Hacker News Reader

Comment by hannibal5 | Hacker News Reader

This is not stupid article. The journalist in question used these few people just to add human interest in a story full of statistics.

1. Increasing number of Japanese have just casual sex.

2. Increasing number of Japanese don't have sex (with other human) at all.

There is statistical data from several surveys backing this up.

View on HN

I think what the parent is saying (and is reiterated by several other posts here) is that premise of young Japanese people not having sex is based on a lack of understanding in the cultural subtexts implied by the way those young people are answering the questions. The reporter is taking their answers at face value, when in fact they shouldn't be at all.

You missed the claim that it is well documented that the Japanese young have less sex. A quick check of condom sales (and/or VD statistics) can verify if people have less sex.

But, of course, the article really might be just pure fantasy with invented statistics.

(I have no idea. Since it is easily testable, any fact checkers at the magazine would find out quickly. But maybe only NYTimes have them, these days.)

Edit: Grammar fix. ferongr, I wrote condom and VD sales like that, since they obviously play off each others -- we do talk about short term affairs... (Ok, gaius did note the third case -- pregnancies/abortions :-) Also supports my points, the amount of sex is easy to measure.)

There was a survey made by the Japanese Government this year, where they found that about 55% of marriages had been having sex less than 1 time every 3 months.

The OP post here discrediting the situation in Japan claiming cultural differences is not understanding that shit DID went downhill.

(by the way, even before the earthquake, there was already numerous article and blog posts written by western reporters but also japanese women complaining that young japanese women cannot convince grasseaters to fuck them... there was even some people that went to reveal their personal anecdotes of forcing men to sleep naked with them, and the guy just... slept, and no matter how much the women caressed him, he just would not have sex)

>A quick check of condom sales (and/or VD statistics) can verify if people have less sex.

Or it could mean that Japanese people have more unprotected sex and that they value personal hygiene and health more, resulting in lower condom sales and V.D. rates per capita.

IF fewer children are being born AND sales of contraceptives are not up THEN less sex is being had. I don't see how it is possible to argue against that.

Hormonal birth control? Environmental factors reducing births?

Again: We talk about short term affairs -- both of these cases would be visible in VD statistics.

Also note the additional obvious problems: Other birth control sales, just like condoms, are easy to find statistically -- and environmental factors ought to be obvious among people trying to get kids.

It really strains credulity to think that Japanese people are going at it like bunnies but are simply light years ahead of everybody else on the planet in terms of sexual sophistication (to the point where unprotected anonymous sex is actually safe sex).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com