"Sex is Cheap" (article)

Glib Gurl

Well-Known Member
slatelogo.gif

Sex Is Cheap
Why young men have the upper hand in bed, even when they're failing in life.

By Mark Regnerus
Posted Friday, Feb. 25, 2011, at 12:23 PM ET
We keep hearing that young men are failing to adapt to contemporary life. Their financial prospects are impaired—earnings for 25- to 34-year-old men have fallen by 20 percent since 1971. Their college enrollment numbers trail women's: Only 43 percent of American undergraduates today are men. Last year, women made up the majority of the work force for the first time. And yet there is one area in which men are very much in charge: premarital heterosexual relationships.

When attractive women will still bed you, life for young men, even those who are floundering, just isn't so bad. This isn't to say that all men direct the course of their relationships. Plenty don't. But what many young men wish for—access to sex without too many complications or commitments—carries the day. If women were more fully in charge of how their relationships transpired, we'd be seeing, on average, more impressive wooing efforts, longer relationships, fewer premarital sexual partners, shorter cohabitations, and more marrying going on. Instead, according to the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (which collects data well into adulthood), none of these things is occurring. Not one. The terms of contemporary sexual relationships favor men and what they want in relationships, not just despite the fact that what they have to offer has diminished, but in part because of it. And it's all thanks to supply and demand.

To better understand what's going on, it's worth a crash course in "sexual economics," an approach best articulated by social psychologists Roy Baumeister and Kathleen Vohs. As Baumeister, Vohs, and others have repeatedly shown, on average, men want sex more than women do. Call it sexist, call it whatever you want—the evidence shows it's true. In one frequently cited study, attractive young researchers separately approached opposite-sex strangers on Florida State University's campus and proposed casual sex. Three-quarters of the men were game, but not one woman said yes. I know: Women love sex too. But research like this consistently demonstrates that men have a greater and far less discriminating appetite for it. As Baumeister and Vohs note, sex in consensual relationships therefore commences only when women decide it does.

And yet despite the fact that women are holding the sexual purse strings, they aren't asking for much in return these days—the market "price" of sex is currently very low. There are several likely reasons for this. One is the spread of pornography: Since high-speed digital porn gives men additional sexual options—more supply for his elevated demand—it takes some measure of price control away from women. The Pill lowered the cost as well. There are also, quite simply, fewer social constraints on sexual relationships than there once were. As a result, the sexual decisions of young women look more like those of men than they once did, at least when women are in their twenties. The price of sex is low, in other words, in part because its costs to women are lower than they used to be.
But just as critical is the fact that a significant number of young men are faring rather badly in life, and are thus skewing the dating pool. It's not that the overall gender ratio in this country is out of whack; it's that there's a growing imbalance between the number of successful young women and successful young men. As a result, in many of the places where young people typically meet—on college campuses, in religious congregations, in cities that draw large numbers of twentysomethings—women outnumber men by significant margins. (In one Manhattan ZIP code, for example, women account for 63 percent of 22-year-olds.)
The idea that sex ratios alter sexual behavior is well-established. Analysis of demographic data from 117 countries has shown that when men outnumber women, women have the upper hand: Marriage rates rise and fewer children are born outside marriage. An oversupply of women, however, tends to lead to a more sexually permissive culture. The same holds true on college campuses. In the course of researching our book Premarital Sex in America, my co-author and I assessed the effects of campus sex ratios on women's sexual attitudes and behavior. We found that virginity is more common on those campuses where women comprise a smaller share of the student body, suggesting that they have the upper hand. By contrast, on campuses where women outnumber men, they are more negative about campus men, hold more negative views of their relationships, go on fewer dates, are less likely to have a boyfriend, and receive less commitment in exchange for sex.

The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health data offer other glimpses into just how low the cost of sex is for young men ages 18 through 23. Take the speed with which these men say their romantic relationships become sexual: 36 percent of young men's relationships add sex by the end of the second week of exclusivity; an additional 13 percent do so by the end of the first month. A second indicator of cheap sex is the share of young men's sexual relationships—30 percent—that don't involve romance at all: no wooing, no dates, no nothing. Finally, as my colleagues and I discovered in our interviews, striking numbers of young women are participating in unwanted sex—either particular acts they dislike or more frequent intercourse than they'd prefer or mimicking porn (being in a dating relationship is correlated to greater acceptance of and use of porn among women).

