Horrific statistics about the mental health of teenage girls in USA \ Globally

[chriscase]

You seem to be trying to make this personal, I don't know why. Everything under discussion in this thread is relevant in my opinion. Try to keep up.

[fkizz]

You seem to be trying to make this personal, I don't know why. Everything under discussion in this thread is relevant in my opinion. Try to keep up.

I'm simply trying to reminder some people that the thread discussion to be about the OP, which is rising teenager suicides in modern times. For some reason it seems certain people can't stomach the grim reality enough to be able to focus on the subject.
No idea why you think I want to make it personal. Would be a waste of time.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

So the hypothesis at hand was that our youth suffer from some kind of woke attack on the "traditional family". I myself find that claim to be unconvincing, for already-stated reasons I wouldn't want to belabor out of consideration for you

Indeed the holy nucleus family under attack from the woke is nothing more than fantasy.

Shall we have a look how glorious the times were 80 years before:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Sir Patrick Stewart: ‘At 80, I’m still in therapy to deal with seeing my mother beaten by my father’

The veteran actor took decades to speak about the domestic abuse he witnessed as a child. He tells Guy Kelly how it still afflicts him today
By Guy Kelly 5 December 2020 • 6:00am



Sir Patrick Stewart in his natural home Credit: Steve Forrest

On his desk at home in Los Angeles, Sir Patrick Stewart keeps an old photograph of the part that, in seven decades of celebrated performances, may well have had the greatest impact on his life.
It shows him on stage in Stratford-upon-Avon in 1981, playing the monstrous Leontes in Ronald Eyre’s RSC production of The Winter’s Tale. Stewart, who was then 40 years old, had originally told Eyre he “couldn’t possibly take the role.” Leontes was so violent, so filled with rage, that the idea frightened him.
“He said to me, ‘Yes you can. And the reason you can play it is that I know he’s inside you. What I’m going to ask you to do is let him out,’” Stewart recalls. But Eyre didn’t know the real story. “He didn’t know the story, no. He was just extraordinarily observant.”
The “story” is one Stewart has been coming to terms with for most of his life: that throughout his early childhood, he witnessed frequent, horrific acts of domestic violence committed by his father against his mother.


“I am 80 years old,” he says, “and I am still in therapy. I see someone every week here in Los Angeles, who I have seen on and off for nearly 20 years. I’m still searching myself, still asking questions of myself, and that is certainly the case when I try to recall what it felt like to be in the middle of violence, and there being nothing I can do.”
On a video call, Stewart’s unmistakable polished pate appears two or three times to say hello and show me things in the house, but he otherwise finds it easier to talk – especially about this subject – with his camera off, letting those stentorian tones do the work.




Patrick Stewart and his mother, Gladys Credit: Courtesy of Sir Patrick Stewart

The family lived in poverty, in a one up, one down in Mirfield, West Yorkshire, in the late 40s. Stewart’s father, Alfred, was a decorated but damaged war hero, a Dunkirk veteran who retired in 1945 as regimental sergeant major of the parachute regiment. His loving mother, Gladys, was a textile worker.
“My parents’ bedroom had a semi-permanent partition built into it, which is where my brother [Trevor, who is five years older] and I slept. No hot water, no cooking facilities, no toilet, bathroom. Just an open fire and a gas ring. I’d never known anything else.”
The size of the house meant that when Alfred became violent, Stewart and his brother couldn’t help but be there.
“We became experts at knowing when the moment had arrived in the shouting when we had to physically put our bodies between our mother and our father. Children should not [have to] become experts at this kind of thing, but we knew when violence was about to happen because we’d seen it so many times,” he says.
“I knew that all of our neighbours knew what happened in our house, and it humiliated me, shamed me. My brother and I felt ourselves responsible for what happened, but of course we were not. To know that you were surrounded by people who were aware of the horror stayed with me, and that’s why I never talked about it.”
Eventually Stewart, who was a boxer at school, grew bigger and stronger than his father, and plucked up the courage to stand up to him. “I warned him that if he did anything to her, he would come off worse. He took that message on board. For him to have a son stand up to him in that way created complex feelings. He just became too old to be a warrior.”
He pauses for a while. “And by the way, my brothers and I had tried to convince my mother to leave him and live somewhere else, but she refused. She loved him. It is common for that to be the case.” Gladys died in 1977, three years before Alfred. “When he was living alone, I believe he missed her badly. And perhaps he might even have regretted aspects of their married life.”




Sir Patrick Stewart speaking at an event for domestic abuse charity Refuge Credit: Julian Nieman

Squaring up to his father is the last Stewart personally saw of the abuse (Trevor, who stayed in Mirfield, later told him the violence persisted when Patrick moved away to train as an actor), but the experience had left an indelible mark – not least by instilling a belief that the same rage his father unleashed was dormant within him, too. At times, he felt it.
“I was beaten with a cane by my headmaster when I was 14, [when] I was innocent of what he was accusing me of. It was one of the hardest moments ever, because I wanted to attack him. I would have killed him. If I’d actually got my hands on him, I don’t think he’d have made it out.”
It was acting that allowed him to recognise just how deeply he had been affected. As one of the most gifted thespians of his generation, intensity of feeling came easy to him, but “extreme anger, fury – I had to fake them, I was frightened of what might happen to me if I allowed those real feelings [out], because I inherited them.”
It wasn’t until that (triumphant) production of The Winter’s Tale, when he stopped being scared of anger on stage. At home, especially during his first, long marriage to Sheila Falconer, he was even more worried about a slip-up. And still is.
“They had to be controlled. I had two children [Daniel and Sophia] and there was no violence in our house. I remember my son, who ended up being much taller than me, going nose to nose with me, arguing about something. I had to suppress all of that [anger]. So yes, it was there, it’s still there.”




Sir Patrick Stewart and Sir Ian McKellen together in No Man's Land in Sheffield in 2016 Credit: Johan Persson

Stewart kept suppressing for another few decades, before deciding, in the 2000s, to share his story in an interview. “I didn’t really know what to say, because I was still ashamed of what I had experienced.” The comments caught the eye of Sandra Horley, who was until recently the chief executive of Refuge, the domestic abuse charity. She contacted him and asked if he would support their work.
“I already knew about Refuge, because my first wife and I lived in Chiswick, where the first Refuge safehouse was established. We would walk to the safe house with donations, and I remember the sound of chains being removed, locks being unlocked, bolts being withdrawn. Nothing could have made a bigger impact on me, that this was, indeed, a safe house.”
Horley talked to Stewart about his childhood, giving him “help and advice on how to deal with the lasting trauma of seeing your mother be knocked about, and bleeding, and policemen in the house, ambulances at the door, and what that had done to me...” He has been a Refuge patron ever since.

Refuge is one of the charities featured in this year’s Telegraph Christmas Appeal, and Stewart is all too aware of how much it needs help – now, more than ever.
“Covid-19 has created a situation more conducive to violence in the home than at any other time in my life. Husbands and wives are behind locked doors, and incidents of violence from men towards their wives and children has more than doubled in these past months. It has never been as bad as it is now.”
Stewart – who is gentle and modest, rather than the intimidating figure people tend to expect – is now as content as he’s ever been. A vast 80th birthday party, arranged by his wife, American jazz singer Sunny Ozell, was destined for the Chateau Marmont in July. That was cancelled, but he’s been promised “something similar on my 81st.”
Jigsaw puzzles, performing sonnets for his Instagram followers, and writing his memoirs must occupy him until acting work returns, but before that it’s Christmas. This year, he’d like to make a plea.
“No one should experience domestic violence. It is a crime, and it is present all across the UK and every corner of the world. Refuge can help, [but] I can only hope readers lend their support,” Stewart says, the voice building to crescendo.
He quietens again. “If they do, they’re giving vital services to women and children just like my mother and me.”


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/the-...mother-beaten/

Its a simple calculation, even if only every 5th WW II veteran had beaten up his wife and children we have some 100.000 victims in every involved country of WW II.

So much to the glory old times and the holy nucleus family.

Teenager suicides have nothing to do with the (not existing) decay of nucleus family.

As starting point you could start at internet media networks like FB, Tik Tok and others, which give unlimited opportunities for cyber bullying, even people can join, which you never have seen in your whole life. The humilation is complete. You have no safe room as every youth atl is using it. Thats different to the past, where bullying happened too, but was local restricted. You could move to another school and thing were mostly ok.

