Surprise! American teens are having less sex than 25 years ago. You’ll never guess why…

You know the stereotype: uptight old folks complaining about the loose morals of the kids, whose sex lives are out of control.

Surprise! Sex among American teens has actually dropped, compared to 25 years ago, according to a new study from the Center for Disease Control. The Washington Post carried a good report, which you can read here.

Here are the important bits, quoted from article:

  • Less than half of teens older than 14 said they’ve had intercourse, a sharp drop from rates in the ’80s
  • Teen births, meanwhile, have plummeted about 57 percent over the last 30 years…
  • The share of teen girls who reported they’ve had sex at least once dropped from 51 percent in 1988 to 44 percent in 2013, they found. Abstinence was more pronounced among the guys: 60 percent of teen boys in 1988 said they’d had sex, compared to 47 percent in 2013. Much of the decline for both boys and girls occurred between 1988 and the period of 2006-2010, and numbers have held steady since then.

Okay. But why?

The Internet. I’m serious.

Or at least, researchers quoted in the article are serious. Apparently, teens are going on to the Internet to get more information about sex and its associated risks. “They’re looking on the web,” says Dr. Brooke Bokor, an Adolescent Medicine Specialist at the Children’s National Health System. “They’re looking for guidance from parents, guardians and physicians. They can and will make positive decisions for their own health, both sexual and otherwise. We really need to be prepared to treat our youth and young adults as educated consumers.”

Speed dating for seniors. Sex education for teens. Is there anything the Internet can’t deliver?

 

Are Millennials becoming more pro-life than their parents? The answer will surprise you.

This week Planned Parenthood is in the news for some shocking secretly-recorded videos that show senior medical staff casually talking about how to harvest body parts from abortions. Gruesome techniques are blandly discussed — where to “crush” so as to keep desired organs intact — and prices are bandied about (a PP medical director jokes, “I want a Lamborghini.”

This may or may not morph into a scandal — the media normally treats Planned Parenthood as an untouchable icon of Good — but the story caused me to revisit an article I clipped in June, which revealed that abortion rates are plummeting anyway…and that the Millennials may be less pro-choice than their parents.

American millennials rethink abortion, for good reasons – Opinion – The Boston Globe.

You can read all the statistics in the article itself, but here’s the money quote, in my opinion:

…there has also been an empathy-driven reaction against abortion among the generation of Americans that grew up in a world of vivid ultrasound images, and among the miracles of neonatal medicine that now make it possible even for babies born extremely prematurely to survive and flourish.

Millennials have also grown up amid the grim images of abortion and its aftermath. For many, the willful destruction of life in the womb seems less an act of “reproductive freedom” than an act of violence against an innocent victim. All of them know someone who has had a legal abortion; they need only look in a mirror to see someone else who could have been lawfully aborted.

One need not revisit the original pro-choice vs. pro-life debate, and it is certainly very unlikely that Roe v. Wade will be overturned and abortion suddenly banned again. What’s really interesting, though, is the degree to which technology is turning an abstract idea into a more concrete reality.  Babies can survive outside the womb earlier and earlier in the pregnancy, and, per the article, this seems to be producing some visceral reactions tending to the pro-life side. At the same time, as we watch Planned Parenthood doctors casually discuss, between sips of wine, how to manipulate an abortion so as to “harvest” intact limbs and organs, what does this do to the idea that there really isn’t a person (yet) in there? I think all this will increase the pressure to reduce the time range within which an abortion can be performed; what’s important, in the context of this blog’s focus, is that the younger generations — who are after all the ones getting pregnant and having, or not having, abortions — may be becoming less open to the idea than were the previous generations.

Uber promotes ‘Senior Mobility’ just as Hillary Clinton attacks company

Is technology moving too fast for politicians to keep up with?

Hillary Clinton recently attacked Uber on the same day the company was promoting itself as a solution to the growing problem of senior mobility.

Uber put out a story on its blog about ‘June,’ described as “sprightly, active, and in her 80s,” who downloaded the Uber app on to her smartphone after hearing about it from her grandchildren. “Soon she was riding all over Miami-Dade county, running errands, and visiting with family and friends — all with Uber.”

The blog post went on to point out that “transportation is often one of the greatest challenges for older adults and for community organizations trying to meet their needs. In fact, the Community Transportation Association of America estimates 26 million older Americans depend on others for their mobility.”

 

Uber Promotes ‘Senior Mobility’ on Same Day Hillary Attacks Company | The Weekly Standard – Linkis.com.