Yes, sex is clearly cheap for men. Women's "erotic capital," as Catherine Hakim of the London School of Economics has dubbed it, can still be traded for attention, a job, perhaps a boyfriend, and certainly all the sex she wants, but it can't assure her love and lifelong commitment. Not in this market. It's no surprise that the percentage of 25- to 34-year-olds who are married has shrunk by an average of 1 percent each year this past decade.

Jill, a 20-year-old college student from Texas, is one of the many young women my colleagues and I interviewed who finds herself confronting the sexual market's realities. Startlingly attractive and an all-star in all ways, she patiently endures her boyfriend's hemming and hawing about their future. If she were operating within a collegiate sexual economy that wasn't oversupplied with women, men would compete for her and she would easily secure the long-term commitment she says she wants. Meanwhile, Julia, a 21-year-old from Arizona who's been in a sexual relationship for two years, is frustrated by her boyfriend's wish to "enjoy the moment and not worry about the future." Michelle, a 20-year-old from Colorado, said she is in the same boat: "I had an ex-boyfriend of mine who said that, um, he didn't know if he was ever going to get married because, he said, there's always going to be someone better." If this is "the end of men," someone really ought to let them know.

And yet while young men's failures in life are not penalizing them in the bedroom, their sexual success may, ironically, be hindering their drive to achieve in life. Don't forget your Freud: Civilization is built on blocked, redirected, and channeled sexual impulse, because men will work for sex. Today's young men, however, seldom have to. As the authors of last year's book Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality put it, "Societies in which women have lots of autonomy and authority tend to be decidedly male-friendly, relaxed, tolerant, and plenty sexy." They're right. But then try getting men to do anything.
Like Slate on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.
Mark Regnerus is associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin and the co-author of Premarital Sex in America: How Young Americans Meet, Mate, and Think about Marrying.

Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2286240/
 
slatelogo.gif

Sex Is Cheap
Why young men have the upper hand in bed, even when they're failing in life.

By Mark Regnerus
Posted Friday, Feb. 25, 2011, at 12:23 PM ET
We keep hearing that young men are failing to adapt to contemporary life. Their financial prospects are impaired—earnings for 25- to 34-year-old men have fallen by 20 percent since 1971. Their college enrollment numbers trail women's: Only 43 percent of American undergraduates today are men. Last year, women made up the majority of the work force for the first time. And yet there is one area in which men are very much in charge: premarital heterosexual relationships.

When attractive women will still bed you, life for young men, even those who are floundering, just isn't so bad. This isn't to say that all men direct the course of their relationships. Plenty don't. But what many young men wish for—access to sex without too many complications or commitments—carries the day. If women were more fully in charge of how their relationships transpired, we'd be seeing, on average, more impressive wooing efforts, longer relationships, fewer premarital sexual partners, shorter cohabitations, and more marrying going on. Instead, according to the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (which collects data well into adulthood), none of these things is occurring. Not one. The terms of contemporary sexual relationships favor men and what they want in relationships, not just despite the fact that what they have to offer has diminished, but in part because of it. And it's all thanks to supply and demand.

Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2286240/

GIFSoup

The implications of this piece are what I have feared for quite a while. The successful young men shortage is quickly becoming a national phenomenon and not just a BW crisis.

One sociologist said that the problems in the black community foreshadow those of the rest of our nation and he was indeed correct. Our black man shortage is just the tip of the iceberg.

All men (in general) are slacking and women are fighting like dogs trying to satiate the few men left by engaging in behaviors they otherwise would flee from.

We as women can stick to raising the bar for our men and risk spinsterhood, or give in sexually and risk STDs and spinsterhood.

Hmm, I better buy some stock in Duracell because I have a feeling I know what other smart women will resort to. :)
 
If women were more fully in charge of how their relationships transpired, we'd be seeing, on average, more impressive wooing efforts, longer relationships, fewer premarital sexual partners, shorter cohabitations, and more marrying going on.