[Lord Thesaurian]

I wouldn't call you so much a medievalist as a fantasist. You seemed to be more or less making up some past that doesn't appear to have ever existed,

Again, that was you. The recent past I “made up” where single parenthood was virtually unheard of compared to today is actually very real.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

cherrypicking some statistics about divorce, and laying on some heavy implications about the fallen state of contemporary society.

Endless accusations, nothing to back it up. If you have a problem with any of my citations or have some refutations to present, feel free to make the argument.

But what is this difference you claim is so significant, between a two-parent household and a single-parent household?

Which of my citations explaining this is unclear/untrue?

Every "nuclear family" is exactly one disaster away from being a single-parent family. Seen this way, your "mountain of evidence" appears to tell us that tragedy and loss are bad.

The disaster you describe wasn’t caused by half the parents in the country mysteriously disappearing. The premier global civil rights group of our time is campaigning against the continued existence of the nuclear family, so they obviously must think it’s real. The effort to conflate the trend with a natural disaster in order to absolve the agency of the millions and millions of people who choose to have unprotected sex out of wedlock and then abandon their families for civil rights or because “marriage is for medieval cat burners” or whatever your point is merely confirms you’re not engaging in good faith here.

I would say, from a taxonomic point of view, that the single-parent family is simply another variation of the nuclear family - one where some catastrophe or other has removed one of the parents. I expect this is a lot more likely in the absence of a robust extended family that might help buffer the impacts of problem events such as illness, infidelity, or violence. So really I think all those terrible statistics about divorce should be laid directly at the feet of the modern "nuclear family" you like so much.

One thing that should be pointed out here is that, by and large, mass shootings are themselves acts of suicide. The problem is very likely one and the same.

Rhetoric isn’t an argument though. If you can somehow make sense of claiming the nuclear family simultaneously never existed and also includes single parents so is therefore real and responsible for everything you said couldn’t have been caused by medieval fantasies, feel free. It has nothing to do with anything I’ve said.

[Muizer]

Again, that was you. The recent past I “made up” where single parenthood was virtually unheard of compared to today is actually very real.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Interesting to note that the number of single parents seems to be declining over the past decade, which incidentally is the time period the report cited by the OP is concerned with.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Interesting to note that the number of single parents seems to be declining over the past decade, which incidentally is the time period the report cited by the OP is concerned with.

The recent relative decline in single parenthood is driven entirely by parents choosing to cohabit instead of get married in the first place. I’ve already addressed the differences between cohabiting outcomes vs marriage, such as the 80% chance of separation by the time kids reach adolescence. It’s certainly an improvement over single parenthood though, thus proving the rule rather than the exception. The timing does comport with the established link between deteriorating youth mental health and divorce/separation rates. Maybe in 10 years the left will pull a CCP and start telling people to get married, so long as they don’t do it in a church.

[alhoon]

You are mistaken here. Lack of money makes university tuition and living expenses while attending effectively free. On the income-based repayment plan, your payments are 15% of your discretionary income for 25 years after which the debt is forgiven. Discretionary income is that income which you make that is above 150% of poverty level. For an individual with no children, this is 15% of your income above $20,385 annually. This threshold is higher if you live in a more expensive area and/or have dependents. If your income is below the threshold, you simply pay nothing each month, yet each month still counts toward your debt forgiveness as if you had paid. For comparison, the median income in Greece is $15,384 PPP, which is well below the level at which a person has completely free living expenses and tuition for college, plus a negative tax rate.

If your parents have an upper middle class or higher income, but refuse to pay for your university, that’s when it’s actually difficult if you are a student under the age of 24 who is not married. From age 24, or if you are married, your parents income is no longer considered in your need calculation.

