More 15 year old boys have smartphones than live with father

MakeEmLaugh

Think tank the Centre for Social Justice has revealed that 62% of 15 year old boys in the UK have smartphones, whereas only 57% live with their father.

A rather shocking statistic, no?

Nodin

It strikes me as a meaningless comparsion.

Muise...

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

Think tank the Centre for Social Justice has revealed that 62% of 15 year old boys in the UK have smartphones, whereas only 57% live with their father.

A rather shocking statistic, no?

Well, at least they can ring him.

kumate_champ07

what does it mean tho, do only 43% live with their mother?

Wacker The Attacker

That's a serious amount of potential chavvage

kumate_champ07

Irish people eat more pasta than Italians

Macavity.

The smartphone statistic is fairly insignificant but only 57% living with their Father is kinda sad.

efb

That's the UK. Relevance to Irl?

looksee

Whatever about the smartphones, its a bit difficult to accept that only 57% live with their father. One in every two (more or less) teenage boys do not have a father in their lives? In order to account for the huge numbers of stable families, there must be whole estates with no men on them?

Though reading it again, the 57% figure is a prediction for 2020. Right. What's on the telly.

Nodin

Macavity. wrote: »

The smartphone statistic is fairly insignificant but 57% not living with their Father is kinda sad.

57% living with.

Macavity.

Nodin wrote: »

57% living with.

Oh I guess that's not so bad. :pac:

stevedublin

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

that 62% of 15 year old boys in the UK have smartphones

not shocking - they are not that expensive, many given for free by mobile phone operators when you sign up for a price plan

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

whereas only 57% live with their father.

sounds shocking - cannot be a good thing

Nodin

looksee wrote: »

Whatever about the smartphones, its a bit difficult to accept that only 57% live with their father. One in every two (more or less) teenage boys do not have a father in their lives? In order to account for the huge numbers of stable families, there must be whole estates with no men on them?

Ahhh, but that presumes that the absence of the father correlates to the absence of any male in the domestic life of the child, which may not be the case.

Fr_Dougal

efb wrote: »

That's the UK. Relevance to Irl?

About 5 years.

Nodin

Macavity. wrote: »

Oh I guess that's not so bad. :pac:

Well you'd have to weigh up the reasons why. I mean people can stay together in some form of mutual loathing relationship for the 'sake of the children', but I can't say it would be too pleasant.

NegativeCreep

I thought way more than 62% of them would have smartphones! Who doesn't have a smartphone in this day and age?

darkpagandeath

100% of that demographic wear footwear on a regular basis. Or consume food, or bathe.

looksee

Nodin wrote: »

Ahhh, but that presumes that the absence of the father correlates to the absence of any male in the domestic life of the child, which may not be the case.

True, but I still think its a makey-up statistic. Anyone can say 'this will be happening in (random date in future)'. By the time it is disproved they will have made their few bob from the research and moved on.

allym

Not living with them doesn't necessarily mean their fathers are not a part of their lives. Plenty of people don't live with one of their parents but still have a perfectly good relationship with them

MakeEmLaugh

efb wrote: »

That's the UK. Relevance to Irl?

Some people are interested in what happens outside of Ireland. You know, the ones who completed secondary school and read newspapers?

But, if that isn't enough motivation for you... The UK is the only country with which the Republic of Ireland shares a border.

Also, Britain (excluding Northern Ireland) has the highest number of Irish-born people living in it outside of Ireland. 869,093 at the last count (that's about 19% of the population of the Republic of Ireland).

Nodin

looksee wrote: »

True, but I still think its a makey-up statistic. Anyone can say 'this will be happening in (random date in future)'. By the time it is disproved they will have made their few bob from the research and moved on.

In that sense yeah, maybe.

Nodin

NegativeCreep wrote: »

I thought way more than 62% of them would have smartphones! Who doesn't have a smartphone in this day and age?

Me.

mfceiling

Anyone read that and not give a shít...

GalwayGuy2

Nodin wrote: »

Ahhh, but that presumes that the absence of the father correlates to the absence of any male in the domestic life of the child, which may not be the case.

I guess it depends on the UK. But, correct me if I'm wrong, but in Ireland, the main replacement for a father figure would be a grandfather?

Also, having a smartphones fairly important. Porn Remain in contact, send out job interviews, search for bus schedules, so on and so forth.

It's probably more important for idiot fifteen year olds to have them.

Nodin

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

I guess it depends on the UK. But, correct me if I'm wrong, but in Ireland, the main replacement for a father figure would be a grandfather? .

....or maybe the boyfriend of the mother, the new husband of the mother.

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Also, having a smartphones fairly important. Porn Remain in contact, send out job interviews, search for bus schedules, so on and so forth.

It's probably more important for idiot fifteen year olds to have them.

