Monogamy and happiness

March 18th, 2011 by Mollie

Referencing a Centers for Disease Control report this month that teens and twentys are waiting longer to have sex, New York Times columnist Ross Douthat tackles the subject of premarital sex.

In 2001, the study reported, 22 percent of Americans aged 15 to 24 were still virgins.  By 2008, that number was up to 28 percent.  Other research suggests that this trend may date back decades, and that young Americans have been growing more sexually conservative since the 1980s.

Why is this good news? … [because] there are different kinds of premarital sex.  There’s sex that’s actually pre-marital, in the sense that it involves monogamous couples on a path that might lead to matrimony one day.  Then there’s sex that’s casual and promiscuous, or just premature and ill considered.”

Monogamy matters, says Douthat, citing the research of two sociologists who authored a recent book, “Premarital Sex in America.”

Their research, which looks at sexual behavior among contemporary young adults, finds a significant correlation between sexual restraint and emotional well-being, between monogamy and happiness – and between promiscuity and depression.

This correlation is much stronger for women than for men.  Female emotional well-being seems to be tightly bound to sexual stability – which may help explain why overall female happiness has actually drifted downward since the sexual revolution.

In a follow-up blog post pivoting off a post by feminist Dana Goldstein, Douthat challenges progressives’ and feminists’ “reflexive hostility” to any criticism that the 60s sexual revolution has changed American sexual culture for the worse, “out of a fear that one concession will cost women every gain.”

Needless to say, I don’t think this is the right way to look at it.  The connection between feminism and sexual permissiveness strikes me as historically contingent rather that strictly necessary, and the economic and social gains that women have made since the 1960s seem robust enough to endure – or, more likely, continue apace – even amid a reconsideration of some of the social changes that accompanied them.  Yes, an ethic of sexual restraint can be turned to patriarchal ends, but so can an ethic of sexual permissiveness, as anyone who’s hung out in a frat house for any length of time can attest.

And the fact that smart feminists like Goldstein feel compelled to act all blasé … lest they give an inch to the forces of reaction, seems like one of the more regrettable aspects of the contemporary cultural debate.

Douthat’s column and post are worth reading.

Public not keen on Rutgers’ co-ed college roommate plan

March 18th, 2011 by Mollie

‘Gender-neutral housing’ may sound like a good, politically correct-sounding idea, but a majority of American adults aren’t buying it.

A survey released by Rasmussen Reports finds that  71% of American adults oppose Rutgers University’s announcement to designate dormitories in which “male and female students can choose to live together as roommates on floors with co-ed rooms and bathrooms.”

Only 45% of adults under 30 oppose the plan.  The other 55% probably haven’t seen what a male can do to a bathroom!

“Doing it” less, later

March 18th, 2011 by Mollie

The Centers for Disease Control delivered a little healthier news report about the sexual behaviors of the 15- to 24-year old age group:

Fewer teens and young adults are having sex, a government survey shows, and theories abound for why they’re doing it less.  Experts say this generation may be more cautious than their predecessors, more aware of sexually spread diseases.  Or perhaps emphasis on abstinence in the past decade has had some influence.

Or maybe they’re just too busy.

“It’s not even on my radar,” said 17-year-old Abbey King of Hinsdale, Ill., a competitive swimmer who starts her day at 5 a.m. and falls into bed at 10:30 p.m. after swimming, school, weight lifting, running, more swimming, homework and a volunteer gig working with service dogs for the disabled.

The study [released March 3, 2011] is based on interviews of about 5,300 young people, ages 15 to 24.  It shows the proportion in that age group who said they’d never had oral, vaginal or anal sex rose in the past decade from 22 percent to about 28 percent.

There are other surveys of sexual behavior, but this is considered the largest and most reliable.  “It’s the gold standard,” said Bill Albert, chief program officer for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.

Read the AP news release here.

Oral sex leading cause of U.S. oral cancer rates

March 18th, 2011 by Mollie

Oral sex now leads the cause of oral cancer in America, according to a new study” (a 225% increase, mainly among white men), beating out tobacco, which is the “leading cause of oral cancer in the rest of the world.”

The Vagina Monologues explained

January 17th, 2011 by Mollie

With the traditionally romantic Valentine’s Day comes one of Radical Feminism’s worst, annual assaults on women:  the Vagina Monologues.

Marketed to college students primarily as a way of ‘ending violence against women’, Eve Ensler’s dehumanizing, male-bashing porn play does violence TO the majority of American women who don’t care to define themselves as mere sexual organs and playthings.

Radical feminists, Women’s Studies faculty, and the Jane Fonda Hollywood crowd love the play for its shock value.  Laughably, these useful idiots are the first to make a scene if a man even suggests that women are sex objects, yet the last to recognize that every scene in the play projects — in overtly vulgar and degrading terms — that exact Neanderthal image of women.

You don’t have to see the play to form an opinion.  Take a quick look at the 10 “Facts vs. Fallacies” compiled by the Luce Institute to see if you can spot any redeeming features in the play.

