Suffering from not having a partner is not a normal psychological reaction and young men who suffer because of that should have access to psychotherapy
Maybe “suffering” is a too strong word, and we should call it “discomfort” or something like that...
Anyway. The problem of young people and sex is that civilization makes things complicated, and people are biologically ready for sex and reproduction long before they are ready mentally and economically to deal with the natural consequences.
If our ape ancestors could talk, they would probably be like: “yeah, if you want to have sex and you find a willing partner, just go ahead and do it (though if you are a male, you may get beaten up by a stronger male); and then most of your kids will die, but such is life”. That standard is not acceptable for us.
The solutions we have now are far from perfect. We try to discourage young people from having sex (does not work reliably; as a side effect, it adds sex to the list of rewards people get for breaking the rules). We try to teach them using contraception (and provide abortions when that fails predictably, because kids are stupid and either forget to use the contraception or they do it wrong or they don’t even care). As far as I know, we do not have more strategies. Some cultures tried to get people married soon, but that is in contrast with our attempt to get everyone through college. In addition to the technical aspects of sex, kids also need to deal with the emotional impact of broken hearts, and to navigate the rules of consent.
Now imagine replacing this all with a harem of intelligent and romantic sexbots. Most of the problems… gone. In turn, we get the problem of reduced motivation to deal with actual humans. Yes, the risk is real, but so is the benefit.
It’s normal to lead a productive and enjoyable life without a romantic partner.
I suppose people are different, but for me, life is usually way more enjoyable when I have a partner. (Though I may be more productive when I do not have one, because I am not distracted from work by my personal happiness. Good for my boss, I suppose, but not for me.)
Maybe “suffering” is a too strong word, and we should call it “discomfort” or something like that...
Anyway. The problem of young people and sex is that civilization makes things complicated, and people are biologically ready for sex and reproduction long before they are ready mentally and economically to deal with the natural consequences.
If our ape ancestors could talk, they would probably be like: “yeah, if you want to have sex and you find a willing partner, just go ahead and do it (though if you are a male, you may get beaten up by a stronger male); and then most of your kids will die, but such is life”. That standard is not acceptable for us.
The solutions we have now are far from perfect. We try to discourage young people from having sex (does not work reliably; as a side effect, it adds sex to the list of rewards people get for breaking the rules). We try to teach them using contraception (and provide abortions when that fails predictably, because kids are stupid and either forget to use the contraception or they do it wrong or they don’t even care). As far as I know, we do not have more strategies. Some cultures tried to get people married soon, but that is in contrast with our attempt to get everyone through college. In addition to the technical aspects of sex, kids also need to deal with the emotional impact of broken hearts, and to navigate the rules of consent.
Now imagine replacing this all with a harem of intelligent and romantic sexbots. Most of the problems… gone. In turn, we get the problem of reduced motivation to deal with actual humans. Yes, the risk is real, but so is the benefit.
I suppose people are different, but for me, life is usually way more enjoyable when I have a partner. (Though I may be more productive when I do not have one, because I am not distracted from work by my personal happiness. Good for my boss, I suppose, but not for me.)