ladycunegonde

Apr 17, 2013

I posted this on my journal but realized it was a better topic for the forums.

Are you Fearless enough to say no to Sex

So this lady was on "The View" today. She said this:

"The answer of course is slow love. Research supports this. Nearly 90 percent of the fast movers in one study had broken up before one year.[1] However, if couples waited just 30 days before engaging in sex, 24 percent were still together a year later. That's a one in four chance."

I think most of this is hogwash (I'm a statistical anomaly) and I think she gives Men too much sexual power. We women are the ones who have the power. I think we just have to realize that and stop GIVING the power up to men.

What do you think?

MrsIselin

Apr 17, 2013

I got in under the wire, giving birth at age 36 and again at 41. Soon after, my god-man slipped out under the wire and I was forced to sell on eBay every remnant from my Sex and the City days -- designer bags, shoes, jewelry -- so I could maintain a breastfeeding lifestyle without a male provider. I still feel lucky. Of all the women I ran with in my 20s and early 30s, I am the only one who was fortunate enough to become a mother. And I am blessed to have a close circle of accidental "aunties" for my kids.

I'm a little suspicious of this. Seems like she's saying that the ultimate goal for women is motherhood. 

This is the payback for sexual freedom: Men who won't commit. When sex rises in supply in a culture, men are less likely to commit to one woman, or they delay marriage until its too late. Thus women are being cheated out of motherhood or treading water as single mothers. We are a lost generation of women who were sold a false bill of goods about fertility, motherhood and female sexual freedom.

And she does it here again. I'm pretty sure I've seen similar arguments, that the people getting screwed the hardest as a result of the sexual revolution are women (pun intended). Not for the reasons she's claiming, though. Sex has always been readily available for men in any era. Well, since the advent of the world's oldest profession, anyway. 

DrGeniusWiener

Apr 17, 2013

Yes.

chucker23n

Apr 17, 2013

How is "saying no to sex" exerting power over men? What's with the assumption that sex is something only men want? Start by first analyzing whether you want sex yourself, your way, rather than whether men are evil.

MrsIselin

Apr 17, 2013

 rather than whether men are evil.

Evil, evil menz. 

Odum_The_13th

Apr 17, 2013

This seems like a trick question.... Like "I dare you to let me order the lobster and not expect to bone me"

MrsIselin

Apr 17, 2013

Can I get the king crab legs instead? 

Odum_The_13th

Apr 17, 2013

Just don't tell Belial!

niceonagoodday

Apr 17, 2013

Ah, yes, the old "Sex is a game to be won or lost" take.   It seems very narrow-minded to me.

 

I think most of this is hogwash (I'm a statistical anomaly) and I think she gives Men too much sexual power. We women are the ones who have the power. I think we just have to realize that and stop GIVING the power up to men

Sex=power and/or sex=commodity are ridiculous notions to me.   I get that other people see it that way, but that seems...well...unenlightened to put it kindly.

Sushibitch

Apr 17, 2013

Well, since the advent of the world's oldest profession, anyway.

Some researchers a while back taught chimps to earn currency which could then be exchanged for treats. They chimps promptly discovered prostitution.

So I reckon the oldest profession is probably pretty old.

ExtremeDating

Apr 17, 2013

The answer of course is slow love. Research supports this. Nearly 90 percent of the fast movers in one study had broken up before one year.[1] However, if couples waited just 30 days before engaging in sex, 24 percent were still together a year later. That's a one in four chance.

Unfortunately, Dr. Walsh has used a book as a citation, a book to which I don't have convenient access. It would've helped if she'd added an annotation giving the details of the actual study, which, if published in a journal, we could presumably get access to without leaving our computers. In other words, Dr. Walsh is a fucking twat who has no respect for the slacker lifestyle.

Assuming the correlation is sound (which is being very generous), what we don't know is whether the study in question asserted a causal link between the early sex and the early break-up (I'd be surprised if it did). Did the researchers rule out the possibility of a third factor being responsible for both the early sex and the early break-up? If they didn't do so, then holding off on the sex wouldn't address the underlying problem.

Another thing that isn't clear is how the researchers have operationalized "couples" and "broken up." Ideally, they'd be considering partners who really were aiming for a long-term relationship. I mean, it's pointless to consider a short-term no-strings-attached fling as a break up, isn't it?

DrGeniusWiener

Apr 17, 2013

Of course if she's a deal breaker like ED, then no.

SillySmartie

Apr 17, 2013

You can't put a number on anything. Number of dates, amount of time, etc. Every relationship is different because people are different. These kinds of articles are annoying and silly.

MrsIselin

Apr 17, 2013

Some researchers a while back taught chimps to earn currency which could then be exchanged for treats. They chimps promptly discovered prostitution.

This is now my second favorite fact of the day. The first was Coraline introducing me to mantis shrimp. 

SillySmartie

Apr 17, 2013

This is now my second favorite fact of the day. The first was Coraline introducing me to mantis shrimp.

nice!

Sushibitch

Apr 17, 2013

Isn't nature awesome?

 

SillySmartie

Apr 17, 2013

So awesome!

MrsIselin

Apr 17, 2013

DEATH STICKS

Invisible_Hand

Apr 17, 2013

Saying no doesn't give you any power because someone else will say yes. There's nothing special about your vagina in relation to others. 

OctoberTens

Apr 17, 2013

There's nothing special about your vagina in relation to others.

Another Hallmark moment.

Or, the logic of a man who spends too much time on a ranch. Alone.

Post a comment