The data is out. New information from the General Social Survey has dropped very interesting data on sex in America.
The data is blowing my mind. Apparently, that is the only thing being blown for 23% of people in my age bracket.
See the following graphs (Courtesy of FreeBeacon.org and WashingtonPost):
Americans Are Not Getting Laid – Especially Young Men
I am unable to fully comprehend this. With how overly sexualized our society is, it seems insane to consider that 23% of my age bracket (18-29) have not had sex in an entire year!
What are they doing? It is an entire year! I thought a month was a long time.
There is so much to unravel here.
Let’s go through a take-away list:
- Americans not having sex in the entire preceding year has rose from 18.6% to 23.2%.
- Older people have less sex, especially if unmarried.
- The group most likely to have sex in a given year is 35, give or take 3 years.
- Young Americans (18-29) reporting no sex has increased immensely from 14.3% to 23%.
- The decline in young Americans sexual numbers is mainly due to men – The share of young men reporting no sex in the past year increased from ~15% in 1989 to 28% in 2018.
- Married individuals report more sex in every age range.
This is baffling, honestly.
Even with the rise of hookup culture, feminism, and bullshit apps like Tinder we are still seeing a decline in sex in the demographic that is most-likely to be affected by these items (18-29).
Additionally, it’s become almost a meme that married people never have sex. Yet it seems the opposite is true: married people are out-bunnying everyone at every age.
There are a few things that are pretty obvious. Such as older people have less sex and the decline in sex is most noticeably due to men.
But the rest of these? I’m not entirely sold on any specific reason.
Sure, men are avoiding marriage in higher numbers due to significant societal stressors.
And MGTOW has become a “thing”.
And gender relations are not in the best state of affairs.
Yet none of these could fully explain the increase. These may affect it a bit, but not entirely.
How do I know this? Simple. Because women’s rates of sexless-ness in a given year did not increase as significantly as men’s.
All three of those issues are men-driven. Yet women are still having sex. So it’s not men driving this phenomenon.
It’s likely women going for a smaller number of higher quality men. One man, two girls. Or seven or so.
This is obvious given the data. If 18% of women are sexless in a year and 28% of men are, then there is some overlap in the sexually active men getting women.
Likewise, women generally hover around 15% mark, so while 18% is an increase, it is not that significant. Compared to men, who also historically hovered around 15%, are now at that insane 28%.
So while anyone can have an opinion of why this is occurring, we know that it is largely women going for the upper tier men that already have (and utilize) options. Leaving the other men to become this iconic statistic.
An interesting phenomenon for sure. I’d be interested to know why women are more likely to be going for the same men now compared to preceding years. Or if there was just such a large overlap in earlier years that it resulted in diminished numbers for both sexes.
There are 5000 articles online discussing this right now, all with different opinions of why this is happening. Some say Tinder, some say technology, some say x, some say y – but I have not seen any discuss this root issue. Women are going after the same men. Most of this increase is driven solely by certain men not getting laid. Women are still in pretty equalized numbers, so it’s not all of us having less sex. It’s women picking differently.
Why? I don’t know. I can’t answer that. I’m not sure anyone truthfully could. It’s probably a combination of many things.
But I am interested to see where this goes. Will this incentivize men to get better so they can actually get laid, or will it just create Japan-like ‘herbivores’ (men with no interest in sex) in the coming decades? Or some potential that I haven’t even considered?
We’ll have to wait and see.