Most Americans Have Had Premarital Sex

PS. I just loved this bit. “”Absolutely not,” Horn said. “The Bush administration does not believe the government should be regulating or stigmatizing the behavior of adults.”. Hahahahaha. Joe Geobbles would have been proud.

PS. I just loved this bit. “”Absolutely not,” Horn said. “The Bush administration does not believe the government should be regulating or stigmatizing the behavior of adults.”. Hahahahaha. Joe Geobbles would have been proud.

Do we let past to the goalie the ’44′ or ’30′ year cut offs? Maybe. It is about premarital sex after all and some wait an awful long time. Do we have to see this only in the context of the abstinance debate? Not at all. It is much wider. In fact, by using the ’44′ and ’30′ year cut off, the youth-abstinance arguement is largely irrelevant as we all grow and develop. What is useful, indeed healthy, at one age, isn’t necessarily relevant at another age.

What we DO have to question is the cant and mendacity of previous ‘studies’ and common as-told-experience. We can’t let that pass though to the goalie. For a generation or more, back to the 40′s and earlier, women have berated men for our desire. We have been made to feel guilt for even wanting to have pre-marital sex. Women have portayed themselves as ‘purer’, more controlled, more chaste than men. Study after study showed a huge discrepency between sexual activity reported by men and that reported by women. Were those studies falsified? Or was it mere lazy research? Men were almost uniformly and ubiquitously accused of exaggerating their activity. Boasting. Of ‘having sex on the brain’. Privately, women berated and demeaned men simply for the contrived obligation for men to make the first move, so that women could claim the veto and higher moral ground.

Now we find, according to this study, that women were no better and no worse than men. Fakes. All that time. Is this study right and most other studies wrong? If it is right, why do the authors not tell it as it is; that previous researchers lied; that the women lied; that previous researchers were more interested in demeaning men than telling the truth; that women have manipulated and lied, demeaned and abused men simply to advance a false image.

I don’t suppose we shall hear these or any other researchers actually taking others to task, nor an essay showing the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s raging feminists claims that all sexual intercourse is rape and the violent subjugation of women by men were in fact sheer hate mongering. Nor that ‘researchers’ have been complicit in the hate.

Do we let past to the goalie the ’44′ or ’30′ year cut offs? Maybe. It is about premarital sex after all and some wait an awful long time. Do we have to see this only in the context of the abstinance debate? Not at all. It is much wider. In fact, by using the ’44′ and ’30′ year cut off, the youth-abstinance arguement is largely irrelevant as we all grow and develop. What is useful, indeed healthy, at one age, isn’t necessarily relevant at another age.

What we DO have to question is the cant and mendacity of previous ‘studies’ and common as-told-experience. We can’t let that pass though to the goalie. For a generation or more, back to the 40′s and earlier, women have berated men for our desire. We have been made to feel guilt for even wanting to have pre-marital sex. Women have portayed themselves as ‘purer’, more controlled, more chaste than men. Study after study showed a huge discrepency between sexual activity reported by men and that reported by women. Were those studies falsified? Or was it mere lazy research? Men were almost uniformly and ubiquitously accused of exaggerating their activity. Boasting. Of ‘having sex on the brain’. Privately, women berated and demeaned men simply for the contrived obligation for men to make the first move, so that women could claim the veto and higher moral ground.

Now we find, according to this study, that women were no better and no worse than men. Fakes. All that time. Is this study right and most other studies wrong? If it is right, why do the authors not tell it as it is; that previous researchers lied; that the women lied; that previous researchers were more interested in demeaning men than telling the truth; that women have manipulated and lied, demeaned and abused men simply to advance a false image.

I don’t suppose we shall hear these or any other researchers actually taking others to task, nor an essay showing the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s raging feminists claims that all sexual intercourse is rape and the violent subjugation of women by men were in fact sheer hate mongering. Nor that ‘researchers’ have been complicit in the hate.