118
119

Some facts and statistics about sexual relationships MGTOWs and the like love to ignore (self.TheBluePill)

bolognesesauce が 投稿

https://kinseyinstitute.org/research/publications/faq.php

Some of my favourite statistics:

Median number of opposite-sex partners in lifetime among U.S. men and women aged 25-44 years of age is 6.6 for men and 4.3 for women. (National Center for Health Statistics, 2015)

This proves wrong all the manospherians claiming the evil womz are sluttier than men.

Percentage of men and women aged 15-44 years of age who have had 15 or more opposite-sex sexual partners in their lifetime is 21.8% for men, and 10.6% for women.

Men and women both were likely to report sexual satisfaction if they also reported frequent kissing and cuddling, sexual caressing by the partner, higher sexual functioning, and if they had sex more frequently. On the other hand, for men, having had more sex partners in their lifetime was a predictor of less sexual satisfaction.

Kinda ruins TRP theory that all women love being beaten during sex and that we hate kissing and cuddling.

Frequent kissing or cuddling predicted happiness in the relationship for men, but not for women. Both men and women reported more happiness the longer they had been together.

This one's interesting because it suggests that men are happier if a relationship has more affectionate actions such as kissing and cuddling. Again, this goes against the TRP idea.

Average age of first intercourse, by gender, in the United States (Read more »): Males: 16.8 yrs Females: 17.2 yrs

Goes against the manosphere idea that all women are slutty slutz who lose their virginity at 14.

Just found these interesting. I'm not posting this to slut shame since I don't care if people have loads of sex. I'm just posting this to show that no, women aren't all "decadent hos" who have sex with 18 different men everyday.

全 82 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]akherousiia 55 ポイント56 ポイント  (16子コメント)

Also wasn't there study that showed men generally have a better quality of life after getting married whereas women are better off single? I don't know where to find it but I do remember seeing that somewhere (so take it with a grain of salt obviously since I can't source it). That would be a good one to put here.

[–]WigglyCharlieBlue Pill Charlie's Wiggling Thingy 78 ポイント79 ポイント  (12子コメント)

Married men live, on average, five years longer than bachelors.

Married women, on the other hand, live five years fewer than unmarried women.

But it's women who are the life-sucking vampires, uh huh.

[–]eyes-baby-blue 44 ポイント45 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The probable cause is that men rely on women to for emotional needs as men are conditioned to express none, whatsoever. This puts the burden on women to support two sets of emotions in the marriage.

[–]Naya333 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

There's also research that shows that men eat much healthier after get married, and women end up eating less healthier after marriage than they did before.

[–][削除されました]  (2子コメント)

[removed]

    [–]emimagiquefeminazi 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Are you being serious?

    [–]adraria 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I don't think that just because on average men live five less years without marriage that it implies men need women. That would be akin to saying that because smoking shortens your life time, you need to not smoke. Just because something is unhealthy doesn't mean it's imperative for you to avoid it.

    [–]acetylcysteine 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    Wouldn't married men live longer due to relationship/family constraints... I mean if you have a family/partner you would have far more responsibility and thus probably partake in less risky behaviours.

    [–]greeneyedwench 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    IIRC, they think some of it is that wives tend to talk husbands into going to the doctor for suspicious symptoms instead of "toughing it out" as some guys would do if left to their own devices, so things like cancer are caught earlier.

    [–]Imnotananimalyouare 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    Wouldn't it affect women that why too then? In stead it does the opposite.

    [–]acetylcysteine 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Because men and women are different perhaps? Maybe childbirth, raising children, relationship stressors shorten their lives?

    [–]Imnotananimalyouare 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    The original comment was having a family or partner would result in less risky behavior. How would that apply differently to men and women?

    [–]greeneyedwench 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    My theory would be that women's risk-taking behavior is already lower, due to lower testosterone. I think it's along the same lines as young men having the highest car insurance rates. I don't think women speaking super generally here do as many "Hold my beer and watch this!" sort of stunts.

    So relationship stressors, child-related stressors, possibly higher obesity (women often gain weight when eating with men), etc. become the deciding factors.

