<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Just tell the CDC what a big slut you are</title>
	<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:18:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Lynn Gazis-Sax</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442591</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:00:12 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442591</guid>
					<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;i also think you’re flat wrong that there’s a difference between the expectation of monogamy in dating and the expectation in marriage.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

My point isn't that people &quot;cheat&quot; more often when dating than when married (maybe they do, but that's beside the point); it's that &quot;dating,&quot; by its very nature, includes a bunch of short term relationships (some of which haven't yet reached the point where you've agreed to be exclusive), while marriage lasts longer (even if not always as long as you'd initially thought).  So if you spend any significant period of your marriage &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt; trying to be monogamous, you have fewer sex partners.  If you're introverted and &lt;em&gt;don't like&lt;/em&gt; forcing yourself to go out and find new partners (which covers at least a significant fraction of married people), then you &lt;em&gt;definitely&lt;/em&gt; have fewer partners, now that you don't have to look for new ones just to have any sex life at all.

The same could also be true of people in long term live in relationships, but a lot of unmarried people are unmarried and no currently in a long term relationship, so the average number of sex partners for married people is still going to be lower than the average number for single people (some of whom aren't in a position where &quot;cheating&quot; is even meaningful).
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<blockquote><p>i also think you’re flat wrong that there’s a difference between the expectation of monogamy in dating and the expectation in marriage.</p></blockquote>
	<p>My point isn&#8217;t that people &#8220;cheat&#8221; more often when dating than when married (maybe they do, but that&#8217;s beside the point); it&#8217;s that &#8220;dating,&#8221; by its very nature, includes a bunch of short term relationships (some of which haven&#8217;t yet reached the point where you&#8217;ve agreed to be exclusive), while marriage lasts longer (even if not always as long as you&#8217;d initially thought).  So if you spend any significant period of your marriage <em>at all</em> trying to be monogamous, you have fewer sex partners.  If you&#8217;re introverted and <em>don&#8217;t like</em> forcing yourself to go out and find new partners (which covers at least a significant fraction of married people), then you <em>definitely</em> have fewer partners, now that you don&#8217;t have to look for new ones just to have any sex life at all.</p>
	<p>The same could also be true of people in long term live in relationships, but a lot of unmarried people are unmarried and no currently in a long term relationship, so the average number of sex partners for married people is still going to be lower than the average number for single people (some of whom aren&#8217;t in a position where &#8220;cheating&#8221; is even meaningful).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: rachel</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442157</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:18:52 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442157</guid>
					<description>for the rest of your married life.

using current day statistics, people get married at 25 and die around 75.  in fifty years of marriage, i don't believe for a moment that you only cheat once.  you might have a series of one night stands with no corresponding &quot;mistress&quot; type of affair, but if a person were to cheat, i don't think a person they would only do it one time.  you get away with it once and the next time is easier, time after that is even more easy, etc.

i also think you're flat wrong that there's a difference between the expectation of monogamy in dating and the expectation in marriage.  i'd wager that the number are similar, if not higher in marriage.  if you cheat while you date someone, you're going to cheat after you get married.  and if you don't cheat while dating then you'll be married the first time you cheat.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>for the rest of your married life.</p>
	<p>using current day statistics, people get married at 25 and die around 75.  in fifty years of marriage, i don&#8217;t believe for a moment that you only cheat once.  you might have a series of one night stands with no corresponding &#8220;mistress&#8221; type of affair, but if a person were to cheat, i don&#8217;t think a person they would only do it one time.  you get away with it once and the next time is easier, time after that is even more easy, etc.</p>
	<p>i also think you&#8217;re flat wrong that there&#8217;s a difference between the expectation of monogamy in dating and the expectation in marriage.  i&#8217;d wager that the number are similar, if not higher in marriage.  if you cheat while you date someone, you&#8217;re going to cheat after you get married.  and if you don&#8217;t cheat while dating then you&#8217;ll be married the first time you cheat.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Lynn Gazis-Sax</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442089</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:28:13 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442089</guid>
					<description>&lt;em&gt;i’d be *really* curious to see how often married people are monogamous. from almost every couple i’ve known, at most one person is monogamous. rarely are both.&lt;/em&gt;

During any given year, or for a whole lifetime?  I'd be surprised if most marriages include consistent adultery, even on the part of just one partner.  The average married person is still going to have a lot fewer sexual partners than the average person who is dating over the same period of time, even if married people sometimes cheat.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><em>i’d be *really* curious to see how often married people are monogamous. from almost every couple i’ve known, at most one person is monogamous. rarely are both.</em></p>
	<p>During any given year, or for a whole lifetime?  I&#8217;d be surprised if most marriages include consistent adultery, even on the part of just one partner.  The average married person is still going to have a lot fewer sexual partners than the average person who is dating over the same period of time, even if married people sometimes cheat.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Nathanael Nerode</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442054</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:53:58 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-442054</guid>
					<description>I wish I could find this, but I remember reading in some reputable journal that in a specifically double-blind anonymous survey where the participants were guaranteed secrecy and tracked their partners for several years, and specifically asking only about straight sex, the numbers *still* didn't match: the men had had more partners than the women, total.  (Though not 40-75% more; it was something like 5-10% more.)

