Subscribe
Previous Post
When the going gets tough, do the tough withhold sex? Maybe. According to a new study, women who don’t feel like they are treated as equals with their male counterparts tend not to offer as much sex.
Published in The Journal of Social Psychology, researchers found there’s more sex in countries with higher gender equality, theorizing that when women don’t have as much to offer (meaning a career, an education or their own income), they tend to be more conservative about having sex. But, when women have a higher economic status in society, they have sex more freely.
Study author, Roy Baumeister explains:
If women don’t have many opportunities to make money on their own, they need the value of sex to be as high as possible. When women don’t have other opportunities, sex is the main thing she has to offer.
Baumeister found that countries with more gender equality had more casual sex, more sexual partners and more open-mindedness towards premarital sex.
He also says that men will do whatever is necessary to get sex, even if it means marrying a woman:
In countries where women are at a big disadvantage, they restrain sex, so the price is high and men make a lifetime commitment to support them to get sex.
It’s an interesting theory, but I’m not totally buying the rationale. First of all, sex is the “main thing” a woman has to offer? Really? Secondly, they may chalk up a woman’s sexuality to gender equality–or a lack of it, but in reality, how open a woman is about having sex is much more personal. Gender equality is generally societal based, not so much something that is evaluated on an individual relationship. It has to do with economic fairness, cultural shifts, equal employment opportunities and women’s rights. Sex, on the other hand, has more to do with how a woman feels about herself and how her man treats her–not how society as a whole treats her.
Having said that, I do believe that in a society where there are more opportunities for women, we have more opportunities to feel better about ourselves and score a great guy. But, it’s still the individual that makes the difference–not society. Because we all know that you can have the biggest, most unfair, jerk-of-a-boss in the world, but if you come home to a man who is sensitive and caring with dinner on the table and the laundry folded, you’re probably gonna have sex.
Photo: Thinkstock
I think The Journal of Social Psychology is wrong! Women with a higher economic status in society are not free with sex. I find this to be very stupid. And the rest of the article from The Journal of Social Psychology is wrong too. I think they are egocentric, egoistic, egomania, egotism and egotist dumb people. I can read them loud and clear, they are the type that would treat women badly on a job.
And for Roy Baumeister he is egocentric, egoistic, egomania, egotism and egotist. He must use rosey and her five sisters too much. I bet he listens to too many sick male clients that are also just like him, they for sure need a head management doctor, because they are all sick in the head. I think men that dislike women have major sexual problems, they do not know how to satisfy a lady, so they have to come up with lies, so they can make themselves look good. But in reality they are not good men, they probably had terrible mothers.
Nice and caring real men build women up, they know and understand how to build a lady up, but men that do not do this are stupid! And the stupid men usually master-bate all the time, they use rosey and her five sisters all the time while masterbating. Rosey is the hand and five sisters are the fingers. And they make terrible bosses on jobs.
Roy and his weird friends probably prey on vulnerable women, they are sick men in my books, they have major problems!
Roy is the type that makes poor folks look bad, he judges the poor. Just because some one is poor does not mean that they are like this. Many poor people raise their kids good, so Roy the dumb ass hole is wrong! When people judge and throw stones at poor folks, it hits my nerves too much, because I know alot of poor folks that nurture their kids better than rich folks. Mr Roy can go to hell!!! People with Roys attitudes are like men that prey upon the most vulnerable, they are scary people in my books.
I think Roy Baumeister and The Journal of Social Psychology is full of bull shit! They are so wrong and make me want to puke on them all, they are very very stupid and make women look bad!
Mr dumb ass Roy said, “if women don’t have many opportunities to make money on their own, they need the value of sex to be high as possible when women don’t have other opportunities, sex is the main thing she has to offer. He makes women sound like holes, he has attitudes towards women and sounds just like a sick old predator!
Predators are sick people!!!
And this advertisement can go to hell with The Journal of Social Psychology and Mr Dumb ass Roy Baumeister, they are sick people.
This article sounds like you didn’t read the study, and you’re commenting on something completely different. The study seems to indicate that when a woman is uneducated, poor, and seemingly with fewer options, she witholds sex to gain a higher foothold in life. In other words, in a third world country, a woman would use sex (or the lack therof) to secure a marriage proposal, thereby raising her status. The other side is that when a woman is being treated like a second class citizen by her significant other, she doesn’t give sex out as willingly. That makes perfect sense, and I don’t feel like we need a study to tell us that we don’t put out to jackasses.
It seems like you’re just talking about having a bad job and taking it out on your significant other, which doesn’t seem to relate.