Clinton has also come out against “the gig economy,” even though the evidence suggests that it’s not going anywhere soon, and that younger workers may actually prefer it.

I’m not taking any sides here for or against Clinton herself, but there is clearly a disconnect between the way tech is changing our society and the ability of politicians to disengage from past models and battles. Consumers like the convenience and lower prices of Uber, and the taxi monopoly is rightly seen as rigid, expensive and utterly uncompetitive. Tech also drives the search for jobs: it’s no longer a market in which large and rigidly structured groups (be they unions or trade associations) can necessarily protect themselves from competition.

Politicians should get clued in.  The Boomer/senior age group is grabbing on to new tech solutions with both hands — not just for mobility, but for health and wellness, money management, travel, education and just about everything else. And they’ll account for almost 60% of all votes cast in the upcoming Presidential election.

A resume that lists all your failures? Don’t laugh – it worked!

While this blog stands resolutely against the more juvenile attributes of the struggling Millennial generation — as witness the ‘Kim’ story of yesterday, in which a 20-year blew through her $90,000 college fund and blamed her parents (who else?) for not teaching her budgeting skills — fair is fair, and we’re equally happy to recognize entrepreneurial “go-getter”-ism when it appears.

Here’s a young man who has figured out how to make his resume jump from the vast pile of lookalikes: highlight failure.

I’ll leave it to you to read the article to get all the “business-y”  reasons why this may be good (and certainly, you can’t argue with the results). But I suggest another, less utilitarian reason why the ploy was successful: it shows a sense of humor, which in my experience usually means you’re dealing with an interesting and intelligent person.

A resume of failures stands out to employers – Business Insider.

But wait a sec, wait a sec — didn’t I dump all over the self-mocking “We suck an we’re sorry” video and didn’t an array of Millennials in turn dump all over me, some of them hoping I would die soon? And isn’t this “resume of failures” just that same tactic?

Not at all. Here’s why:

1. He’s at least using his list of failures to accomplish something. He’s not just saying “poor messed-up me” and leaving it there.

2. He’s related his list to real-life aspects of the industry (relevant resume, remember?) and taken a shrewd shot at some of the b.s. that everyone acknowledges but is afraid to say (creative award shows and new business pitches, for example). In this, he demonstrates some wisdom beyond his limited on-paper experience.

3.  He’s got guts, and he pursues follow-up publicity and recognition quite aggressively.

Very Boomer-like, if you ask me…

22-year-old college student blows her $90,000 college fund and blames her parents

Of course it’s their fault. Why didn’t they teach her how to budget properly?

22-year-old college student blows her $90,000 college fund and blames her parents – Yahoo Finance.

Poor ‘Kim':

“Maybe [my parents] should have taught me to budget or something. They never sat me down and had a real serious talk about it…

“[My parents] said there was nothing they could do for me. They’re not being honest with me saying they don’t have [money] because my dad has worked for like a million years and they have a retirement account…

“Then my parents suggested I go take out a loan at a credit union and I’m, like, how am I supposed to do that..

“I know they’re trying to teach me a lesson and blah blah blah and character building but, like, I hope they realize [working part-time] could have such a negative effect on my grades and as a person.”

One can wish that this were a satire. Perhaps the only redeeming thing is that the comments were pretty vicious.

Campus “diversity” in action: 38 ways the left enjoys “privilege”

In a world where it’s commonplace for universities to employ “diversity” officers — indeed, entire departments — it’s important to note that diversity does not include political points of view.

The left wins. In fact, it is not even a “point of view” — it has become Received Wisdom, the established and untouchable “narrative” that pervades every aspect of teaching and learning.

Why is this bad? This blog takes no position on the underlying merits of a relatively left-wing or relatively right-wing analysis of society, or prescription as to what policies or programs would be best. So I’m not arguing against the all-pervasive leftism on the grounds that it is “wrong.”

What’s wrong is the closing of debate, and the protecting of students from the need to confront and analyze contrary positions. As we’ve seen, this reaches levels of idiocy that include “trigger warnings” for just about any difficult material, and “safe rooms” in which the poor dears can sanctuary from ideas that may challenge their beliefs. That this Orwellian process should be occurring at institutions which at one time were vigorous and unafraid guardians of intellectual openness, is amazing — and depressing. It’s no surprise that it produces graduates — particularly in the humanities — who are totally ill-equipped to deal with the real world.

How bad is it? Read this. The fact that it was printed in TIME, hardly the center of right-wing thinking, is instructive.

38 Ways College Students Enjoy ‘Left-Wing Privilege’ on Campus | TIME.