I made a point to improve my social skills before covid and I'm now I'm having an absolute field day. The number of people who are lonely and wish they had something to do means that when I ask someone to coffee, drinks, or just to hangout, chances are they'll say yes. I'm an active member of one of my city's discord servers, so there's a substantial pool to draw from. I've organized in person book clubs, movie nights, and group coffee outings, all from the same pool.<p>More recently, I've engaged with my city's kink community which has no shortage of public socials. I'm at the point where I have to be choosy about how I want to spend my time because it's easy to get over booked.<p>Maybe I have higher initiative than most, but I found the experience to be dependent on how much effort I put into it and incredibly rewarding.
I think old distinction between the words "unsociable" meaning not wanting to socialise, and "anti-social" meaning causing trouble to society, is useful. I guess I'm swimming against the tide with this one though
This is the issue that is top of mind for me at the moment. If you're frustrated by political polarization, this is one of the root causes! I'm very eager to hear any ideas on steps we can take to systematically reverse this damage to society.
It's not that I want to stay at home. It's just that I find it impossible to have a fulfilling social life. I don't know why these articles always seem to assume that these home bound people have good social opportunities.
I recently started reading "The Art and Science of Connection" by Kasley Killam, who argues that social health should be considered the equal to physical health and mental health as three essential, interdependent pillars of personal health, and lack of social connections can be as deadly as, say, smoking cigarettes, to the extent that shortens your life.
A lot of the observations are true but it's really funny to me to frame this through the "21st century" post-pandemic, lens in particular the part about self-optimization, "secular monks" as the article calls it. Immediately reminded me of Baudrillard, (<i>America</i> 1989):<p><i>"The skateboarder with his Walkman, the intellectual working on his word-
processor, the Bronx breakdancer whirling frantically in the Roxy, the jogger and
the body-builder: everywhere, whether in regard to the body or the mental
faculties, you find the same blank solitude, the same narcissistic refraction.
This omnipresent cult of the body is extraordinary. It is the only object on
which everyone is made to concentrate, not as a source of pleasure, but as an
object of frantic concern[...]
This ‘into’ is the key to everything. The point is not to be nor even to have a
body, but to be into your own body. Into your sexuality, into your own desire.
Into your own functions, as if they were energy differentials or video screens.
The hedonism of the ‘into’: the body is a scenario and the curious hygienist
threnody devoted to it runs through the innumerable fitness centres, body-
building gyms, stimulation and simulation studios that stretch from Venice to
Tupanga Canyon, bearing witness to a collective asexual obsession.
</i>"<p>He was one of the first people to point to the irony of a health and beauty obsessed culture that doesn't actually use their health or beauty for anything, because they've removed any real social contact from their life, just existing in isolation in front of a screen. This is the gym goer / instagram influencer who Baudrillard would have compared more to a corpse in a morgue than an actual person.
There is a lot in this piece, but one of the things mentioned was public spaces.<p>While it likely doesn't play a huge role, it can't be ignored that the last ten or so years in the US, public spaces have generally deteriorated due to the lack of enforcement of quality-of-life laws, and general absence of social norms. If your government decides to allow tent cities (everything that comes with that) in your local park, people of means will take their kids to SkyZone. When public transportation becomes unsafe, people of means will opt to rideshare. It points to a failure in leadership of many large US cities. Hopefully that changes.
> This neededness can come in several forms: social, economic, or communitarian. Our children and partners can depend on us for care or income. Our colleagues can rely on us to finish a project, or to commiserate about an annoying boss. Our religious congregations and weekend poker parties can count on us to fill a pew or bring the dip.<p>I think that this point is the underlying rationale for writing the article. "Not enough" people are making sacrifices. It isn't that they're less happy, it's that the author doesn't want them to be happy. They'd rather rewrite the definition of happiness<p>If all you're doing is giving, why bother? You could have a wife and kids, or you could do FIRE. If you go the wife and kids route, suddenly all of your money and time are no longer "yours"<p>I think, if some people look at society and institutions and say "I'm giving more than what I'm receiving here", there's nothing wrong with that. Framing it as the individual's problem is dumb and counterproductive. Religion is on the way out, people are getting sick of lying to themselves
since this article is US focused, 66% of households own pets. People would rather hang out with their pets. People bring their dogs to shop and people used to bring them to bars in the late 2010s.
Is there any research on consumer preferences and why, for example, people might PREFER to be alone vs. eating in a diner? It feels like socialization used to be a forced mechanism, regardless of whether that created positive feelings in both parties. People have such limited time now between caring for children and demanding careers that any time spent meeting new people generally feels wasted unless you have significant energy to invest in that relationship (which generally means less “me” time). I personally don’t feel like this is the fault of technology as much as it is the fault of rising costs and long, intense work hours to pay said costs.
One factor for lack of dine in customers is the exorbitant tips and extra fees that restaurants like tacking on. It’s harder for them to do it with take out customers.
> A 2023 Gallup survey found that the share of Americans who said they experienced loneliness “a lot of the day yesterday” declined by roughly one-third from 2021 to 2023, even as alone time, by Atalay’s calculation, rose slightly.<p>This seems particularly interesting.
If you ever want this back, the solution is simple: less work hours for the same pay.
I suspect that societal health isn't a priority of capitalism though.
> In 2023, 74 percent of all restaurant traffic came from “off premises” customers—that is, from takeout and delivery—up from 61 percent before COVID<p>Sounds like people are just eating out more?<p><a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/239410/us-food-service-and-drinking-place-sales/" rel="nofollow">https://www.statista.com/statistics/239410/us-food-service-a...</a>