Archive for the ‘Hooking-up’ Category

Monogamy and happiness

Friday, March 18th, 2011

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.

Women pay ‘the price for free love’

Monday, January 17th, 2011

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.

(more…)

Self-esteem, sex, and addictions

Thursday, January 13th, 2011

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.”

(more…)

The Girl Can’t Help It?

Friday, December 3rd, 2010

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?

Jury: $2.4 Million for Herpes Transmission

Wednesday, November 17th, 2010

We’ve been told that hooking up costs society big bucks in health care costs, but it just got very expensive on a personal level for one California man.

A Beverly Hills man has been hit with a $2.4 million judgment in a suit alleging that he negligently infected his soon-to-be-ex wife with genital herpes.

The unfortunate transmission occurred after the defendant and his wife reconciled following a month-long split in mid-2007, according to the complaint. Not long after they kissed and made up, the plaintiff began experiencing “severe burning, itching and swelling,” and was diagnosed with genital herpes shortly thereafter.

It was only after this diagnosis that the plaintiff learned that her husband engaged in unprotected sex with several women outside their marriage, behavior that the complaint described as “high-risk.”

The award, which was handed down by a Los Angeles jury, gave the wife $500,000 for past pain and suffering, $1.63 million for future pain and suffering, $250,000 for future medical damages, and $62,000 in punitive damages.

“Herpes litigation is surprisingly common,” notes the article, although perhaps not so surprising given the prevalence of the disease:  16% of all Americans – “and a stunning 48% of black women” – carry the HSV-2 disease. Worse, “80% of those who have the virus never experience outbreaks or even know that they are infected.”

The $2.4 million judgment in this case “pales in comparison” to a jury award of $6.7 million last year to a woman who “contracted herpes after sleeping with a wealthy businessman.”

The plaintiff’s attorney in that case said the eye-popping verdict was “a clear message to all persons infected with a sexually transmitted disease that this type of behavior simply will not be tolerated.”

Love & Fidelity Conference: Sexuality, Integrity and the University

Thursday, October 28th, 2010

Register before Nov. 1 for this annual conference  at Princeton University on November 12 & 13.

It begins Friday (8 pm) with “Friends with Benefits or the Benefits of Friends? The fall of friendship in the hookup culture and the need for its restoration to relationships.”

Saturday’s fare includes “Masculinity and the Real Man” and “Feminism and Femininity,” breakout sessions for students and faculty, and an expert Q&A panel.

Love & Fidelity Network’s third annual conference looks to be a good one.

‘Sex in the City 2′ – post-feminist male empowerment

Saturday, May 22nd, 2010

Hats off to Toby Young (UK Telegraph) for his brutally candid appraisal of Sex in the City as pure single-male empowerment (Sex and the City is about as ‘feminist’ as a copy of Playboy):

I remember going to the launch party for the television series in New York in the mid-90s and sitting in the audience, drinking in the behaviour of Carrie Bradshaw and her friends.  As a single man, I thought all my Christmases had come at once. 

It was as if a group of frat boys had got together and said, “Hey guys, wouldn’t it be funny if we made a TV show that persuades attractive women in their 20s and 30s that it’s fashionable to have sex with men like us without demanding any sort of emotional commitment in return? Not only that, but we’ll do our best to convince them that they actually have to go out of their way to induce us to have this no-strings attached sex by spending several hours a day on incredibly painful personal grooming procedures and then squeezing themselves into these fantastically uncomfortable shoes. The beauty part is we’ll persuade them that doing all this stuff for our benefit – spending their lives beautifying themselves and then submitting to our every sexual demand without asking for anything in return – is a ‘post-feminist’ choice.”

I was expecting at least some women to see through this. Not all single girls in their 20s and 30s could be so stupid as to think that giving it away for nothing is actually a form of post-feminist empowerment, could they?

But no. An entire generation of women fell for it hook, line and sinker. Far from being seen as sluts, women like Samantha Jones were regarded as ‘role models’. Suddenly, it become cool for women to allow themselves to be picked up in bars by selfish, predatory males who are only interested in one-night stands. Who cares if the men never bothered calling them afterwards? It was ‘liberated’ behaviour.

One recurring theme of Sex and the City I particularly enjoy is the idea that modern single women should have two completely different sets of standards when it comes to who they should sleep with and who they should marry. Apparently, it’s okay to share your bed with any Tom, Dick or Harry, but the only men you should marry are chief executives who look like male models and earn over ten million dollars a year. Great! That means they’re never, ever going to get married and will continue to sleep with less-than-perfect men without ever expecting us to put rings on their fingers.

