Monday, January 27, 2014

3x sluttier than grandma

Cry about it or celebrate it, but the increasing sexual incontinence of young women is the reality with which young men have to deal today, both in the UK and elsewhere:
Almost one in 10 of those asked said that they had had slept with more than 10 lovers by the age of 24. The average was 5.65 people.

By contrast, women of their mother’s generation, who were in their early twenties in the 1980s, had had an average of 3.72 sexual partners by the same age.And the previous generation were even less promiscuous.Women of their grandmother’s generation, aged 24 in the 1960s, averaged just 1.67 partners.
It's not so much the average as the standard deviations that would show where the serious problem is. Remember, the risk of marital failure goes up considerably at 2+ previous lovers. So, whereas the average woman was in the reasonable risk category two generations ago, not only is the average woman now well outside that range, but at this rate, the average will reach the nuclear "very low chance of marital success" range in another two generations.

This should also serve to successfully address the atheist demand to prove that declining religious observance is a reliable indicator of declining moral standards.

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure if the "declining moral standards" you refer to is an increase in partners or an increase in divorce. Many atheists may not consider increased promiscuity a moral failure.

Note - I'm not commenting on the morality of more partners, one way or the other.

VD said...

Many atheists may not consider increased promiscuity a moral failure.

Irrelevant. It doesn't matter what they consider a moral failure. All that matters is that the effect be demonstrable by the moral standard against which the original claim is made. They usually claim it isn't possible to demonstrate this and start babbling about Scandinavia. These statistics quite clearly show otherwise.

Anonymous said...

I remember, back in the lead-up to Obamacare, there were all these stories out of the UK, and one stuck with me: They were interviewing some 30-something "lady who lunches" who was single, flat with a cat, drove the BMW on a lease. She was quoted as saying something along the lines of, "You're going to have relationships, and those are going to be sexual, because you're an adult, and you're going to get something. So, you just go down to the clinic and they give you something for it. Really, you Americans don't have that? How puritan and barbaric." Kenny the PUA could have said the same thing.

I kept thinking at the time that the late, great British empire really needed another Cromwell, and I realized - the entire Obamacare edifice was sold and marketed to their target markets because it is the logical follow on to the free sex without consequences line they've peddled for fifty years. It's not that everyone's sick, it's that everyone expects to get herpes and wants free treatment, because those gays with AIDS working under 30 hrs/week have it made.

tz said...

The mistake is Atheists say there is no God. They need to bring back paganism, particurlarly Dionysis and turn all forms of perveted sex into a sacrament to be accompanied with lots of wine. Those churches might be full every sunday morning.

Moral relativism is entirely aboit sex, so this doesn't count to a new atheist. (Randian atheists have enough logic to usually agree with traditional views on sex and marriage).

Smoking is down too.

swiftfoxmark2 said...

And so Rush Limbaugh is vindicated when he called Sandra Fluke a slut.

JJ from AZ said...

Correlation is not causation! Wow logical fallacy anyone. They're given en away! The United States is still the most religiously self identifying country in the developed world. 80-90 odd percent self identifying as Christian and 51% claiming to attend church regularly. Atheism isn't what's broken, it's Christianity that is. Hard to agree with an endless stream of morons preaching WWJD? and then spewing hate in every direction and out of every orifice. Teaching a take it or leave it Christianity with an intertwining of Good Old Testament orality replacing that whole, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," with just good old, "Do unto others, first."

I've never met a Christian. Might be interesting, but I heard they all died out 2,000 years ago. Some jerk named Pilate took out the last one.

Anonymous said...

You know, Unknown, when I'm placing bets on stock movement, correlation is more than sufficient, especially when it happens to be correlated most of the time. Correlation is not causation, while being a favorite go-to line, adds zero information content because, everyone knows, food stamp usage is not a sign that the economy is down, but it sure appears to move with general economic health, every single time.

I will agree with you that Christianity is broken in that it gives lots of people messages without context - e.g., how can the same book say "Judge not lest ye be judged" and "If a brother sins against you, confront him. If you convince him, you gain a brother. If not, bring two witnesses. If he still persists in his sin, bring him before the congregation. If he does not repent, turn him out and treat him as a gentile and a tax collector." - unless these messages are to different people in different circumstances, and you have to read the whole thing to get it.

You will find that it's consistent in context:
- For those outside the faith, the offering is prayers for conversion and the order to give a clear explanation of the Gospel - that is, all are fallen and all are hellbound without Christ
- For those inside the faith, discipline and correction are gifts from God himself, and they are given to the church, exercised in the church offices starting with the local church.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Atheism isn't what's broken, it's Christianity that is.

There's something to this. Just as, it's not only gay marriage that is the problem, it's normal marriage that is in crisis. Christians, sadly, are simply not living up to their Faith.

Anonymous said...

As usual, this set of stats (average, with a 1/10 high outlier) could be made much more illuminating with the mean, standard deviation, and the median # of partners. As it is, we look and say that promiscuity has tripled -- not an unreasonable conclusion, given everyday observations, but I wonder what effect that 1/10 has had on the numbers. You'll recall this woman -- http://www.vice.com/read/meet-the-woman-who-wants-to-have-sex-with-100000-men -- and although she's a definite outlier, we could use a more complete picture.

Anonymous said...

Remember, the risk of marital failure goes up considerably at 2+ previous lovers

Does this hold true across the generations, as the N has gone up for most women? If the average is 5+, is someone with 2 or 3 really much more of a risk than someone with 1?