Then someone thought to survey prostitutes, who were completely excluded from the previous surveys.   At that point the numbers immediately added up.  :-/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I wish I could find this, but I remember reading in some reputable journal that in a specifically double-blind anonymous survey where the participants were guaranteed secrecy and tracked their partners for several years, and specifically asking only about straight sex, the numbers *still* didn&#8217;t match: the men had had more partners than the women, total.  (Though not 40-75% more; it was something like 5-10% more.)</p>
	<p>Then someone thought to survey prostitutes, who were completely excluded from the previous surveys.   At that point the numbers immediately added up.  :-/
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: rachel</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441856</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:41:36 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441856</guid>
					<description>i'd be *really* curious to see how often married people are monogamous.  from almost every couple i've known, at most one person is monogamous.  rarely are both.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>i&#8217;d be *really* curious to see how often married people are monogamous.  from almost every couple i&#8217;ve known, at most one person is monogamous.  rarely are both.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Amanda Marcotte</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441854</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:34:16 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441854</guid>
					<description>&lt;i&gt;Also, “one for the rest of your life” is not really the way that marriage generally works.&lt;/i&gt;

True, but it still cuts down on your numbers a lot.  Say you have 5 partners from age 20-25 and then you marry.  Then you divorce 15 years later and date some more, racking up another 5 partners in 5 years.  Then you get married again, tack on another 15 years and voila!---10 partners in 40 years.  Serial monogamy is why the numbers are so low, even if you're not much of a prude.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p><i>Also, “one for the rest of your life” is not really the way that marriage generally works.</i></p>
	<p>True, but it still cuts down on your numbers a lot.  Say you have 5 partners from age 20-25 and then you marry.  Then you divorce 15 years later and date some more, racking up another 5 partners in 5 years.  Then you get married again, tack on another 15 years and voila!&#8212;10 partners in 40 years.  Serial monogamy is why the numbers are so low, even if you&#8217;re not much of a prude.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Scorpio</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441834</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:06:07 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441834</guid>
					<description>They might also ask about rapes -- been raped, committed a rape, does the person count that as &quot;having sex&quot;.  Men will likely count not committing rape, and having stuck it in via rape as &quot;having sex&quot;.  Women will do the opposite -- say they were raped and that they do not count it as sex.  

Bet that this would be a much larger factor than anyone supposes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>They might also ask about rapes &#8212; been raped, committed a rape, does the person count that as &#8220;having sex&#8221;.  Men will likely count not committing rape, and having stuck it in via rape as &#8220;having sex&#8221;.  Women will do the opposite &#8212; say they were raped and that they do not count it as sex.  </p>
	<p>Bet that this would be a much larger factor than anyone supposes.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: rachel</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441813</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:29:19 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441813</guid>
					<description>loosely twisted, are you seriously that naive?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>loosely twisted, are you seriously that naive?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Loosely Twisted</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441809</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:20:03 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441809</guid>
					<description>I don't know.  What I have experienced in my limited view of the world, the numbers pretty much match what I have seen.

I mean in my OWN family, my Mom, has had 1 person. I have talked to my Grandmother, and grandfather and both said she only dated 1 guy. And well, she Married HIM.

1 guy. EVER. **boggle** 

Same with the rest of my hardcore Mormon family.  Now, I am not Mormon, I left the religion and it's fanaticism.  But seriously these guys are nuts when it comes to sex before marriage. 

Could the number of Mormons (who are long family tied Mormons, meaning those who were born into the religion since Joseph Smith) be skewing any results?  What about other religious sects where the woman is pretty much tied up and chaperoned before being transfered to her husband?

What was that stat for the low end of Bushco's support? 30% that's an awful lot of born ignorants who follow some religious cult.  I myself, well let's say I am in the double digits and leave it there.  I enjoy sex way too much to give it up now.

lol

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>I don&#8217;t know.  What I have experienced in my limited view of the world, the numbers pretty much match what I have seen.</p>
	<p>I mean in my OWN family, my Mom, has had 1 person. I have talked to my Grandmother, and grandfather and both said she only dated 1 guy. And well, she Married HIM.</p>
	<p>1 guy. EVER. **boggle** </p>
	<p>Same with the rest of my hardcore Mormon family.  Now, I am not Mormon, I left the religion and it&#8217;s fanaticism.  But seriously these guys are nuts when it comes to sex before marriage. </p>
	<p>Could the number of Mormons (who are long family tied Mormons, meaning those who were born into the religion since Joseph Smith) be skewing any results?  What about other religious sects where the woman is pretty much tied up and chaperoned before being transfered to her husband?</p>
	<p>What was that stat for the low end of Bushco&#8217;s support? 30% that&#8217;s an awful lot of born ignorants who follow some religious cult.  I myself, well let&#8217;s say I am in the double digits and leave it there.  I enjoy sex way too much to give it up now.</p>
	<p>lol
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Nick</title>
		<link>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441791</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Aug 2007 11:41:28 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/14/5893/#comment-441791</guid>
					<description>Well, that's fair, Amanda, but even in a context of serial monogamy the numbers seem ridiculously small.  Also, &quot;one for the rest of your life&quot; is not really the way that marriage generally works.

I'm not suggesting that I see a &quot;problem&quot; with the numbers being low, just that it's a byproduct of things that are, in fact, problems.  Without those factors, many people would be having much more fun, safe sex than they are currently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Well, that&#8217;s fair, Amanda, but even in a context of serial monogamy the numbers seem ridiculously small.  Also, &#8220;one for the rest of your life&#8221; is not really the way that marriage generally works.</p>
	<p>I&#8217;m not suggesting that I see a &#8220;problem&#8221; with the numbers being low, just that it&#8217;s a byproduct of things that are, in fact, problems.  Without those factors, many people would be having much more fun, safe sex than they are currently.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