And take pictures of your own ass. Very important that.

oldyouth

allym wrote: »

Not living with them doesn't necessarily mean their fathers are not a part of their lives. Plenty of people don't live with one of their parents but still have a perfectly good relationship with them

I think the point is that most people consider it is better to be living happily with 2 parents rather than living happily with 1 parent.

893bet

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

what does it mean tho, do only 43% live with their mother?

No it doesn't. That 57 percent would include single father familes and mother/father families. It wouldnt include single mother families.

darkpagandeath

oldyouth wrote: »

I think the point is that most people consider it is better to be living happily with 2 parents rather than living happily with 1 parent.

Pretty modern concept, Having 2 parents alive is a pretty modern thing due to medical care and such. Used to be a lot different in the past. A lot of women died giving birth.

Mr E

62% of 15 year old boys in the UK have smartphones, whereas only 57% like bananas.

hatrickpatrick

Title should have specified that we were talking about the UK. No offence intended, but socially the UK seems f*cked, and has been for a long time.

hatrickpatrick

oldyouth wrote: »

I think the point is that most people consider it is better to be living happily with 2 parents rather than living happily with 1 parent.

However, living happily with one parent is surely better than living miserably with two?
That's one thing I've never understood about the whole "staying together for the sake of the kids" argument - growing up amongst warring, depressed and angry parents is surely far more damaging to the young psyche?

darkpagandeath

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Title should have specified that we were talking about the UK. No offence intended, but socially the UK seems f*cked, and has been for a long time.

Development of nanny state, Children knowing their rights No discipline in school little to no respect for adults. Has to be something pretty recent say last 30 ish years. As they have had large housing estates way before that and jobless parents. Seems to be getting worse and worse over the years. Gang culture crime. I mean if you grow up with no consequences for your actions what way do you think people will turn out.

oldyouth

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

However, living happily with one parent is surely better than living miserably with two?

That is why I said what I said :rolleyes:

NegativeCreep

Nodin wrote: »

Me.

I doubt you're 15 though

Nodin

NegativeCreep wrote: »

I doubt you're 15 though

Not in many a year, it has to be said.

cloud493

You can get a basic smartphone for nothing these days. Well not literally nothing, but dead cheap.

darkpagandeath

What's the point in this statistic anyway ? Are they trying to say not to buy a smart phone and use the cash to buy a farther ?

Arthur Beesley

darkpagandeath wrote: »

100% of that demographic wear footwear on a regular basis. Or consume food, or bathe.

Not so sure about bathe. They are teenagers.

mickydoomsux

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Development of nanny state, Children knowing their rights No discipline in school little to no respect for adults. Has to be something pretty recent say last 30 ish years. As they have had large housing estates way before that and jobless parents. Seems to be getting worse and worse over the years. Gang culture crime. I mean if you grow up with no consequences for your actions what way do you think people will turn out.

And we, like morons, base everything on "the English model".

Arthur Beesley

mickydoomsux wrote: »

And we, like morons, base everything on "the English model".

No doubt someone will champion the Swedish or Norwegian model.

AlanS181824

I don't see this of relevance to Ireland considering this is for the UK.

But alas interesting nonetheless!

darkpagandeath

mickydoomsux wrote: »

And we, like morons, base everything on "the English model".

True but i wonder how many of them over their have like 150 previous convictions and so on :P The justice system is way worse here i think.

mickydoomsux

Arthur Beesley wrote: »

No doubt someone will champion the Swedish or Norwegian model.

Yeah, let's copy some other countries ideas completely despite the fact that the rest of our social models, taxation system and economy are completely different to theirs.

We'd **** ourselves if we came up with an original concept that doesn't involve "throw money at de vulnerable!"

Nodin

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Yeah, let's copy some other countries ideas completely despite the fact that the rest of our social models, taxation system and economy are completely different to theirs.

We'd **** ourselves if we came up with an original concept that doesn't involve "throw money at de vulnerable!"

So complain about copying the brits, complain about not copying the brits. Ye little ray of sunshine ye.

hatrickpatrick

oldyouth wrote: »

That is why I said what I said :rolleyes:

Sorry should have made clear I wasn't arguing with your own post, just with the prevailing "we can't stand each other anymore but stay together for the sake of the kids" argument which seems pervasive today. I'd actually go so far as to say that true "irresponsibility" is staying together in a scenario in which doing so subjects your kids to a constant air of hostility and grumpiness at home.

Peregrine

If true, that really is a shocking statistic. I would have thought that a lot more than 62% have smartphones.

Maphisto

darkpagandeath wrote: »

What's the point in this statistic anyway ? Are they trying to say not to buy a smart phone and use the cash to buy a farther ?

Or maybe Dad will stay if you're not always fecking about with the phone :pac: