Easy. "Sex" is only P in V. Anything else isn't sex. Probably also the type of people that insist trans men aren't men, etc.
Uhh, I’m not sure you’re familiar with what sex is, if that’s your definition. After all, your description includes soaking, and those Mormon teens assured me that neither god nor the government would mind.
(psst, I'm explaining why they may have structured the question in the way they did, not explaining what I consider to be sex)
(I know, I’m being intentionally obtuse to further your joke and make fun of Mormons)
(touche)
... What is soaking in this context (or should I avoid asking)?
Insert the P in the V and stay still, sex is when you move, if the world around you move your body for you is not sex(ex: someone else moving the bed, tremors, etc)
earthquakes are god saying it's ok to bang
trans people only make up a small percentage of the population and they don't explain the surge visible in the graph
I mean, from your own link, those error bars come from:
The data being a clustered sample set,
That study wasn't specifically asking whether or not respondents were virgins, ie, had 0 sex partners.
...
The error bars there are large because the actual question was 'how many sex partners have you had in the past however many years?', and then your linked post explains how this particular dataset/survey/study was then presented to try to show the answer to a question that wasn't explicitly asked.
That can have a lot more variance than a survey/study that flatly asks binary question of 'have you ever had sex before?', and then goes on to define what does and doesn't count as 'having sex'.
...
And indeed when you actually do that kind of approach, there are many other graphs from many other studies showing it being increasingly for both young men and young women to be virgins, have had 0 sex partners.
https://news.iu.edu/live/news/26924-nearly-1-in-3-young-men-in-the-us-report-having-no
https://www.cdc.gov/yrbs/dstr/index.html
All of these show a marked decline in the number of both young men and young women who have ever had sex, that more people remain sexless for longer, to an older age.
(Though this started earlier among men and is more pronounced, women are now catching up as well)
...
Also worth noting:
Compared to adult participants in the 2009 survey, adults in the 2018 group were significantly more likely to report no penile-vaginal intercourse in the prior year, the researchers found. Study participants were also significantly less likely to report engaging in any other sexual behaviors examined in the study, such as oral sex or anal sex. All modes of past-year partnered sex were reported by fewer people in the 2018 cohort.
Yeah, contrary to the implication of OP's image... no, young men are not having more of some other kind of sex than male/female p/v, but still having some other kind of sex.
They're just not having sex with a partner. At all.
Bros are not en masse becoming gay or bi or pan or trans, and then having 'non-traditional' sex that would make them not virgins in a 'non-traditional' way, not in the numbers you'd need to make that a statistically viable explanation for lack of m/f p/v sex.
This is funny haha meme joke, but its not based in reality, its based in whimsy.
You can check that against male self-id rates as LGBTQ and see that there has been a slow, gradual rise, from about 3% up to about 5% for men right now... but nothing like an 8% to 28% rise in roughly the same time period.
This one particular graph having error bars does not mean this is not a real thing that is happening.
...
And in case its relevant, I am a queer guy who has had varying kinds of sex and intimacy with both men and women, trans-inclusive.
Going to point out that you've erroneously used the term, over and over again, "sex partners", when the graph states "sex with women" and so does the question they seemingly asked.
I am being somewhat loose with terms because I am talking about a whole bunch of statistical data broadly, more specifically, the GSS survey data from the comment I am replying to, and also the other 3 studies that can be found either at or by following through the other links I've provided.
But uh sure, in terms of the GSS study, what is being looked at is currently more precisely defined as'female sex partners,' more specifically, since you've become 18 yo.
https://gssdataexplorer.norc.org/variables/5060/vshow
So uh anyway, I thought that was fairly clearly obvious if you'd actually read even the first few paragraphs of the link in the comment I am replying to, that explains the methodology used to generate that graph.
I was trying to just summarize it for those less well versed in statistics.
...
Either way, my main critique is still valid.
The comment I am replying to seems to imply that because of the error bars on this particular way of presenting GSS data, that the whole idea of more and more males having less and less sex is somehow not credible...
... and this is not the case, there are many, many other studies, far more than just the 3 I've linked, that show that just broadly, young people are having less and less sex.
...
If you can actually find the actual, precise phrasing of what the GSS survey asked in 2018, heck I'd appreciate it, but uh yeah, it does seem to be the case that the GSS survey in 2018 does not expliclity and directly ask whether or not a respondent has had sex with how many people in the last whatever time period...
The whole problem here is that the questionairre itself is changing over time, and thus the methods of calculating whatever graph out of reverse engineering these changing questions is frought with complexity and error.
...
https://nuancepill.substack.com/p/2024-update-to-the-gss-sexlessness-graph
This is the same dataset, the GSS, being again teased in similar ways, with 2024 data.
Apparently we are now up to roughly 27% of 18-29 yo men and 20% of 18-29 yo women having had no sex in the past year, and apparently, the actual wording of the question in the 2024 survey was:
'About how often did you have sex during the last 12 months?’.
So that would be all inclusive, but also:
In 2012, PARTNERS was used (a variable excluded from the most recent survey), as SEXFREQ was only asked to people who had had one or more sexual partners on this year.
...
This is the kind of shit that makes using this GSS survey to look at this issue less statistically valid... you're not actually looking at the same answer to the same question, calculated 8n the same way, over the whole time period that is displayed in these meme graphs.
This is what is meant by "lies, damned lies, and statistics."
Again, the whole point of my comment is that yes, the original graph here is a dumb graph because of how it in particular is constructed, but that it is also dumb to then conclude this whole concept of young people having less sex is bullshit.
There are other, better, more statstically valid studies, graphs and datasets that exist which do a better job of showing the trend/issue people are talking about, and do show that it is a real thing that is happening.
Honestly I trust a plot with huge error bars much more than a plot with tiny error bars or constant error bars.
that's just a straight line with extra steps!
Honestly, feels like they asked like 30 people total
So, at age 18, my virginity comes back if I lost it sooner? I lost my virginity twice? Neat!
(ignoring trouble with the word virginity and what the definition of even a sexual partner or something would be when the average reader perhaps thinks PiV penetrative sex).
Edit: as usual, I should have scrolled down first as others beat me to it.
I'd assume that there's actually more virgins between 18-30 nowadays, though. Loneliness might not be a specifically male epidemic, but it certainly is a societal epidemic in most western countries.
I won't disagree that loneliness is an issue in our society. But I don't think it is the only "problem". Anecdotally for me: I wasn't ready to have sex, a relationship or for dating for a long time. So I'm mostly happy to have taken that time. In previous generations you'd marry and have kids for a while at that point. I think we have a lot more room to grow individually today.
We also have more room to fail individually today. Don't get me wrong, I'm not proposing that we go back to where western societies were in the 50s, but there are definitely downsides to our current societies that need to be dealt with. Lonely people aren't just individual people who are having a bad time, they are IMO a huge threat for societal cohesion. e.g. they're much more likely than non-lonely people to politically radicalize.
i do propose going back to the 50's, 50 AD
I'm part of that group. One reason is I feel like shit, don't really like myself and want the best for the people I love. That ain't me.
Are you talking to a therapist?
Don't really like to info dump but, I have been to therapy. I've felt this way since before I hit puberty. In my oldest memories where I still recognise myself I've felt like this. I've sorta accepted that I'll feel this way for the rest of my life. Everyone experiences a range of emotions and for some people that range lies closer to despair than bliss.
You don't have sex partners.
I don't even have friends.
We are not the same..
Well unless you count my cat as a friend, but that seems one sided. (My cat doesn't see me as a friend, just a dumb monkey)
The amount of Femboys...boy, you have no idea. Those aren't virgins.
They didn't wifes, so they became the wifes.
They're turning the incels gay!
Aren't they turning the gays to incels?
There’s a brief period where they go full femboy first
“Since they turned 18” also seems needlessly specific.
Didn't you know? When you turn 18 your body hits the virginity reset button!
I'm guessing thats to avoid some ethical grey areas. Or theyre specifically gathering data on men after highschool.
I assume they don't want to open a can of worms regarding childhood abuse. Doesn't seem needless
Two consenting 16 year olds having sex is neither child abuse, nor illegal in the UK.
I may be a cis male, but if I can't get some from the ladies, bring on the guys!
I honestly had to reread it and think for a moment before I got it, but to my credit, I just woke up.
If they changed the question now they wouldn't have continuous data going back to 1989 anymore.
People weren't gay until 1989 so that makes sense. Literally not a single one. 😏
But society was a fair bit more socially conservative when discussing homosexuality.
Sure, but like... maybe that data isn't really relevant or trustworthy either if that's how it was phrased?
Pollster: "Have you ever had sex with a woman?"
Closeted sexually active 28 year old gay guy when being gay could get you ostracized or killed: "Oh.... y... yeah! I love the vaginas. So... slippery and... moist (gag)"
Pollster: "NICE!" high five
I mean, there aren't enough gay dudes out there to change the numbers much.
There are more bi guys than society recognizes though.
Ackshually, AFAIK around 5% of the population are homosexual. If that is completely ignored in the graph, the actual number would be closer to 22%. It could possibly be even lower if you consider bisexuals who just not had sex with women. And if you consider that homosexuality is much more accepted these days the numbers are skewed and the percentage could be even higher among younger people.
OP is saying gay sex being excluded, iiuc. Trend seems extreme since 2008, and it would be nice to see the spikes to 16% or so 3 times between 1989 and 2008. The spikes could be corelated to rising stock market bubbles for all I know. Seems over double the 1989-2008 average that I guesstimate at 12%.
Maybe gay men used to experiemnt with women to "find out"? Maybe harsher economic inequality keeps men home? It's not obviously internet porn, which became available in late 90s, though 20 years later would get a lot of under 30s.
It’s not obviously internet porn
It's social networks and the loss of 3rd (and 1st) places. Everybody knows what the problem is. Everybody has some idea how to fix it (look how to fix car transit). Every person in power is intent on refusing to improve things in any way and making it worse.
Direct results of all that Barney and Spermbob bullshit.
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
