US single people under 50 having less sex since Roe overturned, study finds

[Phys251]

US single people under 50 having less sex since Roe overturned, study finds

Annual study from Match Group of 5,000 single people finds shift in behavior since supreme court ruling on abortion

www.theguardian.com

It’s really remarkable that legislation is making people feel more nervous or worried or less comfortable with their sexual lives.

You’re not gonna connect that well if you’re feeling anxious the whole time.

Part of me feels sympathy for this and recognizes that if there is an accidental pregnancy, there are fewer options to terminate it.

Part of me wants people to learn that there are plenty of ways for sexual satisfaction that don't involve intercourse. Oral, mutual masturbation, 69, etc.

 

[Napoleon]

It’s not a bad thing that people are less likely to have intercourse with wild abandon and are more likely to contemplate the consequences.

 

[Phys251]

It’s not a bad thing that people are less likely to have intercourse with wild abandon and are more likely to contemplate the consequences.

^ This is the attitude of anti-choice-ism, which wants to punish women for having sex as they want.

 

[EdwinWillers]

^ This is the attitude of anti-choice-ism, which wants to punish women for having sex as they want.

^^ And this is the attitude of pro-choice-ism.

Finally, someone who is pro-abortion actually admits what the statistics have been saying all along - that abortion is NOT about protecting women's health or lives, it's solely about the right to have sex without consequences. Period.

(and it took a man to admit it).

 

[Gozaburo]

^ This is the attitude of anti-choice-ism, which wants to punish women for having sex as they want.

Science has shown objectively that premarital sex (particularly with a partner that won't be an eventual spouse) leads to higher rates of marriage dissolution and unhappiness downstream. Statistics also show that children raised in divorced households or by single mothers are magnitudes more likely to have emotional stress, criminal behavior, and general dysfunction.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0192513X231155673

Statistics: Children & Divorce

Thinking about divorce? Here are some statistics to help you identify trends and scenarios that your children will deal with when going through the divorce process.

www.owenbylaw.com

This isn't even considering the abortion angle, which has its own set of psychological and physical baggage to unpack. Now that we know this, will you acknowledge that hedonistic sex is OBJECTIVELY horrible for society and has been demonstrated to leave horrible side effects for everyone involved? Or are you going to deny reality and the scientific consensus and say that social stability and the happiness of people should be sacrificed on the alter of orgasms?

 

[samiam5211]

Is there a trend that started after Roe was overturned, or is it just the continuation of a trend that started before Roe was overturned?

 

[Phys251]

Science has shown objectively that premarital sex (particularly with a partner that won't be an eventual spouse) leads to higher rates of marriage dissolution and unhappiness downstream. Statistics also show that children raised in divorced households or by single mothers are magnitudes more likely to have emotional stress, criminal behavior, and general dysfunction.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0192513X231155673

Statistics: Children & Divorce

Thinking about divorce? Here are some statistics to help you identify trends and scenarios that your children will deal with when going through the divorce process.

www.owenbylaw.com

Your Owenby Law site is just an attorney's opinion, so it is dismissed. With your first site, you made the classic correlation-causation error. Besides, why do you want couples stuck in unhappy marriages? Sometimes divorce is the least bad option.

Now that we know this,

No we don't.

will you acknowledge that hedonistic sex is OBJECTIVELY horrible for society and has demonstrated to leave horrible side effects for everyone involved? Or are you going to deny reality and the scientific consensus and say that social stability and the happiness of people should be sacrificed on the alter of orgasms.

No it's not. Stop lying, and get your politics out of people's bedrooms.

 

[Phys251]

Is there a trend that started after Roe was overturned, or is it just the continuation of a trend that started before Roe was overturned?

From the first paragraph of the article:

More than one in 10 single people under 50 say they are having less sex because the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, according to a new study.

That doesn't answer your question of whether there was a trend prior, though. I suspect smartphones in the bedroom are a libido killer as well.

 

[samiam5211]

From the first paragraph of the article:



That doesn't answer your question of whether there was a trend prior, though. I suspect smartphones in the bedroom are a libido killer as well.

Plus the trend of younger people having less sex overall that has been going on for a while now.

 

[Gozaburo]

Your Owenby Law site is just an attorney's opinion, so it is dismissed. With your first site, you made the classic correlation-causation error. Besides, why do you want couples stuck in unhappy marriages? Sometimes divorce is the least bad option.

Here's a scientific article that controls for various factors including religiosity and traditional beliefs. There is a consensus on this issue, there is no denying it.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0192513X231155673

No it's not. Stop lying, and get your politics out of people's bedrooms.

Not an argument and the statistical evidence makes you look like a fool. Just be sincere and admit that ejaculating is more important to you than the wellbeing of families and children. I could at least respect your uninformed opinion as being honest that way.

 

[Helix]

Perhaps women should go on a sex strike. Boy howdy, would that ever change the dynamic.

 

[Phys251]

Here's a scientific article that controls for various factors including religiosity and traditional beliefs. There is a consensus on this issue, there is no denying it.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0192513X231155673

LMAO, you already posted that link. At least try to be original in your sex-negative attitude.

Not an argument and the statistical evidence makes you look like a fool. Just be sincere and admit that ejaculating is more important to you than the wellbeing of families and children. I could at least respect your uninformed opinion as being honest that way.

There is no evidence to suggest that sexual behavior other than male-female missionary is bad. None. You want to regulate what goes on in consenting adults' bedrooms.

