I was reading a book on social life of the upper-middle class and new rich of the American 1920s and realized so many things we now do proudly were considered socially taboo back then. This was especially the case for clothing, makeup, women in certain public spaces, etc. What do you think will be different in the 2120s? Or maybe even the next 50 years?
Wearing clothes of the opposite gender.
Hopefully people’s weird hang up about gender all together won’t be around in 100 years.
I can see this happening in the future
It happened in the past.
Time begins and then time ends. And then time begins once again.
It is happening now, it has happened before, it will surely happen again.
The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again.
We live, we die, then we live again! Ahhhhhhhhhjjjjjj
I just can’t believe you could wear a flowy floral print summer dress and be considered a dependable guy by everyone. Some cultures put such an high effort to preserve their old ways that I can’t see that going away in 100 years, or even 300 years. The rest of us unfortunately have to play by their rules and taboos.
Last year, my father called me up to tell me that he saw a guy wearing a dress. He was obviously looking for a “This is surely a sign of the end times” reply, but I just said “So?”
My father then asked me if I’d wear a dress. I replied “it’s not for me, but I’m not going to judge someone who wants to wear one.”
I can definitely see “guy wearing a dress” going from “this is horrible and the guy should be arrested for such indecency” (what might have happened 100 years ago) to “whatever” in 100 years given how attitudes changed between my father’s generation (Boomer) and mine (GenX).
God damnit, Bob, how many times have I said no white after Labor Day?
My husband has wore a flowery summer dress for our daughter tea party before and it didn’t make me think he was any less dependable. If anything they reason he wore it and how confidently he wore made me more attracted to him.
Being topless regardless of gender in public during hot days.
Not in the United States, not even in 100 years. Anywhere else: Maybe.
It’s already legal in several parts of the US
“Legal” is not “not tabood”.
Fair
links to those places and the statues that support that claim?
At least colorado, Kansas, New Mexico and Wyoming by court.
And quite a lot if european countries (some only at beaches and pools etc.)
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/free-the-nipple-states
Lots of states also are very ambiguous with their laws or don’t actively prosecute them. In any way: It’s s a stupid law and no one is hurt by topless or even nude people in the streets. I don’t find it appealing for myself but if others like it, let them have it.
You could have just googled it yourself but sure
Austin, not sure about the rest of Texas. Apparently the logic was, if men can go topless, why not women?
Not how laws work. There has to be a law to prevent something.
https://whnt.com/news/women-can-now-legally-go-topless-in-6-states-after-federal-ruling/amp/
As I always say: if something is not explicitly forbidden, then it’s fair game.
In Europe some women already go topless at beaches/lakes.
Honestly this can be taboo regardless of your gender
I’ve seen shirtless dudes doing sports outside (e.g. basketball or jogging - though these activities may be uncomfortable for ladies with big tatas, but that’s another matter.)
Or shirtless dudes in public parks enjoying a barbecue day.
I do concede that these are very specific circumstances, though.
So long as they wear sun screen lol
While I do agree that this is a double standard, I don’t see any signs of it going away
It has been a thing in many African and South American indigenous communities for centuries. And it’s a normal thing to do in many European beaches.
So whereas you’re technically right - I don’t see signs of it going away in our communities either - I wouldn’t discard it too quickly.
Prostitution and drugs being illegal.
I have a hard time seeing a proper utopia driven society penalizing these. Everyone should be able to fuck. Everyone should be able to put whatever they want in their bodies too. Dicks or drugs, doesn’t matter.
Total agree with prostitution, Drugs on the other hand are tricky. I like Portugals approach. Decriminalize it for individuals, prosecute the distributors and get those addicted help to get off of it. Seems to work quite good for them.
Some drugs are fine, others not so much. And some people can form bad habits and dependencies on good drugs. Its a tricky situation all around. But yes, thats the best approach imho
But I love drugs.
I’ve recently read it isn’t going so well for them. People aren’t being diverted to rehab as much anymore. The country is attracting addicts that want to get high with no repercussions.
