First base isn't what it used to be

Yeah, I’m not paying to read that.

Especially given that it's a The Atlantic article. Gawd, people, cut to the chase. NYT can be like that, too.

F'in' MacOS intercepts the link and tries to force you into the Apple News app. If it wasn't that Linux apps sucked so badly...
 
Especially given that it's a The Atlantic article. Gawd, people, cut to the chase. NYT can be like that, too.

F'in' MacOS intercepts the link and tries to force you into the Apple News app. If it wasn't that Linux apps sucked so badly...
It did open within Chrome on my iPad, but The Atlantic’s page is so infested with video ads and other junk that I could literally see the battery percentage tick down every time I scrolled the length of the screen.

Add to this the self-important, highfaluting style of the article and I soon bailed out like the others.
 
For me, the article was faded out after the first few paragraphs. That leaves me baffled about the complaints.
 
When I followed the link, I got the following options: "to read this story, sign in, start a free trial, or subscribe today." So in theory anyone can read it if they want to deal with signing up for a free trial. I chose a fourth option and borrowed someone else's sign-in info.

To summarize a few details for anyone who might actually want to use it to inform their writing:
  1. The base system (first, kissing; second, touching boobs; third, touching genitals; home plate, sex), what the title is a reference to, is outmoded; kids these days might say that oral sex is first base or might just not know it at all.
  2. New slang mentioned: sneaky links, zombies, simps, breadcrumbing, cushioning, puriteen, ran through, bop, for the streets, and slime. Feel free to look them up on Urban Dictionary. Personally the only one I've seen outside this article in this context is "simp", for what it's worth.
  3. Sex may be easy to have/get, but intimacy is acknowledged to be scary.
 
I'll just take a guess because I wouldn't give the Atlantic the credit of a click.

First base used to be a kiss, now we live in the age of the goodnight blow job and porn is to blame because porn, and all the evil women in it. are always to be blamed for corrupting virtuous young men.

Hmm, maybe I could write for the Atlantic I just have to work on being super pretentious politically biased and basically irrelevant.
 
Wait a minute, none of those new terms is actually filthy. What's going on with the new generation?

So, genuine question from old fogie - the definition I get for 'bop' is 'Bop is a slang term for a person who has had many sexual partners, or who presents themself online in a way that is thought of as immodest (such as posting pictures or video with revealing clothing).'

Is this...
a) A synonym for 'slut' (of either gender) with all that entails.
b) A positive, sexually liberated word with none of the connotations of the S-word.
c) A sneaky way for the young to call each other the S-word without calling each other the S-word.
 
Last edited:
I'll just take a guess because I wouldn't give the Atlantic the credit of a click.

First base used to be a kiss, now we live in the age of the goodnight blow job and porn is to blame because porn, and all the evil women in it. are always to be blamed for corrupting virtuous young men.

Hmm, maybe I could write for the Atlantic I just have to work on being super pretentious politically biased and basically irrelevant.
If that's all it takes, I'm sending in a writing sample right now. Probably not near as muich fun, but I'm pretty sure they pay better than Lit. :ROFLMAO:
 
So, having not gotten past the paywall, what I'm getting is that the Atlantic is shocked, truly shocked that young adults these days aren't using the same terminology they learned from a 50 year old song?

a80gh2.jpg
 
So, having not gotten past the paywall, what I'm getting is that the Atlantic is shocked, truly shocked that young adults these days aren't using the same terminology they learned from a 50 year old song?
It's really not about the terminology.
 
Thanks for that. I'm going to try to find a way to use the term "sneaky links"
 
It's really not about the terminology.
The whole "generation" thing is a crutch used by (mostly) English-language reporters. It's a way to come up with an article when they don't have one in mind. Now we have generation "Alpha" to contend with, which supposedly is coming up to follow the "Zoomers."

That University of Pittsburgh psychology professor is the same way. Having herself interviewed by The Atlantic gives her another bit to put in her curriculum vitae.
 
That University of Pittsburgh psychology professor is the same way. Having herself interviewed by The Atlantic gives her another bit to put in her curriculum vitae.
To be honest, it's probably more of an ego boost than a career boost for her. Mentions in main stream media has limited value in an academic career and does carry some resentment from other faculty members. University PR loves it, but they don't sit on an RPT committee.
 
The whole "generation" thing is a crutch used by (mostly) English-language reporters. It's a way to come up with an article when they don't have one in mind. Now we have generation "Alpha" to contend with, which supposedly is coming up to follow the "Zoomers."

That University of Pittsburgh psychology professor is the same way. Having herself interviewed by The Atlantic gives her another bit to put in her curriculum vitae.
Regardless of whether we call the age difference “generational” or whatever, and regardless of what names are given to the differing “generations,” there are real differences in the cultural and interpersonal experiences regarding the older people saying these things and the younger people whose experiences are being minimized and erased by them.

It smacks of that classic “this isn’t real, they’re just seeking attention” slur.

The differences aren’t imaginary. But comments like the above make it sound like people think they are.

I don’t think sociologists, psychologists, academics, journalists or anyone else are wrong for saying so and for talking about them.
 
Last edited:
To be honest, it's probably more of an ego boost than a career boost for her. Mentions in main stream media has limited value in an academic career and does carry some resentment from other faculty members. University PR loves it, but they don't sit on an RPT committee.
Agreed - the CV would list the actual paper, not the journalistic coverage of it.
 
To be honest, it's probably more of an ego boost than a career boost for her. Mentions in main stream media has limited value in an academic career and does carry some resentment from other faculty members. University PR loves it, but they don't sit on an RPT committee.
That's true. It's in journalism that it shows up most often. Here's one from Fortune Magazine: "Millennials and Gen Zers are clamoring to break into the housing market. But this real estate expert says ‘not everyone should be an owner’ " What? Not be an owner? That's un-American. Little pink houses for you and me.
 
Back
Top