• Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yes it bloody is.

    If you extrapolate from that, it will be on the control side in short order. That is a trend, we can predict what will happen based on the observed changes.

    • stankmut@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      You could also interpret those results as young women hitting a wall on how much towards freedom they will go. Every other group was much lower on the freedom scale, so they had more room to move.

      • Timbits@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        . . . Because freedom is less of an issue for young American women these days eh?

        • stankmut@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          I’m not sure I follow. Freedom is a huge issue for young American women, which is why we lean so much towards freedom on the scale. I would imagine the lack of hope would move young women to push for freedom, since a lot of this ‘control’ stuff involves controlling women. I think it’s just as likely if not more likely that the increase in despair didn’t change the political leanings because they are already so freedom leaning rather than the young women are a few bad days away from embracing fascism.

    • Sc00ter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Thats not how extraplation works…

      Went toward freedom in any amount of time, extrapolated to any other time, will still be in the same direction, aka toward freedom. The direction cannot change when you have two data points and linearly extrapolate

      If they went up 0.1 in 10 years, if you extrapolate 10 more years, they’ll go up 0.1. If you extrapolate 5 years, they’ll go up 0.05. They’ll always go up at the rate of 0.1/10 years

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not if you look at the rate of change as well as the change. If it’s trending towards zero, it can be a curve rather than straight line. That can then trend negative.

        Think of a car going fast, then applying the brakes. It slows down until it eventually stops.

        Now think of a boat. It doesn’t have a brake. It has a reverse throttle. When you want to slow down, the motor goes backwards. When you hit zero, you start to then go backwards. That’s what they are extrapolating.

        • WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          There’s only 2 points, not 3. You can’t look at the change of the change with only 2 points. For all we know, if they had done the survey in 2005, women would have been further towards freedom and moved towards control for 2014 and the change of the change would show they’re accelerating towards freedom.

          • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes, I agree. However, looking at other similar data could lead to that conclusion. I don’t necessarily agree, but its not that left field.

            I was even simplifying as in didn’t want to look at juatbthebrate of change but also the difference between positive and negative values.