 

[samiam5211]

Perhaps women should go on a sex strike. Boy howdy, would that ever change the dynamic.

They don't have to go on strike, they can just exclude men from their sex.

 

[Gozaburo]

LMAO, you already posted that link. At least try to be original in your sex-negative attitude.

You didn't read it and claimed corellation-causation. Weak.

There is no evidence to suggest that sexual behavior other than male-female missionary is bad. None. You want to regulate what goes on in consenting adults' bedrooms.

Strawman. You've lost the argument and can provide no evidence to the contrary. Your stance on this issue is corrosive to society and the wellbeing of our people (proven by facts). We don't need to hear you submit in this thread but it's clear you just value ejaculating over the wellbeing of people.

 

[Phys251]

You didn't read it and claimed corellation-causation. Weak.


Strawman. You've lost the argument and can provide no evidence to the contrary. Your stance on this issue is corrosive to society and the wellbeing of our people (proven by facts). We don't need to hear you submit in this thread but it's clear you just value ejaculating over the wellbeing of people.

More lies from the person who wants to regulate the private sex lives of consenting adults. You've offered no credible evidence, just copy-pasted a couple sources that you think make your sex-negative position credible. Well it doesn't. Leave consenting adults alone!

 

[samiam5211]

Science has shown objectively that premarital sex (particularly with a partner that won't be an eventual spouse) leads to higher rates of marriage dissolution and unhappiness downstream. Statistics also show that children raised in divorced households or by single mothers are magnitudes more likely to have emotional stress, criminal behavior, and general dysfunction.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0192513X231155673

Statistics: Children & Divorce

Thinking about divorce? Here are some statistics to help you identify trends and scenarios that your children will deal with when going through the divorce process.

www.owenbylaw.com

This isn't even considering the abortion angle, which has its own set of psychological and physical baggage to unpack. Now that we know this, will you acknowledge that hedonistic sex is OBJECTIVELY horrible for society and has been demonstrated to leave horrible side effects for everyone involved? Or are you going to deny reality and the scientific consensus and say that social stability and the happiness of people should be sacrificed on the alter of orgasms?

Disease, unwanted children, and social stigma are the problems associated with "hedonistic sex", that you are talking about.

Every single one of those are things that we can control today.

So yea, 2000 or even 200 years ago, these were serious problems. Today, for the most part, they are things we can control.

 

[Phys251]

Disease, unwanted children, and social stigma are the problems associated with "hedonistic sex", that you are talking about.

Every single one of those are things that we can control today.

So yea, 2000 or even 200 years ago, these were serious problems. Today, for the most part, they are things we can control.

Birth control goes a long way towards that. Keep in mind that many assholes who want to ban abortion are the same ones who want to ban birth control.

 

[Gozaburo]

Disease, unwanted children, and social stigma are the problems associated with "hedonistic sex", that you are talking about.

Every single one of those are things that we can control today.

So yea, 2000 or even 200 years ago, these were serious problems. Today, for the most part, they are things we can control.

What is the argument here even. We had a problem 2,000 years ago so that means we can't address the problems of today?

 

[samiam5211]

What is the argument here even. We had a problem 2,000 years ago so that means we can't address the problems of today?

My point is that "hedonistic sex" is just fine today.

 

[Gozaburo]

My point is that "hedonistic sex" is just fine today.

Even though it would lead to the proliferation of disease (some of which are still incurable) and "unwanted" children.

This of course says nothing about the short and long term societal implications of engaging in polyamory. The consensus seems to be universally negative. If your conclusion is that ejaculating is more important than addressing the downstream effects proven by the statistics of depression, dysfunction, and psychological trauma I'd rather you just be sincere.

 

[Phys251]

Even though it would lead to the proliferation of disease (some of which are still incurable) and "unwanted" children.

This of course says nothing about the short and long term societal implications of engaging in polyamory. The consensus seems to be universally negative. If your conclusion is that ejaculating is more important than addressing the downstream effects proven by the statistics of depression, dysfunction, and psychological trauma I'd rather you just be sincere.

As was clearly stated in the OP, there are plenty of satisfying ways to have healthy sex that don't involve intercourse. Why do you want to prohibit that?

 

[quip]

^^ And this is the attitude of pro-choice-ism.

Finally, someone who is pro-abortion actually admits what the statistics have been saying all along - that abortion is NOT about protecting women's health or lives, it's solely about the right to have sex without consequences. Period.

(and it took a man to admit it).

^^ And this a typical anti-choice-ism conclusion spinning sex rate info into a competing false dichotomy.

Howza 'bout both Ed?

 

[Helix]

They don't have to go on strike, they can just exclude men from their sex.

Women have plenty of reasons to go on actual strike, as well. I want a better country for women, not The Handmaid's Tale vomited out of the tv into real life.

 

[Gordy327]

As was clearly stated in the OP, there are plenty of satisfying ways to have healthy sex that don't involve intercourse. Why do you want to prohibit that?

Yeah, but intercourse is the most satisfying.

 

[choiceone]

^^ And this is the attitude of pro-choice-ism.

Finally, someone who is pro-abortion actually admits what the statistics have been saying all along - that abortion is NOT about protecting women's health or lives, it's solely about the right to have sex without consequences. Period.

(and it took a man to admit it).

If that were true, every state law against abortion would let a girl or woman raped by a man not only have an abortion, but would not require her to report the rape to the police or tell anyone but her doctor and no one would ever demonstrate outside of an abortion clinic, because they couldn't tell if those entering were rape victims.