Trust said...

Promiscuity used to carry a high risk for women. Therefore they tended to be pickier about the kind of men they would get involved with and how far it would go.

Similarly, since women set the bar higher, men would have to be more respectable and demonstrate the capacity to be a husband and father on order to get female companionship.

Now women can simply extract support through government programs or from a beta provider they married temporarily and/or got knocked up by.

Notice how Sandra Fluke directed no animosity towards her carousel partners who would not pay for her birth control. It was all towards your basic.guy who she.won't sleep with, who she wants subsidizing her sex life before.buying food for his kids.

Yet when expects R-E-S-P-E-C-T

Weouro said...

A girl with only 1 by age 24 is probably married.

JJ from AZ said...

"This should also serve to successfully address the atheist demand to prove that declining religious observance is a reliable indicator of declining moral standards."

This is the best example of claiming that correlation is causation. This factoid proves absolutely nothing. It does show hat a study can show that women are becoming more promiscuous, but the proof that a lack of religion is the cause is nowhere in sight. A more ready reason is the separation of pregnancy from sex as a result of the birth control pill or the availability of abortion on demand. I won't claim that either is the actual or only cause (or any cause at all) but the idea that lack of religion (especially one that has only been around for a couple of thousand years) = promiscuity.

VD said...

This is the best example of claiming that correlation is causation. This factoid proves absolutely nothing.

You're completely missing the point. The atheist claim is that the correlation doesn't exist. Now you're moving the goalposts and claiming that the correlation doesn't necessarily prove causation.

Now, you can rightly say I shouldn't have used the words "demand to prove". The usual demand is actually for "any evidence". This certainly satisfies that demand.

Bob said...

lol 10 people by 24, as if..

I wonder how many "didn't count" because "I was drunk, upset, taken advantage of" etc...

But yes of course the difference in the trend is what matters here. Still though it's amusing.

Anonymous said...

To pat myself on the back a little: I've been saying a girl's N should be estimated as "age minus 18." 5.65 at age 24 is pretty damn close. Though I suspect the usual under-reporting, which would probably make the real average higher than 6; but that's why I say to start with that estimate and then add to it based on red flags.

Anonymous said...

A girl with only 1 by age 24 is probably married.

Good point. You have to wonder what the number would be if you could limit it just to unmarried 24-year-old girls who went to college and have lived away from home for at least a year. Throw out the prostitutes too, since they blow the curve, so to speak. I bet you'd still end up over 10.

Things have changed far more than most people realize. Many from those earlier generations think, "Well, in our generation we weren't all virgins at marriage either, and we did okay." Well, how "okay" they did is debatable, but there's a difference between "not quite a virgin" and "banging a new guy every few months since high school."

ECM said...

A more ready reason is the separation of pregnancy from sex as a result of the birth control pill or the availability of abortion on demand...

I don't suppose you considered the acceptance of those things stems from a lack of religious belief and adhesion to traditional morality, eh? But you're trying to make a point, so going to the root of the chain of causation (and coorelation) doesn't particularly help that point, does it?

Bob said...

Also people forget the ease of finding a fuck for girls nowadays. With the communication we have, anytime a lass is horny, even if all her text buddies / support circle are busy, she can just pop online and simply ask for someone to fuck her. Few mins later, some bloke is driving over to sort her out. Even the fatties can get it easily like this.

And that's ANYTIME she's horny or lonely, the only thing stopping them is conscience, and well..yeah.

Anonymous said...

The daughter of some friends of the family: 13 year old. Been sleeping with a guy from her class for one year (13 is legal age in my country for consented sex)

Parents have deprived her of internet. phone, you name it. Will it work? Past experiences tell me it's already too late.

Bob Loblaw said...

Many atheists may not consider increased promiscuity a moral failure.

What does morality mean to an atheist anyway? It's a wholly cultural construct, so when the culture changes the atheist changes with it. That's the only way you can get such a titanic shift in opinion on gay marriage in a decade. If it becomes culturally okay to murder Amish people they'll go along with that shift too.

Bob Loblaw said...

Just as, it's not only gay marriage that is the problem, it's normal marriage that is in crisis. Christians, sadly, are simply not living up to their Faith.

Christians never lived up to their faith. That's just part of being human.

It's a little facile to blame cultural problems on people not living up to their faith. There are feedback loops involved here, especially government incentives. You can structure a society such that people who live up to their faith benefit, or at least don't pay a heavy price. But it means you have to be willing to say to other people "What you're doing is wrong, and we won't support it."

Bob Loblaw said...

A girl with only 1 by age 24 is probably married.

Heh. Where I live a girl with only 1 by age 24 is wholly mythical outside of the ones who are as wide as they are tall. My brother's in-laws went out of their way to tell their sixteen year old twins it was okay to start having sex as long as they were "in love". If parents are providing that kind of guidance, what chance do teenagers have?

Brad Andrews said...

ECM,

You are really going to argue that having easy access to birth control and abortion had no impact on women's willingness to have sex outside marriage? What planet are you from?

Marissa said...

Many from those earlier generations think, "Well, in our generation we weren't all virgins at marriage either, and we did okay." Well, how "okay" they did is debatable

It's almost like...the more premarital sex you absolve...the more you get. Which means the more divorce you get.

Anonymous said...

This post is making my top 10 list published tomorrow. Congrats and love your blog!

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.