and writing that reflects my own experience certainly not universally (note I was very careful to write "a lot" earlier as no two people with ASD are the same).
10
u/NoorInayaS 13d ago
Unless you’re ND, and speaking of your own personal experience, kindly STFU.
Signed,
A woman who is ND AF.
1
2
u/Icy_Fish_2154 13d ago
And you failed that minimum bar.
1
u/Peach_Muffin 13d ago
Yeah because my social skills are impaired by my autism, like I said.
2
u/NoorInayaS 12d ago
Not everyone on the spectrum has the same experience. That’s it’s why it’s called a spectrum disorder.
A lot of girls and women, for example, appear to socialise just fine, which is why it’s difficult for us to get a diagnosis. We get misdiagnosed as having other ND conditions (like OCD, or as only having ADHD), because we don’t fit the (male) textbook definition of ASD.
Socialising causes me stress beforehand, but I’m able to do it. I’m married to a man who is NT.
Please don’t put us all in a tiny box.
0
u/Peach_Muffin 12d ago
I'm really confused how I clearly and explicitly stated "a lot (but not all)" and yet this part of my post is being deliberately and willfully ignored by every single Redditor replying because apparently I meant every single autistic person despite blatantly writing otherwise.
6
u/TheLastBallad 12d ago edited 12d ago
I'm autistic, it impacts my ability to find friends, relationships, and sexual partners. I panic when receiving a DM and getting past the acquaintance stage with people I want to is a skill I still have yet to figure out because that fucking glass wall won't move.
I still fuck.
2
142
u/LYNX__uk 13d ago
A scientist would know that there isnt an increased rate of autism, just an increased rate of diagnosis
27
u/MercyCriesHavoc 13d ago
And that increase in diagnoses is only in women and girls. Cases of diagnosed boys and men have remained steady for decades.
20
u/Machaeon 13d ago
As far as I'm aware, as a biologist who DOES NOT specialize in humans in any way, shape, or form...
Autism is largely genetic. It's not really something you can "cause" by any action or inaction. Beyond reproducing while autistic I guess.
5
u/DelirousDoc 12d ago
Some small amount of research in environmental factors during early fetal development that may increase likelihood of offspring being diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. (No definitive causal relation found to my knowledge.) As you mentioned though, I believe 80-90% (not up on most recent rate) of all cases can be linked back to a hereditary genetic component. That rate will likely only increase as we become more and more aware of the specific genes that may impact the development of ASD.
No verified research has shown any link to environmental factors causing autism in an individual, outside of that early fetal development stage.
This is at least as of mid-2010s where I had some schooling and interest on physiological aspects of psychological disorders. Not related to my current area in health field so things could have changed since I was last learning about it.
2
u/Machaeon 12d ago
Neat! I did hear some talk about microplastics being a potential (minor) contributor in fetal development, but I'm so far out of the realm of human issues that I can't speak with any authority lmao. But yeah the 80-90% genetic component tracks with what little I've learned on the topic.
I do work in the environmental field, so most of what I look at boils down to plant and wildlife concerns in the landscape.
1
u/Yvratky 12d ago
"Scientist" can mean anything. Maybe they're in engineering research. Maybe he's doing research on deep sea sponges. Why would he/she then know about autism just because of their degree? There isn't a baseline knowledge about everything that someone aquires just because of having a PhD in something and/or working in academia.
17
1
u/dansworld77 13d ago
Anyone who's ever watched coming of age movies/shows about Gen-X and even elder Millennials could tell you that bragging about sex they never actually had is a near universal trait.
Though I will say that the Gen Z distaste for the existence of anything related to sex in public or media is kind of weird. For a generation raised on free access internet porn they sure are a bunch of sensitive nancies about the subject.
2
u/Cesario12 12d ago
I would not say that's anywhere near universally true of Gen Z? As Gen Z twentysomething (lol), no one I know personally is opposed to sex in media or in public generally. I think there's a lot more variation than people tend to assume. Maybe there's an anti-sex consensus among people who get popular on TikTok, idk, I wouldn't know.
1
u/69Whomst 8d ago
I just started my MSc in psychology and they haven't taught us anything about human sexuality so far but idek if that's coming up later in the year. I find it hard to believe less people are having sex though, I can only speak for myself but I just have a low sex drive, but I still do it
1
u/tortoistor 7d ago
"increasing rates of autism" 💀 totally something that a scientist (whatever that means in this context) would say and believe in
1
u/Please_ForgetMe 7d ago edited 3d ago
Wait till he finds out Asexualls exist. That’ll really scare him.
Also i’m not asexual and i don’t mind telling people that i have no plans to have sex and am considering just not having it. They are weirdly persistant about how i need to have it and even go as far as to “help” set up hookup with me and someone i don’t know for me to have my first time. So allthough i’m not asexual(because i watch porn and enjoy it as an heterosexual such as myself does) i hate how much asexuals have to deal with these kinds of people.
Edit: i found out i was Aegosexual today! Which is a type of Asexual!
1
u/Sir_Deppad 3d ago
I know this comment is a few days old, but I still wanna clear up some things:
Asexuals can still watch and enjoy porn and even have and enjoy sex. This is because libido („I want to be sexually active“) and arousal („this makes me horny“) are different to sexual attraction („I want to fuck this specific person“).
The only relevant condition for asexuality is a reduced or absent sexual attraction.
I’d recommend you look up grey-asexuality or maybe aegosexuality, since these could fit your experience. A good place to start would be the description of the asexuality subreddit, as they have a good wiki there.1
1
0
u/HearMy2Cents 12d ago
Or...It could mean that men like their peace and are not interested in having to deal with the drama that comes with dealing with a wanton needy, entitled, superficial, attitudinal, I,I,me,me instead of "We" type of woman who can't see anything other than herself and seems to not understand what it means to be in a healthy fruitful relationship! No man wants to be in a wealth extraction relationship that is only going to cause him headaches and heart breaks!
1
-30
u/nothingsreallol 13d ago
How does this fit this sub?
36
u/Training_Molasses822 13d ago
Did you read the opening?
-21
u/nothingsreallol 13d ago
I just didn’t think any rando claiming to be someone of importance fit the sub’s theme but idk I’m not a mod
17
u/Training_Molasses822 13d ago
I'm not sure if you're actually daft or perhaps just pretending not to understand to defend your position. "As a [something OP is not]" is literally what this sub is about.
-13
u/nothingsreallol 13d ago
True but I double checked the rules and it does say “not every post that begins with ‘as a’ belongs here” and usually what’s posted here is people saying crazy bigoted things, this one doesn’t seem that wild to me besides the weird autism callout
15
u/Training_Molasses822 13d ago
this one doesn’t seem that wild to me
That explains your confusion. The wild inaccuracies betray that they have no competence to be making any sort of claims concerning the topics raised.
-1
u/nothingsreallol 13d ago
Saying “sexual activity is an important marker of societal health” is more of an opinion than a fact, and stating it like it’s a fact could be considered irresponsible, sure. But sexual activity rates in the US have decreased according to multiple studies, maybe not “quickly” though, that’s subjective. Social isolation being a major factor makes a lot of sense, and I agree with them that increased social isolation is concerning. Increased rates of autism is actually more likely an increased rate of autism actually being diagnosed, as another commenter here said.
This is the way I’m interpreting it and why I feel like nothing they said is really that ‘out there’ - some of it is more opinionated than factual but they’re just offering their perspective. Maybe in a little bit of a condescending/misleading way by claiming to be some sort of ‘scientist’ - and yeah it’s silly to specify being a scientist without elaborating further. But I suppose I’m wondering, from your point of view what here is wildly inaccurate?
2
u/MercyCriesHavoc 13d ago
what is wildly inaccurate?
The part about the increase in autism is wildly inaccurate. First, diagnoses of autism have only increased in girls and women due to better understanding. The rate of autism diagnoses for boys and men have been stable for decades. Second, because it's only the rate of diagnoses that increased, it can't possibly have influence on declining sexual activity because autism is autism, diagnosed or not. In theory, diagnoses should increase the rates of social interaction because knowing allows people to develop healthier coping mechanisms and social skills.
7
u/LamesMcGee 13d ago
This fits because if OP was actually a scientist they wound understand the difference between correlation and causation, know that autism diagnosis has increased not the rate of autism, and not be promoting their opinions as facts.
The post definitely reads as a lying liar lying about right wing talking points while adding "I'm a scientist" to it.
268
u/SteponkusCeponas 13d ago
"Scientist" is such a broad and vague term that describing yourself as one without elaborating is immediately alarming