    [–]WigglyCharlieBlue Pill Charlie's Wiggling Thingy 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Quite possibly. I was being tongue-in-cheek.

    [–]edie_carmgoth chad 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    single people take care of one person: themself.

    married women are now responsible for the husband too, and the husband no longer has to worry about many responsibilities.

    [–]totes_legitimate 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I'm curious as to whether they control for things like whether the couple has kids or not because I imagine things like pregnancy complications (short term and long term) could contribute to a difference. Additionally, perhaps grief. Men have a shorter life expectancy and traditionally (though I don't know if this is the case still) men tend to be the older partner in the relationship, I wonder if grief of loss of a partner could contribute or even, in the case of an age gap, burden of increased care later in life cause an imbalance of stress resulting in a reduction of life expectancy?

    [–]bolognesesauce[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I've never read that but it seems like an interesting study.

    [–]lacedemonian 104 ポイント105 ポイント  (27子コメント)

    Well today i learned i was later than the average.

    also:

    About 85% of men report that their partner had an orgasm at the most recent sexual event; this compares to the 64% of women who report having had an orgasm at their most recent sexual event.

    I'll let that speak for itself.

    [–]foreignergrlI'm riding the cock carousel. Do not disturb. 31 ポイント32 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    About 85% of men report that their partner had an orgasm at the most recent sexual event; this compares to the 64% of women who report having had an orgasm at their most recent sexual event.

    OMG! I love this so much. Ha ha ha. Every single FR claims that the woman had at least one orgasm. Interesting that they claim to be so logic oriented and, yet, they believe that men who previously couldn't even talk to women, have now become sex gods delivering orgasms on command in one night stands because they found an Internet cult, read the magic sidebar and lifted for two months!

    [–]Kimmalah 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    I'll let that speak for itself.

    To be fair, many women genuinely struggle with that, regardless of how attentive their partner is or how much effort is put in. Some women just don't really ever have orgasms and unfortunately, the science of why that happens is still in its infancy. Some believe that it may be due to certain anatomical differences (like nerve density, sensitivity, etc.) but female anatomy and how it all works together to cause an orgasm is still not understood nearly as well as you'd think it would be by now.

    [–]frotterdammerung 36 ポイント37 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    Orgasm frequency is completely different between heterosexual women and lesbians. So there's quite strong evidence that most of the "orgasm gap" is caused by (needless to say not all) heterosexual men being selfish lovers.

    link: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/feb/23/golden-trio-of-moves-boosts-chances-of-female-orgasm-say-researchers

    [–]anythinginc 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    While 95% of heterosexual men reported that they usually or always orgasmed during sexually intimate moments, just 65% of heterosexual women did. By contrast, the figure was 89% for gay men, 86% for lesbian women

    So we need to fill a 21% gap between straight/gay women.

    In that article, the "orgasm gap" between hetero women and gay women was then explained to be equivalent to saying "vaginal stimulation alone is often not sufficient for many women to orgasm."

    About 30% of men actually think that intercourse is the best way for women to have orgasm

    So there is a 21% difference, and 30% of men literally just don't know any better, misinformed.

    So if that 30% of men learned to provide "the golden trio of genital stimulation, deep kissing and oral sex" in addition to penetration could we then potentially have 95% orgasm rates for hetero men and women, eclipsing lesbian couples? I honestly don't think so, u/Kimmalah has an excellent post and many women (and some men) just have trouble being orgasmic consistently for a myriad of reasons (I would specifically mention cycle times, an orgasm during ovulation is easier IME.)

    Keep in mind something like 1-5% of the population are true sociopaths and so they will never care about their partners.

    Edit: Pro-tip for people trying to "bridge the gap": Google "modified missionary," vaginal, genital, face-to-face for kissing...great, easy position.

    [–]frotterdammerung 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    OK sure, but I said most of the "orgasm gap" is caused by heterosexual men being selfish lovers, which is the statement you appear to be arguing against, and that remains true.

    You seem to think that believing vaginal sex is the best route to orgasm is not evidence of selfishness. But it obviously is.

    Anyone who has even the faintest interest in women's sexuality knows better than that. A guy who thinks vaginal penetration is the best route to orgasm is a guy who has never bothered to educate himself or learn how to be a good lover.

