https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessness-is-rising-but-not-for-the-reasons-incels-claim
First let's approach their main conclusion:
Most people have premartial sex (depending on the country ofc). Marriage decline has more to do with culture rather than anything else. Many young people simply decide not to marry, despite making pairs. Or marrying much later. I however fail to see how being in marriage and sex correlate with each other, since seldom anyone but extremely religious people decide not to have it before marriage. I could go on and tell you how women have lower virgin age, have it easier by a sole fact that there's simply more males than females in the reproductive age(pure mathematics), teach you about economics, but this apparently seems irrelevant to this "amazing study".
Relative change for males compared to females from 2008 to 2016 in sexlessness rising by stunning ~100%, which means there's about twice the amount of men in the group not having sex compared to females. That's roughly ~43% increase for men and ~22.5% increase for women. That's just rough calculations from their chart. So about twice as many men than women, +/- 5%. You call this slightly? Weaselly at best, intentionally misleading at worst.
So what piece did we miss, "ifstudies"?
:
GSS data contains: People who never married, and "average" of people who had zero sexual partners and no sexual encounters.
NSFG data contains: People who never married (JFL)
NHANES data contains: People who never married and who never married and live with a partner (JFLx2)
In 2018, where seldom anyone below 30 marries, what do you expect to see here? That people living with a partner that they are not married to are having sex? Well, data supports that one for sure. Not sure if we needed studies for this one, though.
You need two to marry. A woman and a man. Well, same-sex marriages exist too I guess. But I don't think that's relevant here.
I will skip the education and housing problem, it's obvious to everyone.
First let's approach their main conclusion:
This is not true because it applies only to males. Note the significant increase post 2008 in mainly male celibacy, not female one. If marriages were a problem, why does problem affect males much more significantly, perhaps twice as strong if not more, depending on the source?
Most people have premartial sex (depending on the country ofc). Marriage decline has more to do with culture rather than anything else. Many young people simply decide not to marry, despite making pairs. Or marrying much later. I however fail to see how being in marriage and sex correlate with each other, since seldom anyone but extremely religious people decide not to have it before marriage. I could go on and tell you how women have lower virgin age, have it easier by a sole fact that there's simply more males than females in the reproductive age(pure mathematics), teach you about economics, but this apparently seems irrelevant to this "amazing study".
You call the highest difference in over 25 years "little"? Relatively, women are having twice as much sex as men do.
Relative change for males compared to females from 2008 to 2016 in sexlessness rising by stunning ~100%, which means there's about twice the amount of men in the group not having sex compared to females. That's roughly ~43% increase for men and ~22.5% increase for women. That's just rough calculations from their chart. So about twice as many men than women, +/- 5%. You call this slightly? Weaselly at best, intentionally misleading at worst.
Let's think about this for a second. If the problem concerned both sexes, the relative change between sexes would be unchanged. Why is the difference between males and females the highest now? If that was true, and people of both genders started having less sex, wouldn't the relative difference of sexlessness between males and females be similar to previous years? Not convincing enough perhaps. Maybe a logical truth-bomb? If women's sex frequency in some group didn't change, but male's did, who's doing all the fucking? A good theory would be that there's a smaller group of males who gets more sex that those males would otherwise get. What other way is there to explain this, considering females are having the same amount of sex, but males get less, and you need both to tango. You said it yourself: Female sexual frequency is essentially unchanged since 2000. And if less males fuck, someone has to keep up with all the fucking. I apologize for language, but I cannot possibly explain this in simpler terms.
So what piece did we miss, "ifstudies"?
Do you even read the data you show?
GSS data contains: People who never married, and "average" of people who had zero sexual partners and no sexual encounters.
NSFG data contains: People who never married (JFL)
NHANES data contains: People who never married and who never married and live with a partner (JFLx2)
In 2018, where seldom anyone below 30 marries, what do you expect to see here? That people living with a partner that they are not married to are having sex? Well, data supports that one for sure. Not sure if we needed studies for this one, though.
It's a rule of thumb. It will never be perfectly 20% and 80%.
Damn, for a rule of thumb, that's pretty damn accurate. Small group of top males are having a go with majority of the females. Damn. And if it's truly stable, that means concerning to my previous findings that the standards are rising pretty damn hard. Since that top 20% of males will be in a lesser group. I think for now, 20/60 rule is fine by me. Still means that 80% of males fight for 40% of females. That's twice as much. Even if we pair everyone 1-to-1, what happens to the 40% of men for who there's no one? Weak argument considering they say "sex" and not "partners", and I don't know how to define it. Very misleading. Data missing on women as well. No real source given outside of "GSS" which has like billion different things.
Your findings are not supported by any data. GSS Does not have 'Top sexual males" rankings. If you do not publish data, releasing statements might as well be treated as fantasy. I imagine they're, as has been shown, again misinterpreting existing data. I don't even know what GSS data they used to interpret this so I cannot verify it myself. Also it wouldn't make sense if it's true unless it's relative findings, since, as shown before, someone has to keep up with the additional "sex" even though less males have it.
What the fuck? I mean marriage is when a woman and a man get together. Why is that problem only concerning males, then? Hello? You just said that female sexlessness is virtually unchanged, so, who are those women having sex with? Why do they not have a problem with marriage? Who are they marrying, if they are? Something is going on here. But marriages are on the decline in general! Why are you blaming young men for this?
Then... if marriage is on the decline.. why is female's celibacy rate not rising? I mean, if young men don't marry, young women would not either. Most marriages are within the same age range, more or less. So I don't get what you're trying to say. It takes two to tango, you know? Both in sex and marriage. Or are they saying no marriage only leaves men sexless?
Why does it only concerns males if that's true? Wouldn't women's relative difference in sexlessness in never married females be the fucking same? But it clearly isn't according to data? Maybe they are saying women are having tremendously more sex outside of marriage compared to men and that it's terribly hard for males to have sex outside of marriage. Well that would make sense. Isn't that what we were saying for quite a while here on incels.is? It simply means some men cannot have sex without the institution of marriage, then. To some degree, at least.
Again, then why does it not affect women relatively speaking?
You need two to marry. A woman and a man. Well, same-sex marriages exist too I guess. But I don't think that's relevant here.
I will skip the education and housing problem, it's obvious to everyone.
This whole argument is based on wrong data interpretation. Men are twice more sexless relatively speaking. Look at the data. If it was a marriage problem, we would see such a steep increase not only for men, but for women as well. And yet, relative difference between sexless men and women is the highest in recorded history. Explain this.
Last edited:
