Survey finds 10 partners before marriage 'normal'

Drudge ^ | 10th December 2001 | Ananova

[Don Myers]

Survey finds 10 partners before marriage 'normal'

The majority of young people think it is normal for a person to have at least 10 sexual partners before marriage.

A survey has also found that three in 10 believe it is acceptable for a girl to lose her virginity before the age of 15.

Research carried out by Brook, the youth sex advisory service, says there is a "cultural change" in young people's attitudes towards sex.

Some 64% of men and 54% of women agreed that it was acceptable for a person to sleep with more than 10 partners before getting married.

But the survey, which questioned people aged 17 to 25, also showed that they wanted more information about sex and contraception.

Men admitted to getting most of their knowledge about contraception from TV and magazines, while women learned the most from magazines and their mothers.

Half of all the young women surveyed said they wished that teachers had supplied them with more information about preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

Brook chief executive Jan Barlow said: "Young people have an increasing number of sexual partners and they are saying that's OK.

"But at the same time they don't have the information and access to services that they need.

"Young people must seek out advice and information in order to make their choices and to understand how to protect themselves both against pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases."

[pcl]

it is NOT normal for a woman to sever the emotional from the sexual.

It never ceases to amaze me that men are so willing to stand up and tell woman how they feel. I know there are women who would agree with you and it is probably true for them. I also know there are men who will say they can not or do not sever the emotional from the sexual. Just because some men strongly tie the two together does not mean that all men do. The same appears to be true for women.

I think men are just as likely as women to carry emotional baggage from severed relationships. It is human nature, not female nature, to cling to that which was good.

[Don Myers]

Are you talking about a "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" scenario? Society changed for whatever reason and made sex and drugs more acceptable in the sixties and seventies. The Age of Aquarius and the flower children changed our cultural mores. As these children became older, they began assuming positions of responsibility in our society. Parents were permissive and understanding of moral lapse in the youth because they themselves did the same things, and they believe that such things are really a part of growing up.

Children saw what their parents believed and did the same thing. The parents saw what their children were doing and were silent or even condoned their actions. This permissiveness and condoning becomes worse with each new "batch" of children.

No, I am not naive. I can fully comprehend what is happening in our culture.

[Gumption County]

I think men are just as likely as women to carry emotional baggage from severed relationships. It is human nature, not female nature, to cling to that which was good.

I agree.

What I'm talking about here is casual sex, not genuine relationships.

[John O]

Now if you met this young lady in a non-dating atmosphere she wouldn't have had any of the fear of the group knowing. She could have been up front with you right off the bat and you both would have saved a lot of time.

GSA(P)

[k2blader]

I have to say your assumption is incorrect, as I don't consider virginity precious at any age. If a child has not reached puberty, I really don't associate virginity, or this thread even, with the child, it is automatically a no-no.

Ah, so in your mind, virginity seems not to exist prior to puberty? I respectfully disagree. The innocence, including sexual innocence, of children is an extremely precious thing.

If virginity is not precious, why do we not encourage every young girl to immediately lose it upon menses? And if the answer is "societal norms," why does society establish such norms?

I think it all gets back to the "automatic no-no" concept.

If we're talking about promiscuity, well, one can be promiscuous and still be a virgin.

Well, I've always associated promiscuity with fickle sexual intercourse, so we disagree here as well.

Also, how do you know that sexual purity is precious to God?

The Bible is full of such info. But this requires much more than I can post right now. More later. :)

[maxwell]

I mentioned that life sucks lately.... right?

Dude, you sound way low. Maybe you should take up running. It's done wonders for my mental health. Don't forget to smoke a pack of Marlboro's a day too. Nothing beats that massive head rush you get when you light up right after a five-mile trot...

[Economist_MA]

Weren't those Bible Belt statistics part of a study that also pointed out the difference in divorce rates among Catholics and Evangelicals?

I think we are probably talking about different studies. I am referring to one I saw here on FR which essentially just listed divorce rates by state. I only remember it because I was surprised by how high the divorce rates were in the bible belt compared to the rest of the US. On the same thread, another Freeper put up some statistics showing that in the same states the average marriage age was extremely low.

My interpretation, which may certainly be wrong, was that a "Christian" upbringing may make people feel like they need to marry as soon as a relationship gets serious, but ain't sufficient to prevent subsequent breakups. Please note again that I am talking about upbringing, not practicing Christians. It would certainly be most bizarre to find that folks who go to church all the time would divorce a lot, and the study you are referring to seems to say that it is indeed not the case.

[Economist_MA]

Now of course coming from a group that sells products relating to underage kids to promote these sexual activities wouldn't sway the data.

LOL - I definitely think that the number doesn't describe actual behavior. A 10 average just seems to be a little bit too high. That is not to say that there aren't folks out there who exceed this number, but there are probably much more who are closer to 0.

[Economist_MA]

It is clear from today's society, that it really isn't that women are just leaving marriages that decades ago would have been inescapable. Instead, the more obvious reasons are shifts in the cultural attitudes towards marriage and divorce.

I think it's a combination of both, and essentially a chicken and egg question. Economic circumstances changed and attitudes changed, and I am in no position to say whether there is causality from one to the other. I do agree that the assumption of permanence is extremely important and that way too many couples don't make enough efforts to make a relationship work. This IMHO is true independently of whether they are married or not.

Clearly a strong Christian belief set as advocated by many here helps to make a marriag work - who wouldn't try if the alternative is eternal damnation (exagerating just a wee bit)? That this is not a solution for everyone is also obvious, the idea of adopting a belief system just because it helps for something else seems to contradict most of what I treasure about critical thinking and so on.

Have you read Sowell's Vision of the Anointed? I'd highly recommend it, it's simple and straightforward. In it, he makes the case that sex education actually contributed to higher rates of teen pregnancy, disease and activity.