And yet despite the fact that women are holding the sexual purse strings, they aren't asking for much in return these days—the market "price" of sex is currently very low.

It's not that the overall gender ratio in this country is out of whack; it's that there's a growing imbalance between the number of successful young women and successful young men. As a result, in many of the places where young people typically meet—on college campuses, in religious congregations, in cities that draw large numbers of twentysomethings—women outnumber men by significant margins.

We found that virginity is more common on those campuses where women comprise a smaller share of the student body, suggesting that they have the upper hand. By contrast, on campuses where women outnumber men, they are more negative about campus men, hold more negative views of their relationships, go on fewer dates, are less likely to have a boyfriend, and receive less commitment in exchange for sex.
The entire article was brilliant, but these parts in particular. Especially the bolded. Women indeed have the power, we just need to recognize that.

Xerxes, yes the man shortage is hardly just in the black community but all races/ethnicities in this country and in the UK too I guess. All my non-black girlfriends say there's a MAN shortage, not just black man.
 
When we're dependent on men we lose.

When we're independent of men we stay losing still?

This does not make sense.

DO NOT believe this propaganda! They are salty women are making larger and larger contributions in this world and they want to psychologically destroy us.
 
When we're dependent on men we lose.

When we're independent of men we stay losing still?

This does not make sense.

DO NOT believe this propaganda! They are salty women are making larger and larger contributions in this world and they want to psychologically destroy us.
And I can't help but notice that nearly every one of these articles (whether they're talking about BW or don't make a race-based distinction) begins a little something like this (and the red is ESPECIALLY common):
...We keep hearing that young men are failing to adapt to contemporary life. Their financial prospects are impaired—earnings for 25- to 34-year-old men have fallen by 20 percent since 1971. Their college enrollment numbers trail women's: Only 43 percent of American undergraduates today are men. Last year, women made up the majority of the work force for the first time...
 
This:
...The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health data offer other glimpses into just how low the cost of sex is for young men ages 18 through 23. Take the speed with which these men say their romantic relationships become sexual: 36 percent of young men's relationships add sex by the end of the second week of exclusivity; an additional 13 percent do so by the end of the first month. A second indicator of cheap sex is the share of young men's sexual relationships—30 percent—that don't involve romance at all: no wooing, no dates, no nothing. Finally, as my colleagues and I discovered in our interviews, striking numbers of young women are participating in unwanted sex—either particular acts they dislike or more frequent intercourse than they'd prefer or mimicking porn...
and this:
...Meanwhile, Julia, a 21-year-old from Arizona who's been in a sexual relationship for two years, is frustrated by her boyfriend's wish to "enjoy the moment and not worry about the future." Michelle, a 20-year-old from Colorado, said she is in the same boat: "I had an ex-boyfriend of mine who said that, um, he didn't know if he was ever going to get married because, he said, there's always going to be someone better." If this is "the end of men," someone really ought to let them know...
It's like a woman's happiness in a relationship is completely irrelevant. :perplexed It's one thing to yearn for a loving relationship with a man who has the same (relationship) goals you do and values your happiness as much as you do his when you're unattached, but it's another matter ENTIRELY to want this while you're currently in a relationship. :nono: Too many men are overestimating their worth while too many women are underestimating theirs.
 
If there is one thing I want women to take away from all this is: DO NOT lower your potential nor your standards just because articles like this want to convince us to "become less successful" on the sly.
 
i see this kinda thing all the time. Women are getting desperate and dealing with BS. The price of sex IS really low, but it seems like a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of situation.
 
The thing about the guys that don't care about relationships is that many will when they get older. Men, unlike women do not do well alone. I graduated college a couple years ago but the sister of one of my BFFs goes to Stanford and she said the guys there would be more open to relationships and actually pursue females if they didn't just offer themselves up on a silver platter. My mom says men are like dogs, put a bone in front of them they'll bite.
 
I think that the article is telling women that men are highly motivated by sex. When it's freely given they aren't so motivated. If women want better relationships in the long run, then they should close up the cookie jar and make them earn it. In the process of earning it, they will act more honorably toward the women they are pursuing and also get their own lives together to make themselves more worthy.

