# Study: everyone is having less sex



## blahfridge (Dec 6, 2014)

Why Americans are having less sex - CNN
https://apple.news/ArAJP7ngGSlS0zKA_EkwRaA


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

I'm Happy to go against the trend!


----------



## Lukedog (Nov 18, 2015)

I am a statistic. More like sex-LESS ....


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

From the article:
_In fact, the drop in sex might be the result of culture shifts and female empowerment, explained Margie Nichols, a psychologist. Compared with earlier generations, women might be viewing sex as less of a duty to their husbands and more of a personal choice. "It makes sense that women in relationships might be losing their sex drive and saying 'no' more, as opposed to my mother's generation that just spread their legs and composed a shopping list in their heads during sex," she said. "If that's true, then the decline in frequency is a good thing."_

This seems plausible, at least in some cases. However, I would argue that this decline in frequency is not necessarily "a good thing." A _good thing_ would be for the couple to make sex mutually pleasurable rather than just a chore for the woman. The last thing we need is even more threads about sexual mismatches.


----------



## ChargingCharlie (Nov 14, 2012)

Lukedog said:


> I am a statistic. More like sex-LESS ....


Me, too. I'd venture to guess that a rate of once every 1.5 to 2 years is considered sexless.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> From the article:
> _In fact, the drop in sex might be the result of culture shifts and female empowerment, explained Margie Nichols, a psychologist. Compared with earlier generations, women might be viewing sex as less of a duty to their husbands and more of a personal choice. "It makes sense that women in relationships might be losing their sex drive and saying 'no' more, as opposed to my mother's generation that just spread their legs and composed a shopping list in their heads during sex," she said. "If that's true, then the decline in frequency is a good thing."_
> 
> This seems plausible, at least in some cases. However, I would argue that this decline in frequency is not necessarily "a good thing." A _good thing_ would be for the couple to make sex mutually pleasurable rather than just a chore for the woman. The last thing we need is even more threads about sexual mismatches.


The social sciences guy in me can't help but wonder if this is more due to America turning WAY more conservative and less due to women's personal choice...


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> From the article:
> _In fact, the drop in sex might be the result of culture shifts and female empowerment, explained Margie Nichols, a psychologist. Compared with earlier generations, women might be viewing sex as less of a duty to their husbands and more of a personal choice. "It makes sense that women in relationships might be losing their sex drive and saying 'no' more, as opposed to my mother's generation that just spread their legs and composed a shopping list in their heads during sex," she said. "If that's true, then the decline in frequency is a good thing."_
> 
> This seems plausible, at least in some cases. However, I would argue that this decline in frequency is not necessarily "a good thing." A _good thing_ would be for the couple to make sex mutually pleasurable rather than just a chore for the woman. The last thing we need is even more threads about sexual mismatches.


Agreed. To me its not a good thing at all. Yes "good" that women shouldnt feel "forced" to have sex with their husbands all the while "composing shopping lists in their heads". 

Instead I find that a horribly ****ing sad thing. Sad that a wife would enjoy sex so little as to "compose shopping lists in their heads during" And that any psychologist would view a decline in sex because of that as good is sad as well. How about communicating. How about pulling the enormous stick out of your ass and realizing that sex with your spouse should be at the very least really fun?


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> From the article:
> _In fact, the drop in sex might be the result of culture shifts and female empowerment, explained Margie Nichols, a psychologist. Compared with earlier generations, women might be viewing sex as less of a duty to their husbands and more of a personal choice. "It makes sense that women in relationships might be losing their sex drive and saying 'no' more, as opposed to my mother's generation that just spread their legs and composed a shopping list in their heads during sex," she said. "If that's true, then the decline in frequency is a good thing."_
> 
> This seems plausible, at least in some cases. However, I would argue that this decline in frequency is not necessarily "a good thing." A _good thing_ would be for the couple to make sex mutually pleasurable rather than just a chore for the woman. The last thing we need is even more threads about sexual mismatches.


I have not read the article, but that quote seems to be addressing primarily sex in marriage or committed relationship. I am not sure that women as a whole, especially young single women really are having less sex due to any of that. If anything, empowerment enables women to be more selective in who they have sex with.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

john117 said:


> The social sciences guy in me can't help but wonder if this is more due to America turning WAY more conservative and less due to women's personal choice...


As you might expect, I haven't seen any trend towards greater conservationism, let alone "way more" conservative, at least not overall. More conservative sexually, maybe?

Actually, the explanation that made the most sense to me was the increasing use of electronics. People take their laptops/kindles/smartphones to bed with them. That can't be good for the sex life. I remember some years ago reading well researched data leading to the conclusion we need to not have TVs in our bedrooms. I suspect that goes even moreso today with regard to hand held electronic devices.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

samyeagar said:


> I have not read the article, but that quote seems to be addressing primarily sex in marriage or committed relationship. I am not sure that women as a whole, especially young single women really are having less sex due to any of that. If anything, empowerment enables women to be more selective in who they have sex with.


I disagree, at least for the singles. Empowerment makes it okay to have as much sex as they want with whomever they want. Before such "empowerment," women were expected to be chaste until marriage. Women who enjoyed their sexuality before marriage were shamed/shunned, so being selective was built in, and it was very constraining. Now, the chains are off, so if anything, empowerment should be leading to more sex among single women.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

I've lived in America for 35 years and every day is getting more conservative. I've lived in liberal and conservative states too. 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...merica-about-become-very-conservative-country

There may be an appearance of Sodom and Gomora but it's just that. Less sex is only part of it.


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> As you might expect, I haven't seen any trend towards greater conservationism, let alone "way more" conservative, at least not overall. More conservative sexually, maybe?
> 
> Actually, the explanation that made the most sense to me was the increasing use of electronics. People take their laptops/kindles/smartphones to bed with them. That can't be good for the sex life. I remember some years ago reading well researched data leading to the conclusion we need to not have TVs in our bedrooms. I suspect that goes even moreso today with regard to hand held electronic devices.


Agree again. Lol

Sometimes the TV doesnt even need to be in the bedroom to be a problem. Enter the DVR. I love having a DVR. Being able to record shows and watch them at leisure is a very convenient thing. But it can also be a horrible thing for a sex life. 
Now I love watching shows with my wife after the kids have gone to bed. We enjoy the shows, talk about the better ones, etc. But years ago I had to tell my wife we were getting too many shows that were "must watch" and DVRed. Hard to keep up with that many shows and before you know it you are watching recorded shows right up until you go to bed. Doesnt leave much time for anything else. Luckily for us she too realized it was getting to be too many shows and was indeed getting in the way of intimacy. However Im sure there are many out there who cant turn off the TV/put down the laptop, phone, or tablet.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

john117 said:


> I've lived in America for 35 years and every day is getting more conservative. I've lived in liberal and conservative states too.
> 
> Five Reasons Why America Is About To Become A Very Conservative Country | Zero Hedge
> 
> There may be an appearance of Sodom and Gomora but it's just that. Less sex is only part of it.


It's hard to say the country is becoming more liberal after:
1. 8 years of Obama (and no, Trump does not represent a shift towards conservatism--on immigration yes, but everything else about him is ideology agnostic. It's just about his ego and how to satisfy it).
2. Waves of "Occupy" protests
3. Legalization of MMJ in almost all states and recreational use in some with many more about to break through in the next election cycle. 

But to the points in the article:

1. If the Supreme Court changes, that doesn't make America more conservative--it just means there may be a more conservative interpretation of some cases

2. A decline in immigration doesn't make the country more conservative--it just slows the rate at which its becoming more liberal. (like cutting the annual deficit without actually creating a surplus--total debt still climbs even if at a slower rate)

3. More of the next generation may identify as conservative, but that doesn't mean they are--it's more a matter of perception than actual policy. 

4. Birth rates may or may not be a factor. Many liberals grow up in conservative homes and vice versa. Christian birth rates haven't declined significantly, but fewer people are Christian today than ever before in America.

5. This is an interesting take. I shall have to consider it.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> I disagree, at least for the singles. Empowerment makes it okay to have as much sex as they want with whomever they want. Before such "empowerment," women were expected to be chaste until marriage. Women who enjoyed their sexuality before marriage were shamed/shunned, so being selective was built in, and it was very constraining. Now, the chains are off, so if anything, empowerment should be leading to more sex among single women.


I think maybe my wording was a bit clumsy. I do think women, especially young single women are having more sex today than they did in the past. Again, I did not read the article, but I suspect it is primarily addressing sex within exclusive committed relationships in which empowerment would give women more ability to set the tone they want.


----------



## MrsAldi (Apr 15, 2016)

If a couple both work full time and have kids they are likely exhausted. Most (of my friends) don't even have the energy to cook dinner, never mind sex. And if you have a spare hour once the kids are asleep, you want to watch the latest episode of Games of Thrones or something like that. 

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

MrsAldi said:


> ...you want to watch the latest episode of Games of Thrones or something like that.
> 
> Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk


Not a fan, but from what I've seen there's at least one (softcore) porn scene in each episode...that might help as much as hurt


Jocularity aside, two income families with kids is a tough recipe for frequent, energetic sex. However, the last survey I saw noted that trend was starting to reverse, with two income families in slight decline.


----------



## ChargingCharlie (Nov 14, 2012)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> As you might expect, I haven't seen any trend towards greater conservationism, let alone "way more" conservative, at least not overall. More conservative sexually, maybe?
> 
> Actually, the explanation that made the most sense to me was the increasing use of electronics. People take their laptops/kindles/smartphones to bed with them. That can't be good for the sex life. I remember some years ago reading well researched data leading to the conclusion we need to not have TVs in our bedrooms. I suspect that goes even moreso today with regard to hand held electronic devices.


Agree regarding electronics - everywhere you turn, people have their heads in their phones. I see it when I take the kids to the park - kids are playing and parents are on their phones. I make a conscious effort to not look at my phone unless there's a text or I get a call - more fun to play with the kids. 

My wife is always playing games on her phone, which is one reason our sex life is dead. Sex requires effort and clean-up when finished - Candy Crush doesn't.


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

john117 said:


> I've lived in America for 35 years and every day is getting more conservative. I've lived in liberal and conservative states too.
> 
> Five Reasons Why America Is About To Become A Very Conservative Country | Zero Hedge
> 
> There may be an appearance of Sodom and Gomora but it's just that. Less sex is only part of it.


I have a slightly different impression. Most Americans now think that same-sex marriage should be legal, women are more respected in the work place, and the number of people who do not identify with a specific religion has increased. 

In my opinion, Americans are having less sex because of some of the reasons pointed out in the article. Women are more independent, more tired and stressed-out raising children, and we have access to unlimited free porn 24/7. Add the fact that people talk less and use their smart phones or watch tv instead of interacting with each other, it's a recipe for less sex.


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

ChargingCharlie said:


> Sex requires effort and clean-up when finished - Candy Crush doesn't.


It's also unfortunate that people spend their free time playing Candy Crush instead of reading something good for the brain and learning about the world.


----------



## brooklynAnn (Jun 29, 2015)

This is not an American issue alone. I have been reading of Japanese young people not having sex either. They don't date, get married or have sex. We are all changing due to society and technology. I don't see it getting better...it's the wave of the future.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

After reading the article in question once, I've come to the conclusion that it is poor science. They attempted to measure sexual frequency by self reporting (historically wildly inaccurate) without defining what sex was (so no real idea of what was reported.)

Now it is obvious to me that the reason there is less sex (or sexless if you insist) is pretty obvious from a short observation of the people you see every day. Americans are Fat, ugly, and opinionated. Who wants to hit that?


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

brooklynAnn said:


> This is not an American issue alone. I have been reading of Japanese young people not having sex either. They don't date, get married or have sex. We are all changing due to society and technology. I don't see it getting better...it's the wave of the future.


Just like in the other thread...life like, AI enabled sex toys...


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

Steve1000 said:


> ...women are more respected in the work place, and the number of people who do not identify with a specific religion has increased.


It is a horrible mischaracterization to align those things with conservatism or liberalism. 

Labeling conservatives as misogynist is a horrible fallacy. True conservatives believe in pure meritocracy and there's no room for sexism (or racism) in that. Recently, there have been rampant accusations that sexism is at the very core of Hollywood, and nothing is more liberal than Hollywood. Consider also that across the wave of Tea Party demonstrations, there was not a single report of sexual assault, yet they were rampant at "Occupy" demonstrations. Sure, there are religious fanatics who want to keep women barefoot and pregnant, but they are just that, religious fanatics, not conservatives.

Which brings me to the second point: religion. Yes bible belt fundamentalists usually identify as conservative, but to say that identification with religion is inherently conservative is silly. American Jews are overwhelmingly Democrat. Democrats significantly outnumber Republicans in the Catholic faith. I'm pretty sure the Reverend Jesse Jackson, the Reverend Jeremiah White, the Reverend Al Sharpton, and Minister Farrakhan, and their followers, aren't Republican either.


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> It is a horrible mischaracterization to align those things with conservatism or liberalism.
> 
> Labeling conservatives as misogynist is a horrible fallacy. True conservatives believe in pure meritocracy and there's no room for sexism (or racism) in that. Recently, there have been rampant accusations that sexism is at the very core of Hollywood, and nothing is more liberal than Hollywood. Consider also that across the wave of Tea Party demonstrations, there was not a single report of sexual assault, yet they were rampant at "Occupy" demonstrations. Sure, there are religious fanatics who want to keep women barefoot and pregnant, but they are just that, religious fanatics, not conservatives.
> 
> Which brings me to the second point: religion. Yes bible belt fundamentalists usually identify as conservative, but to say that identification with religion is inherently conservative is silly. American Jews are overwhelmingly Democrat. Democrats significantly outnumber Republicans in the Catholic faith. I'm pretty sure the Reverend Jesse Jackson, the Reverend Jeremiah White, the Reverend Al Sharpton, and Minister Farrakhan, and their followers, aren't Republican either.


Fair enough, especially on your first point. For the second point, American conservatism often closely aligns itself with Christianity. Examples include denying evolution and "getting Jesus back in school". Leaders with these viewpoints are numerous. In my opinion, it is established that the Republican party ties itself much more closely to Christian fundamentalism than the Democratic party. However, with that said, I understand that there are also many like you who are fiscal conservatives and not religious and not socially conservative.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

MrsAldi said:


> If a couple both work full time and have kids they are likely exhausted. Most (of my friends) don't even have the energy to cook dinner, never mind sex. And if you have a spare hour once the kids are asleep, you want to watch the latest episode of Games of Thrones or something like that.


...not to mention having pets that ALSO have children. Then as a couple you have a litter of kittens under your feet, scratching up the backs of couches, and throwing up on the rugs. 











...but OMG they are too cute!


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

Steve1000 said:


> Fair enough, especially on your first point. For the second point, American conservatism often closely aligns itself with Christianity. Examples include denying evolution and "getting Jesus back in school". Leaders with these viewpoints are numerous. In my opinion, it is established that the Republican party ties itself much more closely to Christian fundamentalism than the Democratic party. However, with that said, I understand that there are also many like you who are fiscal conservatives and not religious and not socially conservative.


The Republican Party has courted fundamentalist religious voters, especially in the last couple decades. But that is just one branch of religion. Others are solidly democratic, so the bottom line is that religion is neither/nor. It's just that the bible belt variety gets the most press. The press seems to ignore all the Catholic and Jewish Democrats. 

And as I noted in another thread, Republican is not the exact same thing as Conservative just as Democrat is not the exact same thing as Liberal. There is more overlap among those pairs, but it is not a perfect alignment. Science denying religious fanaticism is not inherently conservative.


----------



## MrsAldi (Apr 15, 2016)

badsanta said:


> ...not to mention having pets that ALSO have children. Then as a couple you have a litter of kittens under your feet, scratching up the backs of couches, and throwing up on the rugs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cats can be worse than kids sometimes! Miller snuck into the neighbors house and had a nap on their bed! 

Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Science denying religious fanaticism is not inherently conservative.


That's true. Conservatism seems to have at least two different meanings. There is the economic theory of conservatism and then a more informal general meaning of maintaining the status quo. The 2nd meaning might not be accurate, but it's a common answer I get when I ask regular non-political people what conservatism means.

...and when I'm in China, being a conservative has a much different meaning as you can imagine. I'm mostly in the US until January, and being that it's current 98F outside, I'm day dreaming about getting back to your state and skiing on all that amazing white powder!


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

Steve1000 said:


> That's true. Conservatism seems to have at least two different meanings. There is the economic theory of conservatism and then a more informal general meaning of maintaining the status quo. The 2nd meaning might not be accurate, but it's a common answer I get when I ask regular non-political people what conservatism means.
> 
> ...and when I'm in China, being a conservative has a much different meaning as you can imagine. I'm mostly in the US until January, and being that it's current 98F outside, I'm day dreaming about getting back to your state and skiing on all that amazing white powder!


That makes sense for two reasons. First, most fundamentalists identify themselves as conservative, so it would be natural to assume religious fundamentalism is conservative base on who you see aligning themselves with that political ideology. Second, that's the image put out in the mainstream media, that Westboro Baptist is the face of conservatism. Ugh!

And yes, conservative in China has a whole different implication!


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

sometimes its right in front of your face.

too much tv,phones,tablets,
too much facebook,snap chat etc
too much disconnect because of said things.

too much fake news.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> That makes sense for two reasons. First, most fundamentalists identify themselves as conservative, so it would be natural to assume religious fundamentalism is conservative base on who you see aligning themselves with that political ideology. Second, that's the image put out in the mainstream media, that Westboro Baptist is the face of conservatism. Ugh!
> 
> And yes, conservative in China has a whole different implication!


Weeeellll not nearly just the Westboro Baptist church...championing things like getting christian prayer, the bible, jesus, ten commandments back in schools, the so called war on christmas, and all that crap is kind of the pervue of the recent republican party who self identifies as conservative, thus enacting the No True Scotsman Fallacy.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

samyeagar said:


> Weeeellll not nearly just the Westboro Baptist church...championing things like getting christian prayer, the bible, jesus, ten commandments back in schools, the so called war on christmas, and all that crap is kind of the pervue of the recent republican party who self identifies as conservative, thus enacting the No True Scotsman Fallacy.


While there are some high visibility Republicans pushing those things (and the press is more than willing to paint them as the face of the party), they are not the desire of the majority of the Republican party, who are far more concerned with things like fiscal policy, free markets, the size of government, and immigration.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

republican,democrat.

it makes no difference all politicians are out for themselves they don't care whats good for our country they care about being in power and making as much money off the peoples back as they can.

these things in the headlines are just to keep the average man distracted and pitted against themselves as they sell our country down the river for monetary gains.


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

chillymorn69 said:


> republican,democrat.
> 
> it makes no difference all politicians are out for themselves they don't care whats good for our country they care about being in power and making as much money off the peoples back as they can.
> 
> these things in the headlines are just to keep the average man distracted and pitted against themselves as they sell our country down the river for monetary gains.


Bingo.

Reagan, Clinton, Bush Jr, and Obama ALL had gangbang sex with Wallstreet.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Middle of Everything said:


> Bingo.
> 
> Reagan, Clinton, Bush Jr, and Obama ALL had gangbang sex with Wallstreet.


And then a quirk of the electoral college put wall street itself into the white house.


----------



## Steve1000 (Nov 25, 2013)

Middle of Everything said:


> Bingo.
> 
> Reagan, Clinton, Bush Jr, and Obama ALL had gangbang sex with Wallstreet.


That's one of the most fair bi-partisan statements I've seen in awhile.


----------



## Lukedog (Nov 18, 2015)

Wow! The thread went from sexless people/relationships/marriages to politics and religion very quickly. :wink2:


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

Lukedog said:


> Wow! The thread went from sexless people/relationships/marriages to politics and religion very quickly. :wink2:


That's largely because the article referenced gave a political explanation for the decrease in sex.

But yes, with each passing post, we stray further off topic.


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Not a fan, but from what I've seen there's at least one (softcore) porn scene in each episode...that might help as much as hurt
> 
> 
> Jocularity aside, two income families with kids is a tough recipe for frequent, energetic sex. However, the last survey I saw noted that trend was starting to reverse, with two income families in slight decline.


My wife (47) and I (46) both work full-time and have kids (almost 17 and 14), yet we share sex 4-6x a week and often more. In our experience with work, kids and other distractions, it's not tough at all to share a smorgasbord of frequent often non-vanilla sex.

As to distractions my wife and I are vociferous readers of fiction and non fiction books, who like watching some movies and television shows, enjoy art galleries, museums, live music and theatre, who also enjoy eating out at least a couple of times a week. Who sometimes consume porn and in my wife's case sometimes plays computer games on an xBox, while I play games on it more frequently. Plus we also sometimes travel for work, her to attend conferences, while I travel to accesss what I render through drawing, painting and photography or to give talks.

We also have two computers at home with the one my wife uses most often, is also used by our kids. While we share an iPad (our kids have their own). Plus we both have smart phones while my wife has two of them (one for work). We also drive our kids to their extracurricular activities as well.

Apart from the times we eat out, we both cook, share housecleaning, laundry and do the dishes by hand and iron our own clothes as required. That said we have no pets plus I work from home, while my wife has a 10 minute commute to work, so we do save some time through that all while enjoying plentiful sex.

If someone wants to have sex they will find the time and have the energy to do that, if they're not interested in sex they'll avoid it and use the distractions to fill that time. Distractions are simply excuses for not wanting sex and not the reasons for avoiding it.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Personal said:


> My wife (47) and I (46) both work full-time and have kids (almost 17 and 14), yet we share sex 4-6x a week and often more. In our experience with work, kids and other distractions, it's not tough at all to share a smorgasbord of frequent often non-vanilla sex.
> 
> As to distractions my wife and I are vociferous readers of fiction and non fiction books, who like watching some movies and television shows, enjoy art galleries, museums, live music and theatre, who also enjoy eating out at least a couple of times a week. Who sometimes consume porn and in my wife's case sometimes plays computer games on an xBox, while I play games on it more frequently. Plus we also sometimes travel for work, her to attend conferences, while I travel to accesss what I render through drawing, painting and photography or to give talks.
> 
> ...


I think you fall outside the norm. Good for you though don't take it for granted . Take your wife out to dinner and bang her on the way home! Then tell her your the envy of tam!


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Actually all religious people, except American Jews, are aligned with the GOP and support is growing...

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/how-the-faithful-voted-a-preliminary-2016-analysis/

The younger generations, brainwashed with decades of abstinence only education, disillusioned by their parents' marriages, and facing less prospect for advancement are ripe for social isolation, which is what happens.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

john117 said:


> Actually all religious people, except American Jews, are aligned with the GOP and support is growing...
> 
> How the faithful voted: A preliminary 2016 analysis | Pew Research Center
> 
> The younger generations, brainwashed with decades of abstinence only education, disillusioned by their parents' marriages, and facing less prospect for advancement are ripe for social isolation, which is what happens.


Catholics went for Obama both times. Trump is an outlier since he's not a true conservative. (Neither was Bush jr for that matter).

Abstinence only is very rare--and it's certainly nothing new. Our generation was taught strictly to wait until marriage pretty universally. Today, that is considered outdated and impractical in all but the most backward Bible Belt enclaves. Other options are far more well known and accepted than at any time in Western history.

Divorce rates have been holding steady, and actually improving in some areas, so why would more youth be disillusioned with their parents marriages?

As for disillusionment, the Democrats have made quite a living pandering to the supposedly oppressed and downtrodden. Bernie only got as far as he did because he promised to forgive everyone their college debt an subsequently pay for everyone else's. Trump was the first who ran as a republican to tap into that jealousy and make votes out of it.


----------



## DustyDog (Jul 12, 2016)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> From the article:
> _In fact, the drop in sex might be the result of culture shifts and female empowerment, explained Margie Nichols, a psychologist. Compared with earlier generations, women might be viewing sex as less of a duty to their husbands and more of a personal choice. "It makes sense that women in relationships might be losing their sex drive and saying 'no' more, as opposed to my mother's generation that just spread their legs and composed a shopping list in their heads during sex," she said. "If that's true, then the decline in frequency is a good thing."_
> 
> This seems plausible, at least in some cases. However, I would argue that this decline in frequency is not necessarily "a good thing." A _good thing_ would be for the couple to make sex mutually pleasurable rather than just a chore for the woman. The last thing we need is even more threads about sexual mismatches.


I have never been with a woman who viewed sex as a duty. She wanted sex, too. But then, I tend to avoid the bible belt....


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Catholics went for Obama both times. Trump is an outlier since he's not a true conservative. (Neither was Bush jr for that matter).
> 
> Abstinence only is very rare--and it's certainly nothing new. Our generation was taught strictly to wait until marriage pretty universally. Today, that is considered outdated and impractical in all but the most backward Bible Belt enclaves. Other options are far more well known and accepted than at any time in Western history.
> 
> ...


Catholics went for Obama? Only if you count Hispanics.... Look at the trends, my friend.

The rest of your post is opinion I'm afraid. You seem to see liberals behind every bush, and maybe if you live in the right state it may be so. Here in the Bible Belt, from Kansas to West Virginia and from Wisconsin to Florida, it ain't so.

The 2010 census and redrawing of congressional districts did wonders for the GOP. But people are turning conservative regardless. With two daughters a few years apart it's hard to miss the attitude shift of young people or their parents.

What Trump did is to make people come out and say outlandish things in line with the party and expect to be taken seriously. Just today I had my program manager, a Stanford educated MSEE and staunch Trump supporter tell us that the Kentucky Ark and creation museum is right, and people and dinosaurs coexisted.... 

Maybe his son who studied theology at a prominent religious university is coaching him  

Smile and nod works well.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

john117 said:


> Catholics went for Obama? Only if you count Hispanics.... Look at the trends, my friend.
> 
> The rest of your post is opinion I'm afraid. You seem to see liberals behind every bush, and maybe if you live in the right state it may be so. Here in the Bible Belt, from Kansas to West Virginia and from Wisconsin to Florida, it ain't so.
> 
> ...


I'm afraid it's dead solid fact that there has been a huge switch from abstinence only to sexual openness from our generation to the current one. In our day, a young, unmarried woman dare not reveal being sexually active. Now, she's considered odd if she's not.

Whether or not a Catholic is Hispanic is beside the point--they still identify as religious and they vote Democrat--so it remains true that many religious people vote democratic (along with Jews and followers of Jackson, Sharpton, Wright, and Farrakhan and others like them. That they are black doesn't change the fact that they are religious and they are democrats.

I also have 2 daughters two years apart and another son two years behind them. We live in a relatively conservative area and the shift we have witnessed is definitely in the opposite direction.

I dare say you see conservatives behind every bush. Although, given your anecdote about your colleague, I could start to see why. That is a bit disturbing. I would reiterate, though, that his position is that of a religious zealot, not a true conservative.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

I grew up in a village in the backwaters of Europe and the city. City girls wouldn't put out for the Lacoste shirt wearing proper guys... or the free spirit long-haired army surplus wearing guys like my bunch. Village girls, on the other hand... in many aspects, the village is the opposite of what we expected. 

Living around here has Conservatives behind every bush, literally and figuratively. Parents have made complaints against businesses that have "revealing storefront displays"... Being in the same church and golf league with your boss are keys to promotion.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

We have had an active sex life for all the 24 years we have been together.

When two people want to connect, they make it happen.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

This is totally a perspective thing. 

Having sex 9 times less per year, on average, means one less sexual encounter per 5-6 weeks, roughly. If you're having sex between 3-6 times a week, that's barely noticeable. If you're having sex once every 2-4 weeks, I imagine 9 encounters less per year would seem like the sky is falling.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

MJJEAN said:


> This is totally a perspective thing.
> 
> Having sex 9 times less per year, on average, means one less sexual encounter per 5-6 weeks, roughly. If you're having sex between 3-6 times a week, that's barely noticeable. If you're having sex once every 2-4 weeks, I imagine 9 encounters less per year would seem like the sky is falling.


I cannot even imagine being in a marriage where sex is happening only once or twice a month.

It is hard to believe that is sustainable.

But different strokes for different folks, I guess.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

Since we moved in together in December my gf and I have had sex every day other than Three days I was away and for two days after she had our baby.For most of our dating we have had sex every day.
Until I first started reading tam I had never heard of a sexless relationship much less a sexless marriage.This talk about revealing all past sexual activity is not a good idea in my opinion because people,especially men tend to overthink things.So when any problems arise it is too easy to say "well you had a threesome before we met or you blew twenty guys in one semester" and I can't stop thinking about it.You are using your partners past and honesty to make them feel guilty.This is also used when someone wants out of their marriage but doesn't have the courage to be honest about it.To all the people on this thread that are unhappy about their partners past,answer me this.What do you think they can do about it? Until a time machine is invented then they can't do anything about it.
Judge someone on how they treat YOU and how they behave NOW.Not for something they did years ago.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

MJJEAN said:


> This is totally a perspective thing.
> 
> Having sex 9 times less per year, on average, means one less sexual encounter per 5-6 weeks, roughly. If you're having sex between 3-6 times a week, that's barely noticeable. If you're having sex once every 2-4 weeks, I imagine 9 encounters less per year would seem like the sky is falling.


I'd ****ing notice.👿


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

When I read the first paragraph of the OP article, I thought, meh, 9 times fewer per year is unremarkable. Then I clicked on the study link -- and it says the average # of times for 20 year olds is 80x per year, and the average for people of 60 is 20x per year. :surprise:

1-2x a month? That's nothing. Even 6-7x a month isn't a whole lot, especially for someone in their 20s.


----------



## Jayg14 (May 23, 2011)

jld said:


> I cannot even imagine being in a marriage where sex is happening only once or twice a month.
> 
> It is hard to believe that is sustainable.
> 
> But different strokes for different folks, I guess.


Not everyone in that situation likes that, just so you know.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

jld said:


> I cannot even imagine being in a marriage where sex is happening only once or twice a month.
> 
> It is hard to believe that is sustainable.
> 
> But different strokes for different folks, I guess.


It truly is individual and all about perspective. 

I don't know anyone irl who managed to make a low sex/no sex marriage work long term. If you only count marriages where no one is having sex, the record among my social groups is 2.5 years of sexlessness before she finally filed for divorce. If you're counting "marriages" where the spouses are not having sex with each other, but either or both spouses are having sex outside the marriage, the record is 19 years. That marriage ended as soon as the kid graduated high school.



Andy1001 said:


> Until I first started reading tam I had never heard of a sexless relationship much less a sexless marriage.


Me, either. Then, about a year after I came here, I found out about 3 sexless marriages. Two ended in divorce, one is ongoing, but neither of them have a sex drive anymore. The wife lost hers when she had a hysterectomy and got thrown into menopause and the husband has severe and life threatening health issues that leave him in chronic pain.



Andy1001 said:


> This talk about revealing all past sexual activity is not a good idea in my opinion because people,especially men tend to overthink things.So when any problems arise it is too easy to say "well you had a threesome before we met or you blew twenty guys in one semester" and I can't stop thinking about it.You are using your partners past and honesty to make them feel guilty.This is also used when someone wants out of their marriage but doesn't have the courage to be honest about it.To all the people on this thread that are unhappy about their partners past,answer me this.What do you think they can do about it? Until a time machine is invented then they can't do anything about it.
> Judge someone on how they treat YOU and how they behave NOW.Not for something they did years ago.


This is a compatibility issue to me and is basically the poster child for my argument to reveal and reveal early. If a person can't handle your past, a large part of what makes you who you are, they aren't the right person for you. Best to weed those people out before getting attached.

Besides, stuff has a way of coming out. One old friend with a big mouth and BLAMMO!


----------



## Livvie (Jan 20, 2014)

Andy1001 said:


> Since we moved in together in December my gf and I have had sex every day other than Three days I was away and for two days after she had our baby.For most of our dating we have had sex every day.
> Until I first started reading tam I had never heard of a sexless relationship much less a sexless marriage.This talk about revealing all past sexual activity is not a good idea in my opinion because people,especially men tend to overthink things.So when any problems arise it is too easy to say "well you had a threesome before we met or you blew twenty guys in one semester" and I can't stop thinking about it.You are using your partners past and honesty to make them feel guilty.This is also used when someone wants out of their marriage but doesn't have the courage to be honest about it.To all the people on this thread that are unhappy about their partners past,answer me this.What do you think they can do about it? Until a time machine is invented then they can't do anything about it.
> Judge someone on how they treat YOU and how they behave NOW.Not for something they did years ago.


Wow, your girlfriend had sex two DAYS after giving birth???!!!???!!!!!!!!!!

Trying to wrap my head around that.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

MJJEAN said:


> This is a compatibility issue to me and is basically the poster child for my argument to reveal and reveal early. If a person can't handle your past, a large part of what makes you who you are, they aren't the right person for you. Best to weed those people out before getting attached.
> 
> Besides, stuff has a way of coming out. One old friend with a big mouth and BLAMMO!


This is fine, BUT, someone can accept you now - sincerely - and change their mind years later, or develop retroactive jealousy, especially if some other issue arises to strain the relationship.


----------



## Taxman (Dec 21, 2016)

No wonder everybody seems angrier these days. I live by the old maxim: An orgasm a day keeps the psychiatrist away.


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

Livvie said:


> Wow, your girlfriend had sex two DAYS after giving birth???!!!???!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Trying to wrap my head around that.


You noticed that too? My wife's OB and im pretty sure this is standard said to wait 6 weeks. 6 VERY VERY VERY long weeks.

Now this is for vaginal birth. Not sure about c-section. But no way that is even two days.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Middle of Everything said:


> You noticed that too? My wife's OB and im pretty sure this is standard said to wait 6 weeks. 6 VERY VERY VERY long weeks.
> 
> Now this is for vaginal birth. Not sure about c-section. But no way that is even two days.


Maybe Clinton was right - oral is not sex (in which case hand jobs wouldn't be either). Buy yeah, can't see vaginal sex happening in less than a month.


----------



## Taxman (Dec 21, 2016)

My wife really could not do the six weeks, we started oral about a week afterward, and had the 6 week anniversary circled on the calendar.


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

Taxman said:


> My wife really could not do the six weeks, we started oral about a week afterward, and had the 6 week anniversary circled on the calendar.


Oh the six weeks was circled all right. Waiting for my wife at the door making sure OB gave her the thumbs up.:grin2:


----------



## Idyit (Mar 5, 2013)

Nope. It's conclusive. I've found a few links that say America is becoming more liberal. Therefor it's all the Democrats fault!!! 

https://www.wired.com/2016/12/dont-let-trumps-win-fool-americas-getting-liberal/

A more liberal nation: Fewer Americans are calling themselves conservative these days - Salon.com

US Conservatives Outnumber Liberals by Narrowing Margin | Gallup

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/01/why-america-is-moving-left/419112/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-getting-more-liberal/?utm_term=.819330e8f368

Conservative Or Liberal? Here's What Americans Really Believe

Notice how all of these are hyper-right leaning, just to confirm a bias.... SMH


----------



## MrsAldi (Apr 15, 2016)

Andy1001 said:


> Since we moved in together in December my gf and I have had sex every day other than for two days after she had our baby. For most of our dating we have had sex every day.


Two days after having a baby, you were able to have sex? 
I was told by doctors that it's likely 6-8 weeks. 



Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


----------



## Taxman (Dec 21, 2016)

Middle of Everything said:


> Oh the six weeks was circled all right. Waiting for my wife at the door making sure OB gave her the thumbs up.:grin2:


I found out afterward that she did not bother talking to the DR. (he was an arsehole, caused some problems, and we changed doctors shortly thereafter-he was drummed out several years later), she said if she felt any pain or felt like I shook something loose, she'd see the doctor, otherwise, she was good to go.:grin2:>

PS our second was through c-section. She wanted an orgasm the day after coming home from the hospital.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

The day I brought my girlfriend home after she had our baby I had a list of questions a mile long for the doctor.My gf only had one,when could she start swimming again.He told her it would be unwise to swim in chlorinated water for a few weeks until all bleeding had stopped and besides it would be unhealthy for other pool users to swim in the same pool in case of bleeding.She looked at me and laughed,then said to the doctor that's not a problem.When we went home I drained the pool,turned off the chlorine and filled it again.It tool almost three days to filter and heat the water and she started swimming then.
She was doing sit-ups the day after I brought her home and as for the sex,I never said it was vaginal,we waited almost a week for that.
She is truly an Amazonian and the more I read on tam the more I appreciate her.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

Livvie said:


> Wow, your girlfriend had sex two DAYS after giving birth???!!!???!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Trying to wrap my head around that.





Middle of Everything said:


> You noticed that too? My wife's OB and im pretty sure this is standard said to wait 6 weeks. 6 VERY VERY VERY long weeks.
> 
> Now this is for vaginal birth. Not sure about c-section. But no way that is even two days.





MrsAldi said:


> Two days after having a baby, you were able to have sex?
> I was told by doctors that it's likely 6-8 weeks.
> Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


 I had two vaginal births and a c-section. I resumed sex about a week after DD1 was born and waited 4 days after DD2 was born. DS was a c-section and I waited almost 2 weeks after his birth because I was literally cut from hip to hip and wanted to make sure the incision had healed enough so that I wouldn't rip it open if we got a little too enthusiastic. 

Maybe some women just bounce back faster than others.

My OB/GYN probably would have killed me had someone snitched, but no way in hell I was going 6 weeks without sex.


----------



## Openminded (Feb 21, 2013)

MrsAldi said:


> Two days after having a baby, you were able to have sex?
> I was told by doctors that it's likely 6-8 weeks.
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, that's the standard speech from doctors. Some women are ready before that (many are not). Depends on how quickly you heal, etc.


----------



## Livvie (Jan 20, 2014)

... And how many and how many layers of stitches you have!!!


----------



## Moliverna (Apr 9, 2017)

Well there are also more medications than ever. All with side affect some affect this....

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Dannip (Jun 13, 2017)

A bull**** story from a fake news organization.


----------



## Dannip (Jun 13, 2017)

Idyit said:


> Nope. It's conclusive. I've found a few links that say America is becoming more liberal. Therefor it's all the Democrats fault!!!
> 
> https://www.wired.com/2016/12/dont-let-trumps-win-fool-americas-getting-liberal/
> 
> ...


You mean they didn't report that today's youth are more conservative in nature?? That's what Ive learned.


----------



## Betrayedone (Jan 1, 2014)

john117 said:


> I've lived in America for 35 years and every day is getting more conservative. I've lived in liberal and conservative states too.
> 
> Five Reasons Why America Is About To Become A Very Conservative Country | Zero Hedge
> 
> There may be an appearance of Sodom and Gomora but it's just that. Less sex is only part of it.


I can't agree with you John that America is becoming more conservative......I see liberalism spreading like an unchecked cancer....with the same result.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Betrayedone said:


> I can't agree with you John that America is becoming more conservative......I see liberalism spreading like an unchecked cancer....with the same result.


Unchecked cancer.... Bias much?

I swear I'll drag y'all into my classroom if I ever teach college again. How can one have a reasonable opinion about whether the country is going conservative or not if all they think of when they think liberals is... Cancer?

Lemme give y'all a hint. The more extreme position y'all have the more they play ya. I have many liberal friends and none of them goes into convulsions thinking about conservatives. Even the day after elections we all shrugged it off and went on to our normal business.

I also have lots of conservative friends who go into convulsions every time alcohol, sex, skin, guns, or taxes are mentioned. They gloated for weeks after the election and most are still disillusioned.

I'm not saying it's all like that. But the sooner we drop the labels and realize it's human beings we're talking about the better off this country will be. 

There.


----------



## toblerone (Oct 18, 2016)

bad article said:


> HEADLINE: PEOPLE HAVING LESS SEX, WHY?
> 
> BODY: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


That is kind of a terrible article since it only barely gazes at threads instead of trying to tug on them to see what would unravel.


----------



## Idyit (Mar 5, 2013)

Dannip said:


> You mean they didn't report that today's youth are more conservative in nature?? That's what Ive learned.


I was being a bit of a jerk pointing out that anything can be found to prop up any position. Another poster put up a link to suggest the country is becoming more conservative, connecting that inconclusive and unproveable dot to diminishing sex in America. The less sex assertion itself is flimsily supported by one article that has been bloviated upon for 5 pages.

We all have biases and bring them with us wherever we go. Whether posting a link or making an assertion about that information. Are Americans having less sex? I don't know but don't believe the CNN article alone is reliable. Are we having more sex? I don't know but I bet I could come up with a lot of interweb info that would support it.

Same with more or less liberal/conservative. The links I posted were to point out that any opinion supported by stuff I found on Google does not truly validate my opinion. Aaaaand... linking two poorly connected ideas, supported by information that only confirms a bias, is only an expression of ones own bias.


----------



## Mr The Other (Feb 1, 2014)

Middle of Everything said:


> Agreed. To me its not a good thing at all. Yes "good" that women shouldnt feel "forced" to have sex with their husbands all the while "composing shopping lists in their heads".
> 
> Instead I find that a horribly ****ing sad thing. Sad that a wife would enjoy sex so little as to "compose shopping lists in their heads during" And that any psychologist would view a decline in sex because of that as good is sad as well. How about communicating. How about pulling the enormous stick out of your ass and realizing that sex with your spouse should be at the very least really fun?


Absolutely.

There are different people out there. If the best thing that can be said for a man's performance is that it is mercifully brief, then you are quite right.

I do not go for a run in the park very often. When I do, I feel great, but I cannot be bothered. If all it took for me to keep my marriage healthy was a few runs in the park, I would do it. I think sometimes a woman can decide they cannot be bothered, then falls out the habit and expects their husband to accept it.

These are two very different levels of obligations.


----------