I haven't read it. The better done studies I have seen on this subject (i.e. making a decent effort to control for all other influence factors etc.) seemed to show the exact opposite.

[LazarusX]

A person's morality is set by different things. Yes, my sense of morality is based upon Biblical concepts. Why is it better? I believe that the Christian religion is better than a religion based upon The Church Of My Big Toe or some other of the modern religions.

While I support your right to believe whatever you want, I think it's pretty unreasonable to expect society to conform to a moral system based on the belief in a god that most likely doesn't exist. A morality based on being decent to people makes a lot more sense than expecting people who don't believe in your religion to conform to it.

[k2blader]

Also, my God said I don't have to impose his views on others. They are free to believe what they wish, which is cool, especially coming from God.

Exactly. Everyone has the God-given free will to choose to believe as he/she wishes.

Hope the abstinence and virginity "naysayers" agree! :)

[k2blader]

All joking aside, do you find both men and women attractive?

Why, yes! Have you never been in platonic relationships with attractive people? :)

[k2blader]

To continue... :-)

Also, how do you know that sexual purity is precious to God?

The following are just a few references to what God's Word says about sexual purity:

"I am afraid that when I come again my God will humble me before you, and I will be grieved over many who have sinned earlier and have not repented of the impurity, sexual sin and debauchery in which they have indulged."
2 Corinthians 12: 21

"The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery;
idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions."
Galatians 5: 19-20

"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people.
Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving."
Ephesians 5: 3-4

"Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry."
Colossians 3: 5

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her
to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word,
and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.
In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church--
for we are members of his body."
Ephesians 5: 25-30

I would like to think that the reason God put the 'funny feeling' into sex, is because He wants us to enjoy our bodies, and the little time we have here on earth. I believe the guilt associated with, and the constraints we have put on sexual behavior, is a very big part of the problems we, as human beings, have experienced throughout history, which, I might add, have come almost exclusively from organised religions. More power to you though, for your beliefs.

I think making love is such a beautiful thing that it is best reserved for a husband & wife within the sacred bond of marriage. A married couple's mutual commitment to one another allows them to best deal with both the good and perhaps not-so-good "consequences" of a sexual relationship.

And yes, Spirituality certainly shapes my outlook on "guilty pleasures." But I believe that what God desires from me in terms of obedience is all only for my own Good.

P.S. I very much appreciate your respecting my beliefs, despite our apparent disagreement, and may I respectfully return the kind favor. :)

[Skywalk]

The book isn't merely about that one issue. I'd still recommend it, and um, why would I trust Sowell more than some other "objective researchers?" He also goes into how arbitrary "controlling" for other factors can be, unless one goes down to the tiniest minutiae. At least, when it comes to studies done for social science purpose.

[Skywalk]

LOL Well I thought I explained my theory behind the "double standard," though I concede that the unusual occurrence of women who completely compartmentalize full-time as men do, is a good buttressing of that point I made. In case anyone doesn't remember, male homosexuals are more promiscuous than male heteros. There is no "check" on their behavior. Women, through genetics and some socialization, put some limits on a man's sexual impulses. A man can do this himself, it is true, but all things being equal, it is better to trust the female.

To put it in layman's terms, if a decent-looking woman walks into any place right now and walks up to 20 men and says "let's go have sex," I bet at least 10 would go follow her, or at least try to arrange it at a pace comfortable for them. If a man were to do that, he'd get 19 rejections, if not 20. UNLESS, he's Brad Pitt or some other celebrity. In that case, he'd still get rejected more often than a woman taking that same approach.

This is why there's a double standard. Women can find sexual partners much easier than men can, and "close the deal" merely by going through the motions. A man, even when acquiring a potential partner, has to bide his time and make sure not to say the wrong things in order to MAYBE get his chance.

[Economist_MA]

I hope to look into it over the holidays. Thanks for the recommendation.

[Gumption County]

8^)

I apologize for being so cryptic and vague. I'll be less a pain in the ass and answer my own question.

What is a serious man, looking for a longterm relationship, to do about women 1, 2, & 3?

Keeping in mind the word serious, the answer is... avoid her if at all possible.

The standard men use vis-a-vis promiscuous women is a perfectly rational one.

[Skywalk]

lol

No worries, I just wanted to make sure you also had read my earlier theory. As long as you did, I have no problem with your approach!

And yes, I'd like to think that avoiding them is the scenario IF you want marriage material, BUT that is extremely hard to do. Already, I'm 24, and am getting older. How many women in their 20s are ready for marriage and have a balanced sexual history or have dealt with their damage? I know I have issues, myself, but none that have interfered with my ability to date and be open to THAT woman.

In fairness to women, I dealt with one that had her own set of issue despite being a virgin, and we never had anything resembling sex. I don't want to portray a monolithic female attitude. However, it grows tiresome dealing with people who display little intellect, little emotional depth, empathy(except for furry animals), and a sense of the meaning of relationships--all things women are supposed to have in abundance. That is truly a myth, and I speak for all my male friends who are, as a rule, superior to the women they've dated.

[Don Myers]

"While I support your right to believe whatever you want, I think it's pretty unreasonable to expect society to conform to a moral system based on the belief in a god that most likely doesn't exist. A morality based on being decent to people makes a lot more sense than expecting people who don't believe in your religion to conform to it."

Oh, I don't expect people to conform to a sense of morality. And society without a belief in the morality of a divine being is apparent. That is why this society is to ridden with the hedonistic lifestyle. And in case you haven't noticed, the "morality of being decent to people" isn't working.

[Don Myers]

"Also, how do you know that sexual purity is precious to God?"

Sexual sin seems to be very important to God. For instance, adultery is the only grounds for divorce in the NT.