Condom Sales Are Up

[adorshki]

From CNN this AM:

People are ready to have sex again: Condom sales are surging | CNN Business

Condom sales have been in a slump during the pandemic as people sheltered at home and put their sex life on hold. But now, as more Americans are getting vaccinated and Covid-19 safety restrictions are loosening, condom makers are no longer having trouble getting their sales up.

www.cnn.com

Accompanied by this pic of a business in South Carolina leading off a video clip about the economic recovery, but hey, what's in a name, right?:

Y'can't make this stuff up, honest:

"But now, as more Americans are getting vaccinated and Covid-19 safety restrictions are loosening, condom makers are no longer having trouble getting their sales up." Amongst other things.

"A spokesperson for CVS called the growth "substantial" in an email, but did not provide data." (I guess they're still waiting for it all to come in.)

Further evidence of an editor asleep at the wheel:
"Sexual inactivity increased among US adults, predominantly younger men, between 2000 and 2018,"

Say what? How do you increase nothing? Activity decreases, inactivity cannot increase.

Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[fronobulax]

Further evidence of an editor asleep at the wheel:
"Sexual inactivity increased among US adults, predominantly younger men, between 2000 and 2018,"

Say what? How do you increase nothing? Activity decreases, inactivity cannot increase.

Maybe I'm missing something.

Maybe. If I have a statistic that says 23% of adults reported an absence of sexual activity in March 2020 and a similar survey reported 68% reported an absence in March 2021 I would say that the number of adults reporting sexual inactivity had increased. If my writing were causal or aimed at an audience with 7th grade reading level, I might say "reported sexual inactivity increased" and we can blame a style guide for eliminating "reported" because dropping it suggests certainty.

Basically what increased was a measure of inactivity and not the inactivity itself.

 

[awagner]

I don't see an issue. If I fast once a week in March, and then fast twice a week in April, the frequency of my inactivity increases.

The same concept can apply to abstinence (whether it is voluntary or involuntary is a different discussion).

 

[walrus]

Al, I'm with you. It is not grammatically correct. One cannot assume that journalists are also writers.

walrus

 

[Guildedagain]

To quote Siskel and Ebert, "Up, way up." ;]

CDC says "don't have sex with people outside your home, but if you do wear a mask, and shower before and after". Boy, this sounds like fun, wearing a mask? And how the h do you shower if you're outside your home? ;]]

Dunno if this will help men get vaccinated, it seems they're lagging way behind the ladies, but since having my 2nd shot, I'm waking with a recurring problem... Superman "the man of steel" comes to mind.

Moving on swiftly, in our neck of the woods, younger people have become somewhat abstinent on their own, a rash of 20 something year olds who hook up on the internet, don't have lasting relationships, don't have long term partners, don't get married and don't have kids.

They're too smart for all of this, they think, but I think they're losing the biological urge, the thing that drives you.

The youngest kids here are 16 and 14. How freakin weird is that?

I'm not a scientist, but I play one on TV, and I'd have to say that the chemicals in our environment are having a severe effect on people's hormones.

The 16 year old has no facial hair yet, but his dad does, and his voice should have changed by now. His dad was into football and boxing, the kid is into video games. Dad keeps pushing him into football and boxing but the kid's not interested. What changed?

Sadly, American fertility "dropped off a cliff" last year after lockdown began last year, the dirty little secret is that conception is becoming exponentially more difficult, and women couldn't make their usual fertility appointments, i. e. expensive pill treatment that sometimes result in quintuplets.

A baby boom was expected because of the lockdown, has revealed itself to be a baby bust.

I fear for the future if the human race. We're actively neutering ourselves with herbicides and pesticides, and for what, to have an endless supply of Govt subsidized High Fructose Corn Syrup, while they expect "1 out of 3 Americans to become diabetic in the near future, 1 out 2 for Hispanic people."

Where are all the pandemic babies? Analysis shows U.S. births have fallen dramatically

Births have fallen dramatically in many states during the coronavirus outbreak, according to an analysis of preliminary data from half the country.

www.nbcnews.com

AP analysis: The expected COVID baby boom may be a baby bust

When most of the U.S. went into lockdown over a year ago, some speculated that confining couples to their homes would lead to a lot of baby-making.

apnews.com

Many expected a pandemic baby boom. In the US, birth rates only fell more dramatically

“When there’s a crisis, I don’t think people are thinking about reproduction.”

thehill.com

 

[FNG]

 

[fronobulax]

The 16 year old has no facial hair yet, but his dad does, and his voice should have changed by now. His dad was into football and boxing, the kid is into video games. Dad keeps pushing him into football and boxing but the kid's not interested. What changed?