    [–]anythinginc 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    You seem to think that believing vaginal sex is the best route to orgasm is not evidence of selfishness. But it obviously is.

    One could just as easily blame it on abysmal sex education and a culture of poor communication between sexual partners. A large percentage of the teen mothers and fathers in America don't even know how they managed to get pregnant beyond the term "unlucky." And that is unfortunate, but I think just because a guy doesn't know how to properly manually or orally stimulate a clitoris doesn't mean he is maliciously, willfully, ignorant.

    [–]frotterdammerung 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Were teens included in this survey? Adult men have access to sex education if they have access to the internet. Adult men with partners have the capability to ask their partners what they like. Not doing so is self-absorbed and selfish.

    [–]bleheddVirtue signalling is my sexual strategy 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Nah, this is all wrong. Read "The Sex God Method", go caveman style, pound the cervix, and if she doesn't come then up your dread game. It's the biotroof that all feeemales will come for Chad.

    [–]stonoceno 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    I wish this was something that more people talked about in a neutral way, and that people understood how these numbers come about.

    I mean, we see people on TV that have these crazy love lives, with a flavor-of-the-week-style romantic life, and we know that that isn't reality, but we don't know what to replace it with. And the people we know, similarly insecure or uncertain, might misrepresent their experiences for fear of seeming too "slutty" or too "prudish".

    While there are certainly the kinds of folks who go out and have different partners multiple times a week or month, that's a pretty high-energy lifestyle, and unless you live in a big city, you're going to start having repeat partners. The pool of available people who are willing to hook up with you in a town of 100,000 people might not be that big, depending on where you are. Most people just can't sustain this, and frankly, lots of people prefer monogamy and a "steady" relationship, where you have just the one partner and a plan for the future together. Many people want to be married eventually or have children. Even someone who doesn't care for long-term monogamy might still enjoy a long-term relationship, or multiple long-term relationships. It's easier to enjoy sex with someone that kinda knows your body already, that you have good chemistry with, and that is semi-reliable in wanting you back. It's not for everyone, of course, and people still do enjoy random hook-ups or prefer to be single or whatever, and that's fine, too.

    On top of that, most adults just don't have the time and the funds to live the "club" lifestyle. It's expensive and draining, and most people have jobs, school, responsibilities, etc., that keep them from going out every night.

    I grew up in an abstinence-heavy area of the US, and the idea that people were out, bangin' all the hoes, was pretty popular, but it's just not reasonable for most people because of the time and energy one has to invest, as well as having a pretty big pool of people to pick from. It's just not a realistic model to work from to glean your insights on the human condition.

    [–]greeneyedwench 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Yep.

    Even when I think about college, and I went to kind of a party school, and there was definitely a subset of frat life that involved a lot of hookups, but there were also large swaths of students who mostly did serial monogamy with maybe 2 or 3 serious SOs, and people who dated around but didn't fuck all the people they dated, and people who were Saving It For Marriage and either didn't date or maybe had one fiance/e the whole time. And people were trying to actually study, too, and had jobs.

    In my adult life I mostly see serial monogamists and some poly people. The serial monogamists tend to date one person at a time, for years, and then each of these relationships will end until one of them doesn't and then they stay with this person. The poly people tend to get into relatively stable small groups and not add new people constantly.

    We're too old, too lazy, and too poor for this jet-setting club lifestyle, kwim? We all just want someone to have a beer and watch Game of Thrones with.

    [–]stonoceno 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yep, same for me! I'm a casual dater, so I have ongoing FWB relationships that are like, 1-6 years old. It suits me - maybe I have a new partner every once in a while, but it's every few months at most, more likely one a year or so. It's not so easy for me to find a partner who's cool with how I do things, and finding someone I click with sexually, too? That's really tough! I hang on to them, because it's not an easy task. And I'm the "slutty" one, essentially, even though I don't exactly have new people all the time.