I heard Oregon (?) was having similar issues there where they made similar changes
Prostitution is already legal in a number of countries, as is cannabis and some other drugs in some places eg Portugal
I’m in general agreement with you but would make an exception for some extremely high harm drugs such as meth
Drugs are not legal in Portugal. It’s decriminalised up to small amounts (ie personal use), which is different.
My understanding is that:
If you get caught with a couple of joints (or any drugs), they are confiscated, you are identified and you might have to pay a fine, do community service or go to an addiction consultation.
If you’re over that limit, but not overly, you get the above + go to court and will likely receive suspended sentence and will have a criminal record.
If you get caught with a truckload (obviously for distribution), if it’s your first offence you’ll likely also get suspended sentence, such is the state of our justice. If it’s not your first offence, you’ll likely do jail time.
Thanks, that’s a great explanation
What benefit does making ‘extremely harmful drugs such as meth’ illegal provide? In the US meth is illegal. In the US meth use is an epidemic. Prohibition doesn’t stop people from accessing or using drugs. It just puts a legal constraint that adds fear of repercussion and social stigma on users that is another barrier to overcome when attempting to seek help and treatment. Not to mention illegal drug trades mean potentially dangerous, unregulated products and the crime that drug trade is often associated with.
If you make most drugs legal bar the most harmful ones, people will gravitate towards the less harmful ones because of legal availability. The mistake the US made is to make all drugs illegal, blanket prohibition has been a disaster
And I think what @sudo wants is decriminalization - that a person who gets arrested for using meth is treated for their addiction rather than go to jail.
For meth users, yes that is the right approach. For the dealers/ sellers etc, jail or something that incapacitates them is a better option
i would not, if you want to do hard drugs you can. in a controlled environment with a doctor nearby. of course you will have to pay for that.
if you ban it, people that want it no matter what will crate an illegal market for it.
I dunno about taboo, but I think there’ll be a lot fewer “monosexual” (homo/hetero people) and a lot more bi/pan people. I think we’re seeing an increase already in acceptance that most people have at least a few people of their non-preferred gender they’re attracted to, and those kinds of mentalities will permeate to a mushy continuum of sexuality, rather than hard categories.
This is just a personal opinion but I suspect the trend is not linear. There will be a surge in acceptance and then possibly a calm in popularity. Social pressures aside, I feel there may be some portion of the world that is bi/pan but not in numbers so large that it would be a huge shift in current status quos. We’re also at a time when mental health is seeing an identity crisis and we’re trying to label every quirk. Gender identity almost seems like part of a shotgun approach to try and fix other issues.
I do not want to sound like I’m downplaying the importance of sexual orientation and gender identity, but there’s just so much going on socially with how fast we’re moving as a culture with the Internet that it’s hard to predict what is real and what is trendy.
Of course I could be entirely wrong.
I think it’s similar to what happened when left handedness was destigmatized. Suddenly, there was a sharp increase in the number of people saying they were lefties. It wasn’t that more people were becoming lefties. It was that more people felt free to be who they really were.
A trans person 100 years ago couldn’t really come out as trans. If they did, they’d likely face a violent response. So they lived their life in suffering - maybe not even knowing why they felt so different from everyone else and thinking that there was something wrong with them.
As being trans is destigmatized (and hopefully the anti-trans stuff recently is short lived), more and more people will “come out” as trans. It’s not that the actual number of trans people is increasing, but that trans people don’t feel like they have to hide who they are. Eventually, like lefties, the rate will level out and stabilize.
A hundred years from now, people will be referencing trans people instead of lefties when talking about the next marginalized group that’s being destigmatized.
In a more general sense, this is leaving out people who want to try something different or people who are confused. They may or may not be bi/gay/trans or whatever, but the mental health damage is from being pigeonholed. Everyone should be able to try a few things without repercussions.
