A report in today's ST entitled 'Guess who has the most sex?' reports the findings of the 'first comprehensive global (59 countries) study of sexual behaviour.'
The 'surprise findings':
1. 'Married people have most sex.'
2. 'People aren't losing their virginity at ever younger ages. Mid- to late teens is when both sees become sexually active.'
3. 'No firm link between promiscuity and sexually transmitted diseases.'
I will not bother to say much about findings #1 and #2 except that, depending on how you look at them, you might or might not be surprised.
However, I do find the reasoning for #3 - no firm link between promiscuity and STDs - rather weird.
This Professor who was involved in the study said that:
'they had expected to find the most promiscuous behaviour in regions like Africa with the highest rates of STDs. That was not the case, as multiple partners were more commonly reported in industrialised countries where the incidence of such diseases was relatively low.
She said this implied that promiscuity may be less important than factors such as poverty and education - especially in the encouragement of condom use - in the transmission of STDs.'
Now, depending on how you look at it, you could agree wholeheartedly with her. OR, you might think that:
1. STDs spread because of promiscuous behaviour.
2. If you are are poor and uneducated but are not promiscuous, you wouldn't get or transmit STDs (excepting circumstances such as if you happen to be married to a promiscuous spouse).
3. If you are rich, educated and promiscuous, you may not get or transmit STDs because you know about precautions and can afford them, not because you are not promiscuous.
4. Therefore, if you are promiscuous (rich or poor, educated or not), you are at risk of getting or transmitting STDs. Full-stop.
The 'surprise findings':
1. 'Married people have most sex.'
2. 'People aren't losing their virginity at ever younger ages. Mid- to late teens is when both sees become sexually active.'
3. 'No firm link between promiscuity and sexually transmitted diseases.'
I will not bother to say much about findings #1 and #2 except that, depending on how you look at them, you might or might not be surprised.
However, I do find the reasoning for #3 - no firm link between promiscuity and STDs - rather weird.
This Professor who was involved in the study said that:
'they had expected to find the most promiscuous behaviour in regions like Africa with the highest rates of STDs. That was not the case, as multiple partners were more commonly reported in industrialised countries where the incidence of such diseases was relatively low.
She said this implied that promiscuity may be less important than factors such as poverty and education - especially in the encouragement of condom use - in the transmission of STDs.'
Now, depending on how you look at it, you could agree wholeheartedly with her. OR, you might think that:
1. STDs spread because of promiscuous behaviour.
2. If you are are poor and uneducated but are not promiscuous, you wouldn't get or transmit STDs (excepting circumstances such as if you happen to be married to a promiscuous spouse).
3. If you are rich, educated and promiscuous, you may not get or transmit STDs because you know about precautions and can afford them, not because you are not promiscuous.
4. Therefore, if you are promiscuous (rich or poor, educated or not), you are at risk of getting or transmitting STDs. Full-stop.
Comments