This last point is the killer. The truly incredible thing about Carrie and her chums is that they don’t make the connection between their promiscuity and their inability to find husbands.

Duh! Since time immemorial, the way women have enticed men to make a commitment to them is by refusing to put out until the man gets down on one knee. But if you’re willing to trade access to your body for a Cosmopolitan and a copy of Vogue, why would a man bother to spend $10,000 on a diamond ring? The Sex and the City women are never going to ensnare the Masters of the Universe they fantasize about marrying because Alpha males can have sex with them whenever they want and then discard them like used towels.

Ouch!

Toby is “greatly looking forward” to the release of the movie on May 27.  No surprise there.

Hollywood Sex Symbol: sexy yes, sluttiness no

Sunday, May 9th, 2010

Raquel WelchIn a provocative article posted on CNN.com today, Hollywood sex symbol Raquel Welch “waves the red flag of caution over how low moral standards have plummeted.”

Margaret Sanger opened the first American family-planning clinic in 1916, and nothing would be the same again.  Since then the growing proliferation of birth control methods has had an awesome effect on both sexes and led to a sea change in moral values.

The upside is that it empowered women to make better choices in life.  

The downside is a loss of caution and, well, rampant female sluttiness.

One significant, and enduring effect of The Pill on female sexual attitudes during the 60’s, was :  “Now we can have sex anytime we want, without the consequences.  Hallelujah, let’s party.”

It remains this way.  These days, nobody seems able to “keep it in their pants” or honor a commitment!  

Sadly, there’s a huge difference between ’sexy’ and ’slut’ that too many teen girls are missing today.  A Golden-Globe-winning actress with 45 films to her credit, Welch should know.  She oozed a sexiness that men of several generations fantasized about and women tried to emulate.  But slut?  Never.  And even she’s shocked by today’s behavior:

As a result of the example set by their elders, by the 1990s teenage sexual promiscuity — or hooking up — with multiple partners had become a common occurrence.  Many of my friends who were parents of teenagers sat in stunned stilence several years ago when it came to light that oral sex had become a popular practice among adolescent girls in middle schools across the country.

The 13-year-old daughter of one such friend freely admitted to performing fellatio on several boys at school on a regular basis.  “Aw come on, Mom.  It’s no big deal.  Everyone is doing it,” she said.  Apparently, since it’s not the act of intercourse, kids don’t count it as sex.  Can any sane person fail to make a judgment call about that?

In reality, any sane person has to feel sorry for these pathetic girls, because sluttiness is never attractive to either gender. 

Women can be sexy as hell without decending into sluts, and Welch calls teen girls to a higher standard:

Seriously, folks, if an aging sex symbol like me starts waving the red flag of caution over how low moral standards have plummeted, you know it’s gotta be pretty bad.  In fact, it’s precisely because of the sexy image I’ve had that it’s important for me to speak up and say:  Come on girls!  Time to pull up our socks!  We’re capable of so much better. 

Yes, we are!

Is Hook-Up Fatigue Setting In?

Wednesday, April 21st, 2010

It looks that way.  Stephanie Chen’s CNN article, No Hooking Up, No Sex for Some Co-eds, reports students are choosing to disengage from the often alcohol-fueled hook-up scene that leaves many women with a hangover of the blues even if they manage to avoid getting a sexually transmitted disease. 

It shouldn’t come as a surprise.  While some researchers have found no long-term harmful psychological damage from hooking-up, other studies, writes Chen, “have shown the instability from hooking up can cause depression.  Repeated rejection and detached relationships can also damage self-esteem.”  Even researchers who discount psychological damage warn that the hook-up culture has become a “direct route for spreading STDs,” since those who practice this type of sex tend to engage with many more partners.  

A growing body of evidence suggests women and men have very different morning-after reactions to friends-with-benefits, hooking up, and similar nonromantic sexual relations.

(more…)

“Shame Cycle: the new backlash against casual sex”

Thursday, March 4th, 2010

Jessica Grose at Slate.com pens an interesting piece on the shame cycle women feel after pursuing a life of casual sex.   Feminist authors Julie Klausner and Hephzibah Anderson are among her several examples. 

“When you cry about things not working out,” Grose quotes Klausner in a new collection of essays, “you’re crying not only because a guy you slept with now doesn’t seem to care you’re alive, but also because you’re ashamed of yourself for crying.”

Grose also quotes Anderson’s confession (in a book to be released this summer) at having such deep regrets about casual sex that she gave up “penetrative sex” for a year:  

(more…)