3 ms·
This WaPo article and specifically the chart entitled "Young men driving the decline in sex": https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/29/share-americans
by embeng4096 5y ago
This WaPo article and specifically the chart entitled "Young men driving the decline in sex": https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/29/share-americans-not-having-sex-has-reached-record-high/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/29/share-ame...
I read the chart as indicating a jump from ~15% to 28% of men 18-30 not having sex, and women from ~13% to 18%. So perhaps the simultaneous rise could be due to factors like less promiscuity overall or more selectivity, but I find that GP's reasoning is plausible for explaining why sexlessness in men rose higher and faster than that in women.
- rthomas6 5y agoSo, to me, this implies women being more selective of partners than in the past accounts for some of the overall decrease, but not all.
- embeng4096 5y agoCan you elaborate? This particular comment of yours reads to me as agreeing -- as in agreeing that selectivity accounts for some of the decrease in sex, but not all, which I think is what I stated. Your other comment in this overall thread gives me the impression that you actually disagree though, so I think I'm missing something and would appreciate more explanation.
- rthomas6 5y agoNo, I agree. My other comment was limited the context of talking about that data only (that 80 percent of women fight over 20% of the men on data sites), not your data. You have promiscuity rates separated by sex, and changes of them over time. The other comment doesn't, and only taking the other comment's data by itself isn't enough, imo, to draw any meaningful conclusions.
- embeng4096 5y agoAh, makes sense -- thanks for clarifying.