    Even if I could bed someone new every week, I just wouldn't be very interested. It's too much work! I like my alone time, you know? And the initial stages of meeting someone are fun, but also stressful: do they like me, can I trust them to not ghost, do I have to take them out, etc. Knowing I have FWB-A or FWB-B who is chill and will come just hang with me, whose company I enjoy and will also fool around in a way that's fun for me, is way easier.

    People also think my way is really stressful, not to say anything about the jet-setting clubber! They say they don't know how to have that many partners (distance and does having partners who don't need a lot of attention and neither do I - we're friends first and foremost, so the sex isn't always there), and one keeps them busy enough! I think we can all find a model that works, and there's no shame in having 0 partners or hundreds, so long as it it's what works for you and makes you happy. Most of us will end up with a few partners, probably over extended periods of time, and that's just fine.

    [–]bleak-outlookNH State Rep Robert Fisher founded TRP-https://archive.li/Jgtbx 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    Median number of opposite-sex partners in lifetime among U.S. men and women aged 25-44 years of age is 6.6 for men and 4.3 for women. (National Center for Health Statistics, 2015)

    Percentage of men and women aged 15-44 years of age who have had 15 or more opposite-sex sexual partners in their lifetime is 21.8% for men, and 10.6% for women.

    I'd like to focus on these two statistics. An idea frequently paraded around the manosphere (and incel community) is that everyone (all women and super hot men) is having casual sex and fucking a different person every other week. These studies prove that this is simply not true. I read another study which claimed that only a relatively small portion of the population is promiscuous (IIRC about 15-20% of males and 15-20% of females), and they're only promiscuous with each other. That means that for about 80% of the population, casual sex is not happening. Monogamy is hard wired into our brains, whether it be a social construct or a biological one. Social media and pop culture shove sex down our throats, but they're selling a lie.

    Average age of first intercourse, by gender, in the United States (Read more »): Males: 16.8 yrs Females: 17.2 yrs

    This is a stat that gets thrown around the communities commonly. It's important to remember that these are averages. When I was in high-school, I was worried about going to college because I thought everyone there would have already had sex and be having sex with everyone else. I lost my virginity at 18 and I was surprised to find that a good amount of college kids are still virgins.

    [–]greeneyedwench 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (4子コメント)

    One thing I've noticed is that manospherians sometimes seem unable to look outside the clubbing scene at all, to even notice there's anything else going on in the world. It's like they're video game characters who spawned in the middle of a hot nightspot and have never seen anything else. So they're constantly trying to attract the small pool of women who are there, and compete with the small pool of men who are there, and draw all their conclusions about human behavior from what they see there. It's like they've never been to a grocery store or an Applebee's.

    [–]ponyproblematicthe intrinsic nature of women to destroy things 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    to be fair grocery stores are for females because real alpha men never cook

    [–]eyes-baby-blue 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    And what's ironic is that cooks are usually the most drunken, pirate-like, scoundrels alive. Sex jokes are rampant and we're constantly hooking up with the waitresses.

    [–]StrikeDearMistressPerfect isolation... here behind my waaaall... 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Also, they go to really boring clubs, as it seems. It isn't all about getting shitfaced and laid, there might be great music to dance to and interesting people of both genders to chat with too.

    I go to a techno club every other week, sometimes alone and sober. It can still be fun, just ask Moby.

    [–]greeneyedwench 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    This too! I used to go clubbing in my younger years and it wasn't about picking up men--I thought the dancing itself was cathartic.

    [–]SmarchHare 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    But that means for every 22 year old, there's a 12 year old 🙁

    [–]Balldogs 33 ポイント34 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    You're assuming that these emotionally driven neurotic screeching woman-hating messes care about stoopid facts and figures and logic and reason.

    [–]WigglyCharlieBlue Pill Charlie's Wiggling Thingy 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Feelz before reelz!

    [–]frotterdammerung 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    for men, having had more sex partners in their lifetime was a predictor of less sexual satisfaction.

    But what about the oxytocin!!! What about the PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT that every time a new dick enters a woman, a tiny tentacle sneaks up from it and bites off a piece of her heart so that a woman who's had a lot of sex cannot truly love a man. But men having sex with lots of women are just enacting their true manly nature (which is to be a mindless zombie controlled by biotruffles.) Men who have lots of sex with lots of women are the greatest and holiest beings on earth, and they are happy! They are! I mean, we are.