I don't think there is anything new or unusual about your observations except for the specific of video games. You are describing many of my friends when they were teenagers half a century ago.

So my answer to your rhetorical question is nothing has changed.

 

[adorshki]

Al, I'm with you. It is not grammatically correct. One cannot assume that journalists are also writers.

walrus

YES, I stand by my assertion: "INactivity" is by definition a nil which cannot be incremented either positively (increased) or negatively (decreased) to yield a different value for nil. That can only be done with integers with values greater or lesser than zero: you can't make zero "bigger".

I don't see an issue. If I fast once a week in March, and then fast twice a week in April, the frequency of my inactivity increases.

The same concept can apply to abstinence (whether it is voluntary or involuntary is a different discussion).

AS explained above: NO. The frequency of your activity (eating) decreases.

OR: The frequency of your action (fasting) increased. Fasting is not inactivity, it is conscious abstention from a certain activity.

Maybe. If I have a statistic that says 23% of adults reported an absence of sexual activity in March 2020 and a similar survey reported 68% reported an absence in March 2021 I would say that the number of adults reporting sexual inactivity had increased. If my writing were causal or aimed at an audience with 7th grade reading level, I might say "reported sexual inactivity increased" and we can blame a style guide for eliminating "reported" because dropping it suggests certainty.

Basically what increased was a measure of inactivity and not the inactivity itself.

That ain't what the sentence says, it says: "Sexual inactivity increased among US adults,..."

"An increase in the rate of abstinence" (The procreational equivalent of fasting) would have been correct.

 

[davismanLV]

If inactivity has grown across a group of people or population, then inactivity has increased, as in, across the population. Inactivity isn't a thing or zero, but a behavior or lack of behavior. Which can increase across the group sampled.

 

[adorshki]

Inactivity isn't a thing or zero,

Really? It IS a zero of activity by definition: NO activity.

And no matter what you multiply zero by, ("frequency of inactivity") the result is zero. Not "bigger zero" or "smaller zero", just zero..

 

[dreadnut]

That's exactly what I was thinking, FNG!

 

[davismanLV]

Al, can I borrow your saw again???

Again, they're talking about incidences of behavior, which can increase or decrease across a population.

 

[adorshki]

Al, can I borrow your saw again???

Again, they're talking about incidences of behavior, which can increase or decrease across a population.

INactivity is by definition a LACK of behavior. Thus the logical fallacy of quantifying "incidences" thereof.

And the size of the sample is irrelevant.

Except when it comes to socks and condoms.

 

[Opsimath]

Al, can I borrow your saw again???

You guys are so funny!

 

[davismanLV]

And the saw?? I feel I really need it right now.....

 

[FNG]

Really? It IS a zero of activity by definition: NO activity.

And no matter what you multiply zero by, ("frequency of inactivity") the result is zero. Not "bigger zero" or "smaller zero", just zero..

Inactivity is zero. The frequency that you obtain inactivity, or zero, is measurable, and the frequency can increase or decrease.

Duh.

 

[fronobulax]

INactivity is by definition a LACK of behavior. Thus the logical fallacy of quantifying "incidences" thereof.

The fallacy is assuming a literalist interpretation of written English. The fallacy exists because you presume to know both the intent of the author and possess the only valid understanding of what was said. There is an obvious analogy but no one is going to make it, including me.

If you can measure or quantify something then you can make valid statements about whether the measurement increases or decreases.

Since percentages add up to 100, if x% of the population did something then (1-x)% did not do that something. If that something is "engage in sexual activity" then the compliment is "did not engage in sexual activity". If you wish to assert that "did not engage in sexual activity" is not synonymous with "sexual inactivity" then you may but you stand alone when you take a writer or editor to task for disagreeing with you.

Maybe it's time apply updates and reboot the PostBot?

 

[adorshki]

Inactivity is zero. The frequency that you obtain inactivity, or zero, is measurable, and the frequency can increase or decrease.

Duh.

Frequency is a multiplier. Zero times x is zero. "Duh"'

If you can measure or quantify something then you can make valid statements about whether the measurement increases or decreases.

I abstained every day in March. I abstained every day in April.
Since March has 31 days and April has 28, did my rate of abstention decrease in April?

The fallacy is assuming a literalist interpretation of written English.

It's a news story. It's supposed to be taken literally.

If you wish to assert that "did not engage in sexual activity" is not synonymous with "sexual inactivity" then you may but you stand alone when you take a writer or editor to task for disagreeing with you

Just because I'm alone doesn't mean I'm wrong.
The vast majority of people thought the earth was flat at one time, too.

 

[bluesypicky]

So, has your sexual inactivity increased Al?

 

[FNG]

Frequency is not a multiplier. It a measure of something over a period of time.

Not complicated....