this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2024
239 points (94.1% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35893 readers
1322 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I have seen in many US shows where they portray guys who are living with parents as losers, or there are jokes or memes about it, I never get it.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Shadow@lemmy.ca 113 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Implication is that you're incapable of being self sufficient.

Too broke to move out, your parents still cook for you / do your laundry, can't bring a girl home without your parents hearing you get it on, etc.

[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Implication is that you're incapable of being self sufficient.

Holdover stereotype from when living on your own with a service job was realistically doable. Which just flat out is not the case in most cities now.

Although not wanting your parents hear you bang is totally fair.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Red_October@lemmy.world 95 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Traditionally, being self sufficient enough to move out of your parents house and live on your own was considered a major, basic, and early benchmark of growing up, adulthood, and success. Sort of like taking your first steps, it was just considered a "bare minimum" benchmark.

That impression, the idea of moving out on your own being the bare minimum start to being a successful adult, has not kept up with the modern age and the economy we've grown up in. The idea that anyone should be able to move out on their own came about in an age when a single adult working a basic job full time could afford a house and support a family on their income alone. That just is not even close to the case now, but some societal memes take longer to change than others.

It's this. This is the eloquent and succinct answer OP. No an upvote wouldn't have been enough.

[–] solitaire@infosec.pub 12 points 9 months ago

I've been looking for rentals lately. Every inspection has dozens upon dozens of people show up. Rental vacancies are at a tiny fraction of a percent. No landlord will take someone if the rent will cost more than 30% of their income. To qualify for a studio apartment it takes almost double the median wage.

I hate it so much. I've budgeted so that I know I can afford these places on my income, I have a significant pile of savings and a stable job. I have been looking for a place for six months and been rejected from them all.

I've given up. Even if I could get a place it'd be cheaper to pay a fucking mortgage.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 81 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It isn't anymore. That's dead.

It was, like 25 years ago. Well, maybe 15 years ago.

Pre-2007.

Because back then people were making good money out of college, and they were able to buy a house for themselves. Shit, they didn't even need to go to college. As long as you were working hard before 2007, and you were going to be able to find a down payment on a house as long as you didn't have some kind of financial affliction.

That's not to say that gen X had it easy as compared to those before them, but there's a clear separation.

Millennials tried their hardest not to live at home, just because of the social stigma.

Gen Z is feeling that stigma less. That's why you're probably here questioning why it's even a thing. You're probably Gen Z.

Jen alpha won't see it as strange.

[–] z00s@lemmy.world 38 points 9 months ago

I really hope the stigma goes away because unless the world economy improves, a lot of people will have to stay with parents until a lot later in life.

It is a cultural thing though. It's not an issue at all in most of SE Asia.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 62 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Because it used to be a sign that someone was unsuccessful or “lazy”. Now it just means the housing market is absolute dog shit, and people making 200k a year still can’t afford to buy a house near their work.

Multi-generational households have been the most common form of familial living arrangements in human history, so, take that as you will.

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 50 points 9 months ago

For 58 years young people had enough income to support themselves fine, so living with your parents was due to either fear of being out on your own, laziness, or another dependency. All unattractive qualities.

[–] scoobford@lemmy.zip 50 points 9 months ago

In the US, wages were high enough that you could afford rent and a decent living as an unskilled laborer until fairly recently.

Also, if you lived with your parents you could not fuck. Even if your parents were not religious, it was a social value and they probably weren't cool with it. And your date probably wasn't cool with it wither, because it was weird.

[–] blady_blah@lemmy.world 49 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The idea that if you're still living at home that your parents are still taking care of you. That they still make your food, do you laundry, pay your bills, etc. there is also a stereotype that you're emotionally stunted since you haven't moved out and had to take care of yourself. This is often summarized in the neck beard living in his parents basement meme.

I'm not saying this is true, but that's the idea.

[–] Difuefr@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Thats what they sell you, the real reason is that people living with their parents are not spending money in the house market.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] s_s@lemm.ee 39 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

I assume you are American, and probably not Hispanic?

Because these assumptions are extremely cultural.

Anyways, for white Americans "Self-sufficiency" (or Self-reliance as Ralph Waldo Emmerson called an extreme version of it) is an old Puritan value, like hardwork and lifelong monogamy.

[–] pedestrian@links.hackliberty.org 20 points 9 months ago

Don't know why you're getting downvoted. You're not off base. My family is Hispanic and my mom would love it if I lived with her till I'm 40.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Ilflish@lemm.ee 35 points 9 months ago

It suggests they can't afford to pay rent. It's an old stereotype that is kind of redundant nowadays since (a) most people renting can't afford it anymore and (b) different cultures are way more accepting and even encouraged living with your family. Most people understand that now.

You still here the saying buts it's more about NEETs taking advantage of family rather than being smart

[–] Breezy@lemmy.world 33 points 9 months ago (21 children)

So i started living back with my mom when i was in my late 20s, i lost a 70k job due to bullshit. Then i got back to working hoping to move out..... and..... covid hit..... i was laid off after a year, and i just havent got back to working. I live with my mom who is disabled and in very bad health over conditions i dont know how to spell. Then i got a dui after my old boss died, i wasnt even driving just sitting in the car drunk by a lake. So now i cant drive for another couple years and am finding it hard to work some whete close that i can get a ride that also doesnt make me be around a shit ton of people who i might get sick from and then bring it back to my mother.