OK, that's for the debt repayment. But that doesn't mean that if you don't have rich parents, you cannot afford a good uni unless you're a practically a genius.

in the absence of response, regarding the good old nuclear family

The idyllic nuclear family, where loving mother and excellent homemaker Dorothy cares for little Timothy and Elizabeth and attentive and responsible Ralph brings all the necessary maturity and financial stability, has only existed in television commercials. They (the establishment) have tried to establish it as a norm, as what we should aspire to, which has created more trauma and dissatisfaction than anything else. In contrast to that ultranaive, impossible family, there is the real family, in which Ralph goes to whores every Friday after work, Dorothy consumes anxiolytics at large, Timothy begins to question his sexuality (and feels horrified because it is not what he society expects of him) and Elizabeth panics every time Uncle Johny shows up for a visit (you know why).

Do you actually think THAT is the actual, real family? Do you honestly think that by and large, fathers visit whores every week, the uncle molests the teen and the son is a closeted gay?
I know a lot of Americans and we discuss their families. Sure, the perfect family of the commercials doesn't exist. But you would be hard pressed to find one like what you describe.

In Germany the idea of the nuclear family rised only lately in the 50s. Before the extended family with aunts, uncles and cousins was more important.

About the fairy tale of holy-happy nucleus family:

Key facts

• Nearly 3 in 4 children - or 300 million children - aged 2–4 years regularly suffer physical punishment and/or psychological violence at the hands of parents and caregivers
• One in 5 women and 1 in 13 men report having been sexually abused as a child aged 0-17 years.
• 120 million girls and young women under 20 years of age have suffered some form of forced sexual contact.
• Consequences of child maltreatment include impaired lifelong physical and mental health, and the social and occupational outcomes can ultimately slow a country's economic and social development.
• Child maltreatment is often hidden. Only a fraction of child victims of maltreatment ever gets support from health professionals.
• A child who is abused is more likely to abuse others as an adult so that violence is passed down from one generation to the next. It is therefore critical to break this cycle of violence, and in so doing create positive multi-generational impacts.
• Preventing child maltreatment before it starts is possible and requires a multisectoral approach.
• Effective prevention approaches include supporting parents and teaching positive parenting skills, and enhancing laws to prohibit violent punishment.
• Ongoing care of children and families can reduce the risk of maltreatment reoccurring and can minimize its consequences.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-s...d-maltreatment

And as i said problematic family relationships are one of the causes of child mistreatment:

"Relationship

Characteristics of the relationships within families or among intimate partners, friends and peers that may increase the risk of child maltreatment include:

family breakdown or violence between other family members
being isolated in the community or lacking a support network
a breakdown of support in child rearing from the extended family."

So you better leave your partner if you family is already broken, its better for your children.

O_O

FFS!!!!

Added to First Post. Thanks Morticia.


About the Nuclear Family:
I believe a child that is brought up with the help from grandfathers and uncles/ aunts is much happier. And so are the child's parents. Not that it is impossible to raise a kid well by a family of two parents only, but it is much harder, especially before the child goes to school. The demands on time and energy make things harder. I know for a fact that all my friends and relatives are grateful for their parents and in-laws when they take the kid for a few hours off their hands.
Sure, sure, you can hire a babysitter... but most people I know trust their parents (even if they don't like their inlaws, mind you) more than babysitters. And I have friends that use babysitters for years without any issue but they still prefer the grandparents when they are available.

I consider myself blessed to have grown up in a home where my grandparents and my aunt were living one floor above and another aunt a floor below. I also treasure the time I spent with my other grandparents and my other aunt and uncles and cousins.



@Legio @Morticia @Settra @Chriscase
About the "The Nuclear family ideal started in the 50s" or "it was around for thousands of years" without doing any research I can tell you that ...
It was not easy to have a "nuclear family" before the 50s for most of the world. Simply put, the chances that one of your parents would die when you were a kid or would be a sailor (or soldier in WW2) and away from home for years at a time etc etc were high.
Morticia I understand why the idea of the nuclear families started in the 50s in Germany. Two world wars in the first half of the 20th century would unfortunately ensure that the father was not around (or was shell-shocked and traumatized) before that.

[sumskilz]

OK, that's for the debt repayment. But that doesn't mean that if you don't have rich parents, you cannot afford a good uni unless you're a practically a genius.

Actually, it does mean exactly that. If you are poor or lower middle class (which is upper middle class by most of Europe’s standards), you qualify for grants and loans that cover all your expenses (including tuition, rent, food, etc.) which you don’t have to pay back unless you make a lot of money. In other words, it’s effectively free unless it pays off for you.

Also, if you start out poor or lower middle class, because your parents are, or because you’re married and/or age 24 or older, and then make a middle class income after university, even then it will be free, or close to it, if you have a couple of kids as dependents.

As I noted, and see Chriscase’s comment on my last post, there are some issues/complications with the system for younger students whose parents’ income is above a certain threshold, but that doesn’t make your sweeping generalization/assumption valid.

I believe a child that is brought up with the help from grandfathers and uncles/ aunts is much happier. And so are the child's parents. Not that it is impossible to raise a kid well by a family of two parents only, but it is much harder, especially before the child goes to school.

I haven’t gotten the impression that Legio is arguing in favor of the nuclear family to the exclusion of the extended family. When I was growing up, I got the impression that a lot of the kids in single parent households had largely lost contact with one side of their extended family, either because the parent they live with had an adversarial relationship with the ex-in-laws or had moved far away from them.

Reasonable arguments are always made based on averages and all things being equal. Obviously, children living with one responsible parent are better off than those living with two parents who are meth addicts. So the question is if all things being equal, are statistical outcomes better for children living with both their parents, and as far as I’ve seen, the answer appears to be a solid yes.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Statistics is a funny thing, even if outcome A has a probability of 75 % and B only of 25 %, B can happen 4 time in a row.

In my experience as former trial lawyer criminals with a partial dysfunctional family would have had a better chance, if Mother, which has done the best to hold the family together, would have left the drunken, violent or drug addicted or not caring father at a early age of the probant. And in most cases the family of the father had a history of domestic violence too.

[mishkin]

Do you actually think THAT is the actual, real family? Do you honestly think that by and large, fathers visit whores every week, the uncle molests the teen and the son is a closeted gay?
I know a lot of Americans and we discuss their families. Sure, the perfect family of the commercials doesn't exist. But you would be hard pressed to find one like what you describe.

I have brought together in the same family things that are not very unlikely to happen (4 out of ten adult men go to whores, 1 out of ten people are not heterosexual, the figures that you show in the OP regarding the abuse suffered by adolescents). And maybe I should have added a little alcoholism.

[Infidel144]

(4 out of ten adult men go to whores,

Source needed...

[sumskilz]

Source needed...

I looked it up:

A 1996 survey including of 1145 Swedish men aged 18–74 years found that 12.7% of the respondents had paid for sexual services. (Månsson, 1996) Estimates from other Western and Northern European countries have shown that about 12.9% of Norwegian men (Schei & Stigum, 2010), 11–13% of Finnish men (Haavio-Mannila & Rotkirch, 2000) had at some point paid for sex. Paying or giving other types of compensation or reimbursement for sex is a crime in Sweden since 1999, when the purchase of sexual services became illegal. The law is aimed to increase gender equality and protect vulnerable women from exploitation and violence. The Swedish strategy for gender equality also includes the aim to reduce the demand for prostitution. A 2010 longitudinal internet survey among Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes aged 18–65 investigated the effects of criminalization on the demand and purchase of sex. In Norway, the purchase of sexual services is illegal since 2009, and in Denmark, it is still legal. The proportion who reported having bought sex during the past 6 months was lowest in Sweden (0.29%), higher in Denmark (1.3%) and in Norway (0.93%). The conclusion of the authors is that the effect of criminalization is a decrease in demand and purchase of sexual services (Kotsadam & Jakobsson, 2014). In the U.S., 16% of men reported having paid for sex at least once in their lives, and 0.5% reported doing so at least once a year (Michael, Gagnon, Laumann, & Kolata, 1994). In Russia, it was found that 10–13% of men had purchased sex at least once (Haavio-Mannila & Rotkirch, 2000). In Holland the comparable figure is 14%, in Switzerland 19%, in the UK 7–10%, and in Spain 39% (Leridon, van Zesson, & Hubert, 1998). Source

It appears that Spain is an extreme outlier among Western countries. For Spain only, Mishkin’s claim might have been roughly correct, except that the higher figures refer to having paid for sex at least once, and so don’t necessarily indicate that it is habitual as Mishkin asserted. In some of these surveys, “paid for” was lumped together with “or offered some other kind of compensation”. It may seem loserish, but the latter may even be in the context of a relationship, or be perceived as such by the man, even if the woman didn’t consider it that way. Think of guys who will spend a lot on a date with the goal of simply hooking up.