I don’t know if this is still true, but it seemed like a few years ago it was considered ok for women to “experiment”, but I don’t think it ever was for guys. They should all be able to figure things out without worrying about labels or face social pressure to be one thing or another
I hope you’re right. When my kids started asking questions and wondering what they might be, my answer was that labels are just a convenience and you should never worry about fitting any one. Be yourself first, then decide out if there is a close enough label you want to use. This needs to be the fururey
The Kinsey report looked at this objectively in the 40’s and 50’s. Everyone is on a spectrum of homo/heterosexuality. Labels, social norms, politics, etc change with time and mostly exist to for “othering” people.
It’s worth looking back at history. Ancient Romans make for interesting reading. Things change and tides change without logic or reason. Just be who you are and be good to others.
I certainly hope so. There’s definitely a taboo that comes with bi and pan folks - at least what I’ve seen anyway. The idea that we must conform to either this or that is becoming more and more outdated. The pushback from certain groups however continue to be fierce.
Wtf even is pan? Is it just bi + more horny? It seems redundant.
I use bi personally, but pan people argue that they’re more than two genders and they are attracted to all of them. I use bi because my sexuality is dualistic – I have both heterosexual and homosexual attractions. The two are effectively synonymous.
I’m neither so take this with a cup of salt:
Originally they were the same. Pan (and some others) faded from use and was largely forgotten.
When it first came back into use, there was a lot of “you’re attracted to both genders; we’re attracted to all genders” but this got a lot of pushback as being bi-phobic because it paints bisexuals as being transphobic (although if you really think about it, the accusation that this is transphobic is itself transphobic as it implies trans people are not included in “both genders”. Perhaps enby-phobic would have been a more appropriate accusation).
These days the generally accepted distinction is that pansexuals are attracted to people regardless of gender, as in gender plays no part, as opposed to bisexuals who may (or may not) be attracted differently to different genders.
What’s the difference between emocore, metal core, hard-core , speedcore and death jazz?
People like to pick their own labels.
deleted by creator
This is already rapidly becoming a thing, the younger generations are far more open about their sexuality than any that preceded them.
Younger generations are so hung up about sex they’re practically puritan
lol nope
Drugs. The prohibition of psychedelic substances in particular is looking more like a crime against humanity since we are rediscovering their therapeutic properties in the west (that shaman have known for mellenia).
Discussion on the topic of mental health. Virtually nothing was known about mental health until very recently. We are the first generation that even talks about it. Therapy didn’t exist in any practical and organised sense for my mother’s generation. If you got PTSD during WWI, it was a death sentence because your own frigging side would shoot you.
Human genetic modifications for improved physical/mental/emotional performance and aesthetics reasons. I’m sure furries will get what they want someday.
As long as it doesn’t lead to the eugenics wars.
Red Rising incoming :|
It will.
People need to stop seeing history as something we get to design.
God I hope to wag a tail in my lifetime.
Here’s hoping
When pls?
Access to abortions, I hope, sh!t is getting long.
Voluntarily chopping off your arm. (To replace it with something else)
“From the moment I understood the weakness of my flesh…”
Seriously though, even some pretty mundane stuff- knees and hips and such that won’t crap out on my when I’m old, teeth that won’t chip even if I do stupid shit like use them as a bottle opener, there’s all kinds of bugs just waiting to be patched out of the human wetware.
And that without even considering the superhuman upgrades that could be considered.
Polyamory
Will society be stable if harems throw off the balance in the dating scene?
Polyamory goes in multiple directions though. You are thinking of “polygamy” but there is also polyandry and other configurations.
I agree with this answer, too. I don’t really care how many people are in a family together. Live your life.
What balance ? 🤔
Being overweight. It’s a matter of years before a magic pill cures obesity.
Obesity will no longer be seen as a social taboo, but as a disease than can be cured.
Ozempic already exists. Its only going to get more refined from here.
I hope you’re right. I hope soon. If there’s any way to fix obesity it will make a very noticeable impact on life expectancy, and health expectancy.