No i didnt answer your question, but i tried to outline the why of someone living back with their parents.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] squiblet@kbin.social 28 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

Somehow this became a cultural thing in the US. In some other countries like in South America it’s perfectly normal for 3-4 generations to live under 1 roof.

My guess is it’s tied to making people spend more money for capitalism. The effect it’s had on families is not very positive. It leads to things like elderly people draining thousands from their savings or family members a month for nursing homes. People have to hire child care when otherwise family members could watch a child. Children grow up with more distance from older relatives. Buying additional homes and cars is way more expensive than sharing them. Additional cable and utility bills. More appliances. More food waste.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] neatchee@lemmy.world 25 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Ok this is a super fascinating intersection of American social history

So the first thing you have to always keep in mind when thinking about Americans and their behavior is that the country was founded by people so absurdly religious that the British kicked them out. Then, along with some wealthy land owners, they said "fuck off" right back to the crown, declared "no take-backs", and went on about 100 years of aggressive westward expansion.

If you're not familiar with the phrase "manifest destiny" it's worth looking up. It's fundamental to American society

Fast forward a bit to post-WWII and the economic boom of the time. "The American Dream" - and the promise to our returning soldiers - was owning your own house with a yard, wife, kids, dog, and a car. And given our history, and the return of thousands and thousands of young men from the war, that kinda became the measuring stick of basic success: moving out.

And of course since America is the land of opportunity, if you can't do even that much, you've only got yourself to blame /s

We all know the meme of "striking out on your own" as a symbol of maturity. This is just what happens when "striking out on your own" becomes a cultural identity

[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Boop2133@lemmy.world 25 points 9 months ago (8 children)

I'm 23 and still living with my dad. Why wouldn't I take the deal to have no rent while I work full time at a decent job so I can pay off my student loans? Sounds stupid to move out at least for me right now

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Sensitivezombie@lemmy.zip 23 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It comes from the Individualism ideology that Western culture holds dear. Americans just hold it tighter. It can be argued that the cause of this is American capitalism, which has greater focus on measuring success by one's ability to consume (can you afford it, how much can you afford, are you self-reliant, your ability to consume more and better than you did last year).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Flumpkin@slrpnk.net 20 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Because then you can't yodel while fucking your girlfriend/boyfriend.

[–] tiredofsametab@kbin.run 17 points 9 months ago

This is one reason "love hotels" are a thing in Japan where multi-generational living and/or thin walls are very common.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 18 points 9 months ago

It depends on your age. Living with your parents at 10 is different than 20 and is different than 40.

Ever since I was older than 25 or so, if I was going to go on a date with someone, if they lived with their parents that's a huge complication. How're we going to fuck? What if their parents don't have good boundaries? How can I gauge if they know how to be an adult? Like, what if their mom still does their laundry and they don't know how to take care of themselves?

It's a proxy measurement for independence and being able to take care of themselves.

It's a little different if they're taking care of their parents. Still not great, but doesn't have the "Do they even know how to take care of themselves?" problems.

[–] brb@sh.itjust.works 18 points 9 months ago (1 children)

In Finland it's very easy to move on your own because the government will basically pay your living costs if you don't have any money. So very few people live with their parents past 20 years.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (6 children)

Mainly the push for a false family narrative called the 'Nuclear Family', which was idolized since the 60s as a pop psych experiment that has obviously failed.

Some claim it was deliberate to prop up the nursing home industry and to force middle class families into poverty by making it less likely they pool their resources.

Some claim it was a marketing move, as 'nuclear family' homes are significantly less happy per capita than homes with 3 generations living under one roof. Happy people buy less shit to make them happy.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] kat_angstrom@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Because they're racist cult members and visits are awkward enough let alone living there. Might just be me tho

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BorisBoreUs@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago

There are bootstraps you haven't appropriately pulled up if you live at home.

The more legitimate reason is that there's a school of thought that you can't become a fully-fledged, independent adult without putting some distance between youself and the folks that raised you. There's a difference between someone who never left home and is content to just stay in the status quo, vs an adult who maybe went to off to college or was away from home for some period of time while working that has had to come back due to challenging circumstances and doesn't plan to stay longer than they need to. Obviously, the stereotype is of the former and not the latter.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you’re in an East Asian culture, it’s not.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

They're seen as not progressing through the expected stages of american life. It comes off as a refusal to grow up but obviously that's not always the case.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 10 points 9 months ago

This dates back to when buying a house in your twenties wasn’t a crazy idea out of a science fiction novel.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 9 points 9 months ago

Historical cultural difference between the US and other countries. Although it is less prevalent now, it was expected for a male to be on his own and "leave the nest" as soon as they graduated high school, with college being that transition point if an education was pursued.

The old America where you left home as soon as you could and built your own life with hard work and skill is long gone, but the trope and the expectations are still there.

[–] shani66@ani.social 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If you want to get to the heart of a terrible practice or belief, look at who is pushing it (not simply buying it) and who is benefiting. This is a very recent idea (like, you might still be able to find a grandma who was raised before that stupid shit took off) pushed to keep people poor and generally weaker than they otherwise would be. If you've got multiple generations, or even families, living together they have far more breathing room economically.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (2 children)

My parents suck. If you have to put up with their shit you're definitely a loser.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

Probably because so many parents suck.

load more comments
view more: next ›