Friday, August 20, 2010
Thursday, August 19, 2010
What Is It About 20-Somethings?
Why are so many people in their 20s taking so long to grow up?
By ROBIN MARANTZ HENIG
Published: August 18, 2010
This question pops up everywhere, underlying concerns about “failure to launch” and “boomerang kids.” Two new sitcoms feature grown children moving back in with their parents — “$#*! My Dad Says,” starring William Shatner as a divorced curmudgeon whose 20-something son can’t make it on his own as a blogger, and “Big Lake,” in which a financial whiz kid loses his Wall Street job and moves back home to rural Pennsylvania. A cover of The New Yorker last spring picked up on the zeitgeist: a young man hangs up his new Ph.D. in his boyhood bedroom, the cardboard box at his feet signaling his plans to move back home now that he’s officially overqualified for a job. In the doorway stand his parents, their expressions a mix of resignation, worry, annoyance and perplexity: how exactly did this happen?
It’s happening all over, in all sorts of families, not just young people moving back home but also young people taking longer to reach adulthood overall. It’s a development that predates the current economic doldrums, and no one knows yet what the impact will be — on the prospects of the young men and women; on the parents on whom so many of them depend; on society, built on the expectation of an orderly progression in which kids finish school, grow up, start careers, make a family and eventually retire to live on pensions supported by the next crop of kids who finish school, grow up, start careers, make a family and on and on. The traditional cycle seems to have gone off course, as young people remain un tethered to romantic partners or to permanent homes, going back to school for lack of better options, traveling, avoiding commitments, competing ferociously for unpaid internships or temporary (and often grueling) Teach for America jobs, forestalling the beginning of adult life.
The 20s are a black box, and there is a lot of churning in there. One-third of people in their 20s move to a new residence every year. Forty percent move back home with their parents at least once. They go through an average of seven jobs in their 20s, more job changes than in any other stretch. Two-thirds spend at least some time living with a romantic partner without being married. And marriage occurs later than ever. The median age at first marriage in the early 1970s, when the baby boomers were young, was 21 for women and 23 for men; by 2009 it had climbed to 26 for women and 28 for men, five years in a little more than a generation.
We’re in the thick of what one sociologist calls “the changing timetable for adulthood.” Sociologists traditionally define the “transition to adulthood” as marked by five milestones: completing school, leaving home, becoming financially independent, marrying and having a child. In 1960, 77 percent of women and 65 percent of men had, by the time they reached 30, passed all five milestones. Among 30-year-olds in 2000, according to data from the United States Census Bureau, fewer than half of the women and one-third of the men had done so. A Canadian study reported that a typical 30-year-old in 2001 had completed the same number of milestones as a 25-year-old in the early ’70s.
The whole idea of milestones, of course, is something of an anachronism; it implies a lockstep march toward adulthood that is rare these days. Kids don’t shuffle along in unison on the road to maturity. They slouch toward adulthood at an uneven, highly individual pace. Some never achieve all five milestones, including those who are single or childless by choice, or unable to marry even if they wanted to because they’re gay. Others reach the milestones completely out of order, advancing professionally before committing to a monogamous relationship, having children young and marrying later, leaving school to go to work and returning to school long after becoming financially secure.
Even if some traditional milestones are never reached, one thing is clear: Getting to what we would generally call adulthood is happening later than ever. But why? That’s the subject of lively debate among policy makers and academics. To some, what we’re seeing is a transient epiphenomenon, the byproduct of cultural and economic forces. To others, the longer road to adulthood signifies something deep, durable and maybe better-suited to our neurological hard-wiring. What we’re seeing, they insist, is the dawning of a new life stage — a stage that all of us need to adjust to.-more at ny times
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Not tryin' to hate but it comes so naturally. This commercial is so fucking cheesy- Nas has a P.Rod 4 specific rap? What's next? Nas singing Nike sponsored birthday telegrams? If this was my representation of skateboarding, I don't think I'd ever start. The bar has been set way too high when you're varial heelflipping to nosegrinding nollie heelflipping out of ledges, and while you switch b/s tail the thing that Jake Johnson switch b/s 50-50ed in Mind Field. I'm supposed to believe you're "just cruising the streets." And why do I suddenly feel that "reaching for greatness" should have nothing to do with skateboarding? I think "reaching for greatness" belongs only in rap lyrics, and it really shouldn't coincide with a NIKE SB shoe.
Anyway, I'd much rather watch Jake's part in Mind Field with his assortment of sick Autumn t-shirts than this "P.Rod killing every spot in NY therefore Nas is relevant commercial." At least in the 90's there was shit like EST and Photosynthesis to keep you curious about New York. I have to watch Jake's part to equalize these two eras of skateboarding for me.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Published: August 16, 2010
Want to take a safe stroll around New York City? Avoid crossing at intersections. Pay special heed to cars making left turns. Do not go anywhere between 3 p.m. and 9 p.m., stick to the side streets and skip Manhattan entirely.
It has never been easy to safely navigate the streets of New York, where automobiles zip inches away from smartphone-toting pedestrians and the footrace across an intersection has been compared to a game of human Frogger.
But a report released Monday by the city’s transportation planners offers unprecedented insight into the precarious life on the city’s streets — pinpointing where, when and why pedestrian accidents are likely to occur — while undercutting some of the century-old assumptions about transportation in the country’s biggest city.
Taxis, it turns out, were no careering menace: cabs accounted for far fewer pedestrian accidents in Manhattan than privately owned vehicles. Jaywalkers, surely the city’s most numerous scofflaws, were involved in fewer collisions than their law-abiding counterparts who waited for the “walk” sign.
And one discovery could permanently upend one of the uglier stereotypes of the motoring world: in 80 percent of city accidents that resulted in a pedestrian’s death or serious injury, a male driver was behind the wheel.
The study, which the city’s Transportation Department described as the most ambitious of its kind by an American city, examined more than 7,000 crashes that occurred in New York City between 2002 and 2006 and that resulted in the death or serious injury of at least one pedestrian.-nytimes.com