Smartphones Linked to Promiscuous Teenagers

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

LordFish:

Thyunda:

EDIT: Oh NOW it works

Yeh soz, I changed the link due to hotlink block. Also if your friend didn't have a mobile, he'd still prolly get laid a lot.

That's for certain. But then he'd have to go out, meet a girl, take her home, fuck her, get rid of her, go back out, find another, repeat the process. That's inefficient. With Facebook access he can...like...get instant feedback whether it's a waste of time or not, en masse. And then they come to him, so he doesn't have to waste energy or money on walking or bus fares. It's truly a wonder.

THIS JUST IN: Teenagers are hormone-driven hornballs with poor impulse control who'll use whatever's available to them to have sex.

...except that we've known this for about as long as there have been teenagers. But hey, bad parents will take any excuse to pardon their inability to parent... and we've known this for about as long as there have been bad parents.

Speaking as a 30-something, it's amazing to think we *ever* got laid back in the day. We had to actually go out and find females.

And club them and drag them back to the cave.

You young `uns don't know how easy you've got it these days.

Captcha: my beating heart

Suitable.

DrunkOnEstus:

Do not blame it on the phone, or the TV, or anything else you've made a babysitter out of.

However, you can blame it on the boogie.

Anyway, time to go get a smartphone.

I live in Los Angeles and can say this number is too low.

Correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation, correlation is not causation.

And Thyunda; proposing some random scenario that's somewhat related to the premise doesn't change anything. The "study" is shambolic, from what I can tell at least since none of the various questionable news outlets who are running this story have actually bothered to link to the bloody paper, and it doesn't seem to be available on the USCAL website; they amalgamated loads of surveys, found the percentage of teens who claimed to be sexually active who owned a smartphone and the percentage who made the same claim and didn't own a smartphone, and when the former was larger than the latter, jumped to their ludicrous and unsupported conclusion.

Were the surveys all of the same quality, and if not, what methods were used to correct? Were the surveys drawn from representative samples? What tricks were used to normalise the data sets, if any? Was any attempt made to investigate alternative explanations for the final numbers; for example was socio-economic status taken into account? What about area of residence? Age of the respondents?

Either the results of this study are being completely misinterpreted by every single media outlet carrying the story and the "scientists" involved are making no effort to correct that misinformation, in which case they are negligent; or they genuinely did lay out this massive steaming log of shit they laughably label a "study", in which case they are incompetent. I put "scientists" in quotation marks because we're talking about Sociologists here, and where normally I'd give the authors of a paper the benefit of the doubt and blame the often moronic and always sensationalist cretins in the media, Sociology as a field is responsible for so much unmitigated, pseudoscientific bullshit that I can very easily see it being the fault of Eric Rice et al.

It makes it easier to communicate with potential partners privately. That's all. Give an irresponsible and horny teenager access to that ability, what do you think will happen?

Sounds like a complete useless study. Correlation does not imply causation, how should be smartphones be a "risky avenue"? Are they also gateway drugs now?

It all depends on what kind of target audience among the teens these phones are popular with. Since I hardly use facebook and I've got no use for a smartphone, I don't have one while at the same time I'm not promiscuous. Not having one doesn't make me have less sex, and having one wouldn't make me have more sex. This link is fallacious to say the least.

And of course homosexual teens are more inclined to look for partners on the internet. They are probably afraid of discrimination in their own school/work place/neighborhood.

Andy Shandy:

DrunkOnEstus:

Do not blame it on the phone, or the TV, or anything else you've made a babysitter out of.

However, you can blame it on the boogie.

Anyway, time to go get a smartphone.

I'm choosing to personally blame it on that damned new age jazz music the kids are off dancing to. Amazingly, I don't have a smartphone of any kind, but if this research is to believed my wife would kill me within a month...so maybe I've done right by avoiding it : )

Grey Carter:
Space Hopper-esque physique

No way, everyone knows Space Hoppers are the epitomy of The Sexy.

image

Thyunda:

LobsterFeng:

Thyunda:

It IS causality. Teenagers with smartphones have more access to, say, Facebook for example. In order to text someone, you have to either get the number from them or somebody else. For Facebook, you could add a hundred local girls, send each of them a message, initiate a sexual conversation, and it's pretty probable that out of the hundred you messaged, one would be down for it. Just do that a couple of times and that's like, three in a week. And that's if only one replied each time.

I'm pretty sure if I tried that I would be registered as a sexual predator.

No you wouldn't. Because you wouldn't text "Down to fuck?"
You'd message something like "Hey I saw you on my friend's wall and thought you looked nice" and then if they reply positively you take it from there. You flirt, they flirt back. That's how things work.

If they don't reciprocate, then you simply close the conversation and pursue other, more profitable avenues.

And how is any of it illegal? They are of the age of consent (I assume, each to their own naturally), and once they say no you don't pursue it any longer. What will you say in court? Get all teary eyed and say HE SAID HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SEX WITH ME OVER THE INTERNET!!!!

Illegal or not it's still creepy.

Me55enger:
In todays news:

Supid people do stupid things, thanks to some generic and easily targetable product that we didnt have 20 years ago.

Technology does not produce unprotected sex, being born without a working brain causes unprotected sex.

Actually, it would be the brain processing the sensation picked up by your nerve endings communicating a significant drop off in pleasure caused by latex barrier preventing subtleties of the vaginal wall, as well as warmth and moisture, to stimulate minute or obscure errogenous zones along the penis.

Brain works fine. Condoms suck.

I use them, sure - but every single guy would much rather not. I don't think intelligence is the culprit when every instinct in your body is fighting the artificiality. It takes a wealth of will-power, that plenty of guys don't have, to stop in the middle of peak arousal to put that thing on, or to not just rip it off. Those that keep it on are woefully underappreciated - the ladies still think, past that point, that they're the ones doing us the favor. lol

So, this study proves that people with more opportunity to use the internet are more likely to look for sex on the internet?

