Americans’ Sex Lives Have Gone Limp—lovemaking Fell ~15% Since The ’90s

[Afro_Vacancy]

Americans’ sex lives have gone limp—lovemaking fell ~15% since the ’90s
Decline linked to more singletons and less frisky married couples.
Beth Mole - 3/7/2017, 2:28 PM
https://arstechnica.com/science/201...e-gone-limp-lovemaking-fell-15-since-the-90s/

Sexy times in the US are declining, according to a new study in the Archives of Sexual Behavior.

American adults reported having nine fewer romps a year in the early 2010s than they did in the late 1990s—dropping from an average of about 62 times a year between 1995 and 2000 to around 53 a year between 2010 and 2014. Researchers saw declines across ages, races, religions, education levels, employment statuses, and regions. They linked the sagging numbers to two trends: an increase in singletons over that period—who tend to have less sex than married or partnered people—plus a slow-down in the sex lives of married and coupled people. But the drivers of those trends are still unclear.

 

[CaptainForehead]

How's your ED David? You were planning on visiting a urologist a couple of months back.

 

[SmoothSailing]

I wish they would delve further into the data and outline if there are fewer or greater people having no sex, and whether there were differences in the median values between the genders. Wish I had access the the study, not paying for it though.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

How's your ED David? You were planning on visiting a urologist a couple of months back.

It's on and off. I was doing no fap but I'm off it as of a week ago as I'm stuck at home with a viral infection and bored out of my mind.

The urologist gave no useful advice. They referred me to a sexual psychiatry clinic. I spent 4 hours with them and they've written up a report on me and suggestions.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

The study abstract:

American adults had sex about nine fewer times per year in the early 2010s compared to the late 1990s in data from the nationally representative General Social Survey, N = 26,620, 1989–2014. This was partially due to the higher percentage of unpartnered individuals, who have sex less frequently on average. Sexual frequency declined among the partnered (married or living together) but stayed steady among the unpartnered, reducing the marital/partnered advantage for sexual frequency. Declines in sexual frequency were similar across gender, race, region, educational level, and work status and were largest among those in their 50s, those with school-age children, and those who did not watch pornography. In analyses separating the effects of age, time period, and cohort, the decline was primarily due to birth cohort (year of birth, also known as generation). With age and time period controlled, those born in the 1930s (Silent generation) had sex the most often, whereas those born in the 1990s (Millennials and iGen) had sex the least often. The decline was not linked to longer working hours or increased pornography use. Age had a strong effect on sexual frequency: Americans in their 20s had sex an average of about 80 times per year, compared to about 20 times per year for those in their 60s. The results suggest that Americans are having sex less frequently due to two primary factors: An increasing number of individuals without a steady or marital partner and a decline in sexual frequency among those with partners.

 

[CopeForLife]

> implies that he has ED
> fapping

wut

 

[kj6723]

I attribute it to:

1) People becoming more picky

2) People being pussies

I include myself in both of these categories

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I attribute it to:

1) People becoming more picky

2) People being pussies

I include myself in both of these categories

Possible but it's hard to say as we weren't on the market in the 1990s. We don't really know what it was like.

 

[Roberto_72]

I attribute it to:

1) People becoming more picky

2) People being pussies

I include myself in both of these categories

Possible but it's hard to say as we weren't on the market in the 1990s. We don't really know what it was like.

I WAS on the market and the big difference back then is that people's curiosity and narcissism were not exhausted by chats and selfies.

Social media are an outlet for needs and passions that 20 years ago were satisfied by real life.

 

[SmoothSailing]

I WAS on the market and the big difference back then is that people's curiosity and narcissism were not exhausted by chats and selfies.

Social media are an outlet for needs and passions that 20 years ago were satisfied by real life.

This is the most plausible reason I've read so far. People no longer have such a need to validate themselves with sex, when they can do it through social media so easily. Still it doesn't explain why the biggest drop off was with couples and not single people.

 

[pjhair]

Still it doesn't explain why the biggest drop off was with couples and not single people.

Perhaps increased exposure and constant display of hot models have increased expectations among women?

 

[SmoothSailing]

Perhaps increased exposure and constant display of hot models have increased expectations among women?

Perhaps, although I've always been slightly skeptical of how much an affect this has. The amount of sexy girls I've seen, the amount of stuff I've seen in pornos, and yet it's never put me off f*****g average girls in any way.

Perhaps women now have more of a say in relationships than they did in the past, and thus can dictate less sex. I wish we had the raw data so our guesses could have a bit more weight.

 

[pjhair]

Perhaps, although I've always been slightly skeptical of how much an affect this has. The amount of sexy girls I've seen, the amount of stuff I've seen in pornos, and yet it's never put me off f*****g average girls in any way.

That's because men are far less pickier than women when it comes to sex.

 

[JohnsonDDG]

Two significant factors:

-Increased levels of stress and anxiety
-Easy access to p**rn - creating less need for actual sex - and possibly PIED

 

[Guzam]

Americans’ sex lives have gone limp—lovemaking fell ~15% since the ’90s
Decline linked to more singletons and less frisky married couples.
Beth Mole - 3/7/2017, 2:28 PM
https://arstechnica.com/science/201...e-gone-limp-lovemaking-fell-15-since-the-90s/

Obviously one of the consequences of sexual liberation of women. The 'free sex for all' meme was just what it was, a meme.

Humans in the first world are steadily falling into a matriarchal society where all sexual leverage is in the woman's hands and women are free to reproduce exclusively with the top 20% of males becoming the first, and only, driver of further evolution in humans.