As a personal note, my Mom is approaching 80 with serious health issues and lack of mobility. She would be so much better off if one of those was not obesity
How do you see that manifesting?
Hunger suppressant? Prevention of food breakdown? Some meth like energy burning? Some test like muscle growth?
All have dangers.
I suppose you could have some sort of fat camp where you are monitored by doctors and lose like 1kg a week for a couple of months.
How do you see that manifesting?
Hunger suppressant? Prevention of food breakdown? Some meth like energy burning? Some test like muscle growth?
All have dangers.
I suppose you could have some sort of fat camp where you are monitored by doctors and lose like 1kg a week for a couple of months.
Why not a fashion choice?
Because it’s extremely unhealthy?
Hasn’t stopped fashion before
If you can already be any size you want I’m sure you can make sure to keep the fat out of your organs.
That’s how I see it now.
Could be
I suspect that some degree of polyamory may be more socially acceptable in 100 years than it is now.
Don’t worry too much, Kojima will make a game about it eventually.
I am going to operate under the following assumptions:
-the current global trend towards authoritarian governments will continue and become more prevalent
-balkanization will be the new norm: an atlas will show more numerous and smaller countries
-climate change (extreme heat, extreme humidity and sea level rise) will make large regions functionally unfit for human habitation by reasons of lethal heat and/or humidity, loss of coastal access, lack of potable water and/or loss of sustainable agriculture.
-we’ll be well into the technological curve for AI and robotics. We’ll have gone past the early stage where people over-estimate technological capabilities and far into the later stages where people will under-estimate technological capabilities
-if cash is still legal, it will be useless for all legitimate transactions because no institution wants it. If it still exists, it will only be useful for peer-to-peer illegitimate transactions: crime, drugs and sex.
-whatever is bad now will be worseSo: social taboos that exist today that will not be taboo in 100 years?
-slavery: we already see slavery in all but name in the form of privatized prisons and wage-slavery (work a soul-killing minimum wage job, or die/be homeless). What if the cost of being able to emigrate from a country or region that is uninhabitable is slavery, whether real or de facto? It’s the cheapest form of labor.
-murder: being deemed outlaw will make a comeback. An outlaw is outside the protection of the law, so killing an outlaw is not a crime.
-extortion: governments and government proxies (militias, death squads, religious sects) will exercise sanctioned extortion
-hoarding: if you are living in an unstable balkan state or are an unpopular minority in one, hoarding will not be pathologic
-civilian ownership of firearms
-racism and nationalism; best way to keep out undesirable climate refugees is to de-humanize them
-corporations being into every piece of the pie: a logical extension of the trend to privatization or “wanting government to be run like a business” is the replacement of nation-states by corporations or zaibatsu-like alliances of multiple corporationsNo offense intended, but I sincerely hope you are wrong on all accounts. I doubt it, but one can hope…
Sadly, I think many of those things will come true.
That was a well thought out and utterly terrifying take. I believe many of the points you’ve made will indeed be true, much to my chagrin.
corporations being into every piece of the pie: a logical extension of the trend to privatization or “wanting government to be run like a business” is the replacement of nation-states by corporations or zaibatsu-like alliances of multiple corporations
I personally think corporations are going to kill each other off (most likely culminating in a global corpo-war where the last two duke it out) with only one surviving and becoming something akin to the catholic church in the medieval period.
balkanization will be the new norm: an atlas will show more numerous and smaller countries
How is this not more of a thing? All these countries that didn’t exist until Europe organised them have grown and matured (in a way). But plenty of countries complain about how the boarders were made, why don’t they sort them out and change things?
Like nothing is stopping them from doing it. Blaming it on someone 100 years ago that is long dead isn’t stopping anything from happening.
So…. what book were you reading?
I’d be surprised if in 100 years there’s not at least one place in the world where wearing a pet collar is considered socially acceptable.
It’s already here, and has been for decades. Goth clubs, yo.
Is that not just a choker?