In other news, people with cars are more likely to drive.

Well, time to hand in my shitty Samsung M300.

AngloDoom:
So, this study proves that people with more opportunity to use the internet are more likely to look for sex on the internet?

In other news, people with cars are more likely to drive.

Also, people who play poker are more likely to have cheated at poker than those who don't play poker.

I am not a teenager anymore so no getting birds because phone related things?

Evil Smurf:
I am not a teenager anymore so no getting birds because phone related things?

Nono... it means you have to resort to the traditional methods of pulling birds - going to nightclubs.

And yet how many parents get irate if educators try to confiscate their kid's phone?

RhombusHatesYou:

Evil Smurf:
I am not a teenager anymore so no getting birds because phone related things?

Nono... it means you have to resort to the traditional methods of pulling birds - going to nightclubs.

drunk birds are more fun anyway :D

image

Ladies try and contain your orgasms.

My girlfriend has a smartphone, and it does not promote any promiscuity from her what-so-ever.

In related news apple have fired their entire marketing department. Said a spokesman : this shit'll sell itself now."

Me55enger:
In todays news:

Supid people do stupid things, thanks to some generic and easily targetable product that we didnt have 20 years ago.

Technology does not produce unprotected sex, being born without a working brain causes unprotected sex.

This.

Also the article make it out like i should go get smartphone now cause i want to get laid. interesting, definatelly adding to my investment list.

Sooooo.... what app is that linked to?

I finally come back to The Escapist after a short hiatus, and what do I find?

A study that says: Cell phone = SEX.

I must admit, this is a pretty strange thing for science to be researching.

The correlation probably comes in from another angle, previous research has shown that dumb people have more sex, and another that dumb people are the biggest market for "hip" shit.

So if you really want to do the nasty more often then whip out a clown suit and get in character.

Quaxar:
What the hell am I reading?

I'm curious... I have never been approached on the internet for annonymous sex. How is that even a thing? Also, the "Los Angeles Unified School District" doesn't seem like the most diverse of statistic sources to talk about the whole teenagerdom (yes, this is now a word).

Are you a "swaglett"/Prospective "teen-mom" character?
Do you use facebook?
Are you between the ages of 13 and 20?

If you answered no to any of these questions, that is why you are not approached for sex on the internet.

It's the same as how it was done "back in my day" but insead of propositioning people on MSN and face to face at parties, it's facebook IM (or "Inboxing") and face to face at parties.

I have a thought; maybe our puritanically based society is maladjusted for present day westernized society?

Me55enger:
In todays news:

Supid people do stupid things, thanks to some generic and easily targetable product that we didnt have 20 years ago.

Technology does not produce unprotected sex, being born without a working brain causes unprotected sex.

Brains aren't the problem, personal responsibility is. A teen at about 16-19 and then on into the 20s is just a child with an adult's body. I'm not making excuses for them, but we don't expect children to be responsible, reasonable, or conscientious. Add a big batch of raging hormones and freedom to be as reckless as they wish, and irresponsible as they please and this is what you get.

Making anything other than themselves a scapegoat is pathetic though. Suggesting anyone or anything else is responsible for their actions should absolve them of nothing. It's nothing less than the same pitiful excuse obese people make with fast food and weight problems, or serial rapists that blame pornography.

Maybe I should get that smartphone.

A few questions though:

1. Does the effect still hold after the teenage years? (I'm in my twenties and want to make sure I'm not inciting jailbait)

2. Is there an app for that?

NEWSFLASH: Californians love having sex - also the leg bone is connected to the knee bone.

This proves that not people who are carefree about their sexual lives are more likely to have a smart phone, not that smart phones cause more sex

Funny how Winetrobe suggests school health professionals should talk to teens about condoms when that kind of thing has been stripped from many sex-ed programs.

>Increased communication possibilities
>Easier contact between people
>Easier flirting/arranging dates etc
>More potential for sex

This is the most Captain Obvious thing I've seen in a long time, who funds these fucking studies.

Thyunda:

No you wouldn't. Because you wouldn't text "Down to fuck?"

You'd message something like "Hey I saw you on my friend's wall and thought you looked nice" and then if they reply positively you take it from there. You flirt, they flirt back. That's how things work.

If they don't reciprocate, then you simply close the conversation and pursue other, more profitable avenues.

And how is any of it illegal? They are of the age of consent (I assume, each to their own naturally), and once they say no you don't pursue it any longer. What will you say in court? Get all teary eyed and say HE SAID HE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SEX WITH ME OVER THE INTERNET!!!!

And thus we enter the end of the world. Take out the entirety of face to face human interaction and where do we end up?

Fucking Pulse, thats where. We'll have demons coming out of our phones and making everyone commit suicide.

AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO SEE'S THIS!?!

LordFish:
As a student of statics I would like to shout the following "CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSALITY!"

Fails on this front tend to have a strong correlation with the social views of either the surveyist, or the funder, or the newspaper/magazine interpreting.

Weslebear:
>Increased communication possibilities
>Easier contact between people
>Easier flirting/arranging dates etc
>More potential for sex

This is the most Captain Obvious thing I've seen in a long time, who funds these fucking studies.

Add basic correlation between people taking sex appeal into account when it comes to phone choice, and people having sex.

And to answer your question: "anyone who stands to profit from shouting WON'T ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!". Take your pick.

My take on this is that at this day and age...if a teenager does not have a smartphone he just can't communicate.

That and if your parents aren't buying you a phone when your a teenager then they probably aren't letting you out at night either. Obviously not in all cases but i'm sure there is a correlation

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here