    This is true science. It is proven by evolution and the sidebar. I bet you learned your stupid so-called facts in a Gender Studies degree. They are clearly wrong.

    edit: I knew it! The Kinsey Institute is a hotbed of evil Gender Studies. Everything they say is wrong and you are wrong and muh biotruffles are the only true truths. SEE THE PROOF AT THIS LINK https://kinseyinstitute.org/research/index.php

    [–]SamuelEnderby 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (7子コメント)

    Frequent kissing or cuddling predicted happiness in the relationship for men, but not for women.

    This one seems odd. Why not for women?

    [–]bleak-outlookNH State Rep Robert Fisher founded TRP-https://archive.li/Jgtbx 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Clearly men don't know about treating your woman correctly and jackhammering the shit out of that pussy.

    [–]WigglyCharlieBlue Pill Charlie's Wiggling Thingy 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Clearly men don't know about treating your woman correctly and jackhammering the shit out of that pussy cervix.

    FTFY.

    [–]IckyStickyPooOppressed by Humpty Trumpty's handmaiden 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Ugh. I am someone who likes cervix stimulation, but def. not jackhammering it. Ouch!

    [–]InVelluVeritasStudies seem to be bullshit, according to personal experience 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    My guess would be that men are taught not to ask for kisses/cuddles, so when they don't get any they just "accept" it and stay unhappy. On the other hand, women are taught to be more cuddly/etc, so women in relationships with less physical affection would be more likely to be happy this way, since they are the one "controlling" it, so to speak.

    [–]bolognesesauce[S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    It does seem quite odd. Maybe other factors are at play?

    [–]falsestone 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    I don't have a source for this, but in my experience women are expected to give of their body to an extreme extent in heterosexual relationships, including being available for the physical contact element of emotional support even when not desiring contact (or expressly desiring NO contact).

    It can be stressful and uncomfortable, being socially obliged to surrender even simple elements of body autonomy (e.g. "I'm too stressed; I don't feel like being touched right now." having to take a backseat to "It's expected that I be physically affectionate, and I would consider myself a bad partner if I 'withheld' such affection at any time.").

    And no, you may not be being forced. That's not what I'm implying. In a mostly-healthy relationship, no one's holding you down or emotionally abusing you to guilt you into physical contact. Not being abused into an action isn't the same as it not being expected, though. There's a social construct of gender roles which include "woman" as "caregiver" that is utter bullshit but people still internalize, which especially sucks for introverted women who more frequently have the "I don't want to be touched" times.

    TL;DR

    This example of handling a woman's bodily autonomy in a relationship is depressingly rare, but thankfully increasing as men seek out info on how to form healthy relationships and abandon harmful historic stereotypes/expectations.

    [–]FistOfFacepalm 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Maybe physical affection is all us guys need but women have more demands

    [–]Mylittleponee 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

    I'm glad MGTOW have decided to GTOW, to be very honest.

    [–]IckyStickyPooOppressed by Humpty Trumpty's handmaiden 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    If only they would.

    [–]LipstickPaper 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    They say 14 for girls because that is who they want to target.

    [–]SnapshillBot 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Talking with feeeemales since 2013

    Snapshots:

    1. This Post - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, snew.github.io, archive.is

    2. https://kinseyinstitute.org/researc... - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is

    I am a bot. (Info / Contact)

    [–]CharlesChristI like the color blue 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    The TRPers would argue that this is false since they think the women who participated maybe lying.

    [–]guidedhand 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Median number of opposite-sex partners in lifetime among U.S. men and women aged 25-44 years of age is 6.6 for men and 4.3 for women. (National Center for Health Statistics, 2015)

    This actually indicates that there are a higher number of female outliers. of course the majority of the population arent slutty, but this number says that the women who are 'slutty', are far more slutty than their male slut counterparts.

    Your link doesnt really link to anything useful (like a paper where the numbers came from), but id be really interested to see the standard deviation and other errata on those numbers. obviously the mean number of partners are the same, so itd be interesting to see what makes the difference between 6.6 and 4.3.