I don't know if women in general don't want to reel it in or feel like they'll lose even more if they do, but reminding women that they are the gatekeeper is a positive message, imo.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if women in general don't want to reel it in or feel like they'll lose even more if they do, but reminding women that they are the gatekeeper is a positive message, imo.

The problem is, for everyone woman that sees herself as a gatekeeper (hates that term) there is another woman that does not. How many times have we heard about women who guard their sexuality, but their significant other STILL cheats on them because they know where to get sex if they really wanted it? Women are not monolithic and I'm confused to why people believe its realistic to have all women approach relationships the same way. And even if we did, they way society works, what ever situation we as women find ourselves in, we lose someway somehow.

Also, show me a society on earth where utmost importance placed on a woman guarding her sexuality causing men to treat women in general with respect/jump through hoops for her.
 
Also, let's drop this assumption that all men are sex craved gorillas who can't control themselves.
 
Also, let's drop this assumption that all men are sex craved gorillas who can't control themselves.

The problem is, for everyone woman that sees herself as a gatekeeper (hates that term) there is another woman that does not. How many times have we heard about women who guard their sexuality, but their significant other STILL cheats on them because they know where to get sex if they really wanted it? Women are not monolithic and I'm confused to why people believe its realistic to have all women approach relationships the same way. And even if we did, they way society works, what ever situation we as women find ourselves in, we lose someway somehow.

Also, show me a society on earth where utmost importance placed on a woman guarding her sexuality causing men to treat women in general with respect/jump through hoops for her.

The way that you are writing is very black and white with little room for shades of gray. To say that men are more motivated by sex than women are is not at all to say that they are utterly lacking in self control. It's a relative comparison.

Similarly, to say that men act better when women behave in certain ways is also not at all to say that men will behave perfectly if women behave in certain ways. There is nothing in the article or what was said thus far in the thread that suggests that a man will not cheat if only a woman will do x, y, or z. The point is much finer than that. Again, the point being made is a relative one: In the US (since that's the setting of the article), if women on the whole set higher standards, then men on the whole will do more to meet them. There's nothing about whether women ought to achieve less and nothing about how to prevent a man from cheating.
 
I totally agree with the article, because it just confirms that which we already knew which is...MEN LOVE THE CHASE!!

A man cant chase and woo you out of your draws if you willingly taking them off. Men want to feel like they have "conquered" you meaning they took you out, spent some money on you, played a little phonetag, and generally had to work to wear you down. This makes them feel special and they feel like they have EARNED your affections which strokes their ego.

Unfortunately, women of today are sexually unihibited and very fortheright about getting the "D" if they want it. This is great and all, but when you genuinely want it and you just drop the "P" off in his lap, he is NOT looking at you in awe picturing you walking down the aisle dressed in white. Thus, you are not getting anymore closer to being a wife, but instead you become the "HomeyLoverFriend". You might get a few dates and a couple movie nights if you're lucky, but this is all while he is still out searching for his "Wife".

At the end of the day, it all boils down to keeping your legs closed, or atleast AVOID coloring with the dude that you really like and want to be serious with. Its contradictory, but if you MUST color save it for the "cute, but undersirable as a mate" guy. You can acknowledge that is wack and not worth your time, so u wouldnt dare entertain the thought of being in a relationship with dude. But even then Id ONLY reccommend that if you are capable of coloring with out getting attached and getting your feelings involved, and most women cant sooo...
 
Also, let's drop this assumption that all men are sex craved gorillas who can't control themselves.

*all* men are not. True, but they do, *on average* think about sex 5times more than women do... And that's where the dichotomy exists...

A lot of you come into theses threads with the negative slant already in mind, guns a-blazin...

This article, personally was on point for me because this is *exactly* what I'm seeing in my big city... More women, less men, = (generally speaking) more choice for men, and less commitment for women.

I have not been wooed in ages, but the number of times I've been propositioned for sex is daily. Yes multiple times daily.

I *am* the gatekeeper of my own sexuality, and I don't give a what if some next girl in my city is opening her legs to my reject. In my opinion, she also could choose to keep her legs closed too.
 
It is way too cheap these days. I've actually had guys get mad at me for not giving it up. It's like expected now after a few weeks of talking and not even wooing. :nono:
 
Back
Top