Note that while 16% of men in the US reported having paid for sex at least once in their lives, only 0.5% reported having done so at least once a year. Would that 0.5% of men hold up for married men? That is less clear.

[Infidel144]

I looked it up:

It appears that Spain is an extreme outlier among Western countries. For Spain only, Mishkin’s claim might have been roughly correct, except that the higher figures refer to having paid for sex at least once, and so don’t necessarily indicate that it is habitual as Mishkin asserted. In some of these surveys, “paid for” was lumped together with “or offered some other kind of compensation”. It may seem loserish, but the latter may even be in the context of a relationship, or be perceived as such by the man, even if the woman didn’t consider it that way. Think of guys who will spend a lot on a date with the goal of simply hooking up.

Note that while 16% of men in the US reported having paid for sex at least once in their lives, only 0.5% reported having done so at least once a year. Would that 0.5% of men hold up for married men? That is less clear.

Thanks.

So, mishkin, when you claimed that "there is the real family, in which Ralph goes to whores every Friday after work" ("Ralph" presumably being the father/husband in mishkin's fantasy) and then claimed that "4 out of ten adult men go to whores" were you utilizing this outlier statistic that refers to Spain and does not say it is married men and does not say that "Ralph" does this once a week?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

And US men would certainly not lie in a survey in a prudish country, where female naked nipples are a scandal and virgin rings are a thing. Even more, when its a offense.

A more realistic view on this thing in the US:

A 2004 TNS poll reported 15 percent of all men have paid for sex and 30 percent of single men over age 30 have paid for sex.^[63] Over 200 men answered ads placed in Chicago area sex service classifieds for in depth interviews. Of these self-admitted "johns", 83% view buying sex as a form of addiction, 57% suspect that the women they paid were abused as children, and 40% said they are usually intoxicated when they purchase sex.^[64]
The prostitution trade in the United States is estimated to generate $14 billion a year.^[65] A 2012 report by Fondation Scelles indicated that there were an estimated 1 million prostitutes in the U.S.<sup>[66]

Prostitution in the United States - Wikipedia</sup>


And i think many customers are married too because they need something they are to coward to ask their wifes.

In Germany 18 % of all men between 15 and 74 years are using regularily the services of prostitutes( Udo Gerheim: Motive der männlichen Nachfrage nach käuflichem Sex. In: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte. 9/2013, S. 44.).

According to the only representative study from the German-speaking world, about one in five German men uses a sexual service at least once in his life. [Dieter Kleiber, Doris Velten: Prostitutionskunden. 1994, S. 16–19.]

The Federal Ministry for Family Affairs estimates the number of daily prostitution customers in Germany at 1.2 million. [https://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/p...g-791038.html].

So please be realistic.

[Infidel144]

And US men would certainly not lie in a survey in a prudish country, where female naked nipples are a scandal and virgin rings are a thing. Even more, when its a offense.

A more realistic view on this thing in the US:

A 2004 TNS poll reported 15 percent of all men have paid for sex and 30 percent of single men over age 30 have paid for sex.^[63] Over 200 men answered ads placed in Chicago area sex service classifieds for in depth interviews. Of these self-admitted "johns", 83% view buying sex as a form of addiction, 57% suspect that the women they paid were abused as children, and 40% said they are usually intoxicated when they purchase sex.^[64]
The prostitution trade in the United States is estimated to generate $14 billion a year.^[65] A 2012 report by Fondation Scelles indicated that there were an estimated 1 million prostitutes in the U.S.<sup>[66]

Prostitution in the United States - Wikipedia</sup>

Morticia attempts to dismiss the survey data that sumskilz supplied (16% of US men have paid for sex) by questioning the honesty of US men (seems both racist and sexist).

To back up this up Morticia then provides more "realistic" data that says 15% of US men have paid for sex.
Morticia even helpfully bolds and underlines it...