Ensler tried to move the play into the mainstream of local community theaters with very little success – wiser women don’t buy what she’s selling.  So she relies on the college campus to keep her distorted sexual and political dreams alive.

Valentine’s Day is a month away, so if you’re a student disgusted by this play’s concept, have a little fun this year.  Plan a couple of counteractive Valentine Day projects, or nail up a few posters, of your own on campus, and have a happy, real woman-empowering Valentine’s Day.

Women pay ‘the price for free love’

January 17th, 2011 by Mollie

Virginia Ironside was a 17-year-old in 1961 when the birth control pill was first licensed in Britain.  She chronicles the ugly side of the swinging 60s sexual revolution for women in a UK Daily Mail article.

Virginia Ironside at age 20

Virginia Ironside at age 20

The culture shock:

In the 50s, sex was completely taboo. At Woman magazine, where I worked a decade later, the journalists weren’t ever allowed to use the word ‘bottom’ – not even in ‘bottom of the garden’ or ‘bottom of the saucepan’. They couldn’t print the word ‘menstruation’…

…we’d been brought up to say ‘no to sex, but the only reason for that was because we might get pregnant. And if we’d got pregnant then of course we might have been thrown out of our parents’ home, or forced to give the baby up for adoption. Before the law changed in 1967 there were abortionists around, but they were illegal, and you couldn’t go to one without paying a lot of money in used notes to a dodgy doctor off Harley Street.

It was a ‘man’s world’:

If you can imagine emerging from this repressed background into the swinging 60s, equipped with a contraceptive pill that had only recently become the hugely popular and completely reliable form of birth control, you can also imagine how ill-prepared we all were for what was to follow.

Read the rest of this entry »

Self-esteem, sex, and addictions

January 13th, 2011 by Mollie

College students may be more obsessed with self-esteem than sex. Is this good news, or bad?

“College students love sex, they love to eat – any place there is free food, they are there,” [lead study researcher Brad] Bushman told LiveScience … “And yet they love self-esteem more.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Study: Delaying Sex = More Stable Relationships, Satisfying Sex

January 13th, 2011 by Mollie

bride-groomkneelingA new study by researcher Dean Busby and colleagues, published in the most recent Journal of Family Psychology, has WebMD and LiveScience talking.

Each article takes a slightly different focus in reporting the study’s findings:  couples who had sex the earliest – such as after the first date or within the first month of dating – had the worst relationship outcomes, while those who waited enjoyed more stable relationships and more satisfying sex over the long haul.

Here are excerpts from each:

Read the rest of this entry »

Do you believe in soul-mates?

December 31st, 2010 by Ashley

According to sociologist Mark Regnerus, the majority of young adults in America would like to marry a soul mate. For the *first time* ever, the Love and Fidelity Network is conducting a poll to see what you think! Please participate in the poll and share it with friends! (Answers are anonymous.)

The Girl Can’t Help It?

December 3rd, 2010 by Mollie

Is a predilection for promiscuity written into a girl’s DNA?  A story at Live Science – “Like to Sleep Around? Blame Your Genes” – suggests the answer is ‘yes’.

A particular version of a dopamine receptor gene called DRD4 is linked to people’s tendency toward both infidelity and uncommitted one-night stands, the researchers reported Nov. 30 in the online open-access journal PloS One.

The same gene has already been linked to alcoholism and gambling addiction, as well as less destructive thrills like a love of horror films.  One study linked the gene to an openness to new social situations, which in turn correlated with political liberalism.

In the new study, researchers gathered a detailed history of sexual behavior and relationships from 181 young adults.  They also collected DNA samples from the volunteers’ cheeks and analyzed the samples for the presence of the thrill-seeking version of DRD4.

“What we found was that individuals with a certain variant of the DRD4 gene were more likely to have a history of uncommitted sex, including one-night stands and acts of infidelity,” study researcher Justin Garcia, a postdoctoral fellow at Binghamton University, State University of New York, said in a statement.

“The motivation seems to stem from a system of pleasure and reward, which is where the release of dopamine comes in,” Garcia said. “In cases of uncommitted sex, the risks are high, the rewards substantial and the motivation variable — all elements that ensure a dopamine ‘rush.’”People with the thrill-seeking gene variant were about twice as likely to report a history of one-night stands as those without the gene variant. Half of those with a love of risk imprinted in their DNA reported committing infidelity in the past, compared with 22 percent of those without the variant.

“The study doesn’t let transgressors off the hook,” said Garcia. “These relationships are associative, which means that not everyone with this genotype will have one-night stands or commit infidelity. Indeed, many people without this genotype still have one-night stands and commit infidelity. The study merely suggests that a much higher proportion of those with this genetic type are likely to engage in these behaviors.”

This raises some interesting questions.  If alcohol and gambling are defined addictions, does this DNA correlation suggest that hooking-up should also be defined as an addiction?   And if a predilection for infidelity can be screened by a DNA test, could a DNA test become a standard for the smart bride and groom’s pre-marital tests?