It's widely known that the average man's sex has decreased because the bottom 80% is getting less sex and the top 20% of males is getting more sex than before. Let's build a simple stat model to explain this intuition of mine.

Assume pre sexual revolution, twenty people exist in a small world and the number of males' annual sexual partners was distributed like this for cultural reasons (marriage, self respect, christian moral values) before sexual revolution:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -> our males, numbered. This also represents their attractiveness on usual scale, equally distributed (huge assumption)
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 -> which are their correspondent annual sexual partners. In total, they got 11 partners.
Average is 1.1 partners annually, median is 1 and mode is 1. Top 20% (men 9 and 10) get more sex than the 'normal man' because even in a conservative society this happens. 90% of men get sex because of marriage and social, rather than attractiveness-based, expectations.

Assume, after sexual revolution, in year 1990 our ten men's sexual partners distribution looks like this:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 4

Average got to 1.4 sexual partners annually! Yay! Everyone's happy! Total of sexual partners is 14!!
BUT. 5 out of 10 of these men got no sex. Mode is 0. Who won? Well, obviously the top 20% of men won most. They got a sh*t ton of pussy, but men just above average won too. And the women, who got not only MORE sex, but ONLY sex with the better men available, won a lot!

Assume after sexual revolution in year 2017 our ten men's sexual partners distribution looks like this:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 5

Oh noes! Sexual partners got down to 13! Average went down to 1.3! People are getting less sex!
With social media and the internet, women got pickier. Who benefits? Well, them, obviously! The top 20% of men in our small world!

Now take into account that attractiveness is not equally distributed but probably normally distributed. Anyway this is happening right here right now. Women get pickier, choose the best men. All the others get fucked and masturbate at home. Less attractive women are suffering this too because they want the best and the best don't want them, so total count goes down. Unless something happens, in a near future only the top 20% men will bang all the women they want, when they want.

 

[JohnsonDDG]

I cant remember the source but there was recent research to suggest that in the UK people have more sexual partners but less actual sex.

The average sexual partners was around 4-5 in the 60s/70s and in the 00s the average was around 11: http://www.natsal.ac.uk/home.aspx

But I think those numbers are off with the tinder generation - I think most people around 25 would have slept with over 20 people each

 

[Grasshüpfer]

For sure it was the hot 90s fashion.

 

[Patrick_Bateman]

Obviously one of the consequences of sexual liberation of women. The 'free sex for all' meme was just what it was, a meme.

Humans in the first world are steadily falling into a matriarchal society where all sexual leverage is in the woman's hands and women are free to reproduce exclusively with the top 20% of males becoming the first, and only, driver of further evolution in humans.

It's widely known that the average man's sex has decreased because the bottom 80% is getting less sex and the top 20% of males is getting more sex than before. Let's build a simple stat model to explain this intuition of mine.

Assume pre sexual revolution, twenty people exist in a small world and the number of males' annual sexual partners was distributed like this for cultural reasons (marriage, self respect, christian moral values) before sexual revolution:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -> our males, numbered. This also represents their attractiveness on usual scale, equally distributed (huge assumption)
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 -> which are their correspondent annual sexual partners. In total, they got 11 partners.
Average is 1.1 partners annually, median is 1 and mode is 1. Top 20% (men 9 and 10) get more sex than the 'normal man' because even in a conservative society this happens. 90% of men get sex because of marriage and social, rather than attractiveness-based, expectations.

Assume, after sexual revolution, in year 1990 our ten men's sexual partners distribution looks like this:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 4

Average got to 1.4 sexual partners annually! Yay! Everyone's happy! Total of sexual partners is 14!!
BUT. 5 out of 10 of these men got no sex. Mode is 0. Who won? Well, obviously the top 20% of men won most. They got a sh*t ton of pussy, but men just above average won too. And the women, who got not only MORE sex, but ONLY sex with the better men available, won a lot!

Assume after sexual revolution in year 2017 our ten men's sexual partners distribution looks like this:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 5

Oh noes! Sexual partners got down to 13! Average went down to 1.3! People are getting less sex!
With social media and the internet, women got pickier. Who benefits? Well, them, obviously! The top 20% of men in our small world!

Now take into account that attractiveness is not equally distributed but probably normally distributed. Anyway this is happening right here right now. Women get pickier, choose the best men. All the others get fucked and masturbate at home. Less attractive women are suffering this too because they want the best and the best don't want them, so total count goes down. Unless something happens, in a near future only the top 20% men will bang all the women they want, when they want.

If you think about in a pure superficial way, it's very logical for women to choose the top 20%. Given the choice they will choose the mate that will bring the best offspring. In this day and age it's easy for the average woman to find a top 20% male willing to jizz inside her. When she inevitably gets dumped by the top 20% male, she can find a beta provider for her elite children. It's basicly eugenics at this point.

Win-win situation for everyone except the 80% males.

 

[resu]

Its the availability of the internet - the cause, by the way.

It is, the novelty worn off, there's no mystery left, everything is out there, with Facebook you can see what couples look like in your whole country and beyond and what they're doing, with Instagram you can see how lame your life is, then there's tons of p**rn easily accessible. Guys are constantly complaining how they don't have a chance on Tinder and women complain they get flooded with messages. In the 90's for instance you had a very small reference point, you had no idea beyond your near surroundings.

The internet should have stayed hard to use so it would only be used for work and for actual nerds and geeks.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I had a female therapist a while back, about 60 years old.

She said when she was young she would meet men by going to dances. 1 or 2 guys would ask her to dance and if she was lucky she might like one of them.