So is the 15% in Morticia's preferred source or the 16% in the source sumskilz provided "more realistic"?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Yeah i know a critical scientific approach on polls or surveys is too much for the common republican Trump voter out there like "Maybe the numbers are only so low because in a prudish conservative bigot society like the US men have a strong motive to not disclose, that they are going to prostitutes?".

Even more, when its so low in a country with so much porn industry, sexual serial murders and rapes in general and on prostitutes.

But have fun celebrating your imagined victory.

The US man is certainly not going less to prostitutes than the german man.

[Infidel144]

Yeah i know a critical scientific approach on polls or surveys is too much for the common republican Trump voter out there like "Maybe the numbers are only so low because in a prudish conservative bigot society like the US men have a strong motive to not disclose, that they are going to prostitutes?".

Even more, when its so low in a country, which so much porn industry, sexual serial murders and rapes on prostitutes.

But have fun celebrating your imagined victory.

Your fallacious tantrum aside:
Does this mean your source (15%) is "more realistic" (your words and characterization when you provided it) than sumskilz source (16%), which you dismissed?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

No both are worse, as we don't know how many have lied because of religious shame or wife is hearing the telephon poll from the other telephon in the bedroom too.

And both are worse, as they are calculating young men between 15 and 25 in, which are in the prime time of getting sexual contacts in school, college university.

Relevant are the men + 25 and there are 30% of single men going to prostitutes - and i'm missing the married men here, whats another weakness in this study.

A wedding ring doesn't make you to a saint without sexual fetishes/desires/wishes.

And in Mishkin's example it is a married man. So if we want to compare numbers with his case, we must took the teenagers and twens out.

[alhoon]

And US men would certainly not lie in a survey in a prudish country, where female naked nipples are a scandal and virgin rings are a thing. Even more, when its a offense.

A more realistic view on this thing in the US:

A 2004 TNS poll reported 15 percent of all men have paid for sex and 30 percent of single men over age 30 have paid for sex.^[63] Over 200 men answered ads placed in Chicago area sex service classifieds for in depth interviews. Of these self-admitted "johns", 83% view buying sex as a form of addiction, 57% suspect that the women they paid were abused as children, and 40% said they are usually intoxicated when they purchase sex.^[64]
The prostitution trade in the United States is estimated to generate $14 billion a year.^[65] A 2012 report by Fondation Scelles indicated that there were an estimated 1 million prostitutes in the U.S.<sup>[66]

Prostitution in the United States - Wikipedia</sup>


And i think many customers are married too because they need something they are to coward to ask their wifes.

In Germany 18 % of all men between 15 and 74 years are using regularily the services of prostitutes( Udo Gerheim: Motive der männlichen Nachfrage nach käuflichem Sex. In: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte. 9/2013, S. 44.).

According to the only representative study from the German-speaking world, about one in five German men uses a sexual service at least once in his life. [Dieter Kleiber, Doris Velten: Prostitutionskunden. 1994, S. 16–19.]

The Federal Ministry for Family Affairs estimates the number of daily prostitution customers in Germany at 1.2 million. [https://www.tagesspiegel.de/kultur/p...g-791038.html].

So please be realistic.

@Morticia and @Mishkin, our doubts are not about the numbers of men that have paid for sex a couple of times in their lives but the quite outrageous claim that 40% of men habitually and frequently make use of such services.

Furthermore @Mishkin, I don't know where the 10% of non-heterosexuals comes from. Last I checked, credible numbers were at 3%-5% if we exclude people that would have a threesome or consider sex in prison.

You claimed in the past that sexual assault is more likely inside the family, which I also don't remember any source for. <== on the other hand, I believe sexual assault in the close family (including uncles and cousins) would be under-reported compared to say, a guy in school or at the gym putting his hands where he's not supposed to. Or old ex-presidents barging in the changing room of beauty pageants. Or current presidents being too frisky with their female secret service agents.

All in all, my point here is that the examples you claim are far more uncommon than you mention.

That said:
@Infidel, do you honestly think the sex industry of USA, from streetwalkers to high class prostitutes, is held aloft by 15% of the men going to them once or twice in their lives? Really?
Or do you think married men would admit to making use of such services? Which, as far as I know, are illegal in most of USA.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Only because you are calculating the Teens and Twens and the Grandpas in, which would like to go too, but can't anymore, have lost the interest.