Culture Have More Sex Please



By Magdalene J. Taylor
Ms. Taylor is a writer covering sex and culture.

Sex is good. Sex is healthy. Sex is an essential part of our social fabric. And you — specifically — should probably be having more of it.
Americans, in the midst of a loneliness epidemic, are not having enough sex. Across almost every demographic group, American adults old and young, single and coupled, rich and poor are having less sex than they have had at any point in at least the past three decades.

Sex isn’t the sole form of fulfilling human interaction and certainly isn’t a salve for loneliness in all forms. Still, it should be seen as a critical part of our social well-being, not an indulgence or an afterthought. This is in large part because the rise in loneliness closely parallels a decline in sex. More than a quarter of Americans hadn’t had sex even once in the past year the last time the General Social Survey asked, in 2021. It was the highest such level of sexlessness in the survey’s history.

That figure includes almost 30 percent of men under 30, a figure that has tripled since 2008. In the 1990s, about half of Americans were having sex weekly or more — that figure is now under 40 percent. For many who are having sex, the frequency has dropped precipitously. And it’s not just sex: Partnership and cohabitation are down, too. Less time spent with friends and lovers — these aren’t distinct issues but symptoms of the same cultural malaise, an isolation that is demolishing Americans’ social lives, love lives and happiness.

Estimates vary, but somewhere between a third and two-thirds of Americans report being lonely. Loneliness exists on a feedback loop: Fraying cultural bonds, damaged physical health and reduced social contact both exacerbate loneliness and are exacerbated by it, to the point that loneliness lowers life expectancy. Loneliness is a challenging phenomenon for researchers to quantify, but there are telltale signs — and they point to a society losing its way. The number of Americans who report having no close friends at all has quadrupled since 1990, according to a Survey Center on American Life study. An average American in 2021 spent 58 percent less time with friends than in 2013, the Census Bureau found.

Covid-19 has contributed to the spike in loneliness and the decline in sex, but is only partially responsible. Between 2014 and 2019, the decrease in time people spent with friends was greater than it was during the pandemic. And during the pandemic, many Americans spent more and more time alone, with neither friends nor romantic partners. Younger Americans are, infamously, less likely to have sex than their parents’ generations — and when they do have sex, they’re doing it with fewer partners.

In my work as a writer covering sex and culture, I have spoken to dozens of men for whom a lack of sex is the defining characteristic of their daily life. It shapes their interests, their motivations, their hopes. Some are incels — short for “involuntary celibates,” believers in a toxic, misogynistic ideology — but more are not. Some believe the pursuit of sex will be entirely futile. In turn, they’ve begun to interpret going out, spending time with friends and meeting new people as futile, too. This thinking becomes cyclical — soon, they’re not only afraid of failing to find a sexual partner but they also grow to fear even platonic social interactions. Sex is only one component of their overall isolation but is in many cases the one upon which the overall problem hinges.
It’s easy to brush these men off as anomalies, or to label their state as a result of personal failings or even the consequences of modern masculinity. But while much of the research around the decline in sex focuses upon young men, almost every group of Americans is experiencing the absence of sex — and the consequences are profound. If a lack of sex is affecting the cultural and social participation of these young men, it’s likely to be affecting the rest of us, too. A lack of sex can easily translate into less socialization, fewer families and a sicker population: Sex reduces pain, relieves stress, improves sleep, lowers blood pressure and strengthens heart health.

Writers like myself have made male sexlessness a well-known issue, even as women are in the same bind. Data from the General Social Survey actually suggests they may be having even less sex than men. In 2021, roughly a quarter of women under 35 reported having had no sex in the past year. For men, the figure was 19 percent. And women who are having sex are less likely to be happy with the sex they’re having. Both men and women report feelings of regret and unhappiness following casual sex, but it’s more common among women — probably in part because of cultural perceptions of sexual autonomy. Sex can bring people together, but that only works when it’s good sex.

Not only are women and men marching together into sexlessness; they’re also on the same road to loneliness. Young women were more likely than men to report losing touch with friends during the pandemic, and a British study found that women were more likely than men to report feeling lonely “often” or “always.” Reporting often focuses on young-male sexlessness — and on incel ideology — but the decline in sex and rise in loneliness and social isolation are not male problems. In 21st-century America, loneliness is essentially omnipresent, and the high schooler’s cliché fear that “everyone else is having sex” has never been less true.

There is no one solution. The loneliness epidemic has been brought about by myriad factors that have been exacerbated over decades. Social media is one culprit; the 20th century’s war of attrition against walkable communities is another. But as loneliness has accelerated, it has become self-perpetuating: Our current societal loneliness — and sexlessness — is a result of social and cultural shifts, while its continuation perpetuates those shifts further.

The loneliness epidemic may be a societal issue, but it can be solved, at least partly, at the level of individual bedrooms. Those of us in a position to be having more sex ought to be doing so. Here is the rare opportunity to do something for the betterment of the world around you that involves nothing more than indulging in one of humanity’s most essential pleasures.

Having more sex is both personal guidance — your doctor might well agree — and a political statement. American society is less connected, made up of individuals who seem increasingly willing to isolate themselves. Having more sex can be an act of social solidarity.

Not everyone who wants to have more sex is easily capable of doing so. Disabilities, religious objections, asexuality and any set of day-to-day restrictions and responsibilities curtail or close off sex for many. There may be some who simply do not want to have more sex, or any sex at all. But even those who won’t have more sex should avoid apathy. Sex is intrinsic to a society built on social connection — and right now, our connections and our sex lives are collapsing alongside each other.

Many people — like some of the young men I have spoken to in my work — have resigned themselves to displacing their sexual desires, relying entirely on porn or other online stimuli, mirroring so many types of relationships that have been subsumed into the digital world. As a balm for loneliness, digital sex can be little better than digital friendship — a source of envy, resentfulness and spite, a driver of loneliness rather than a cure for it. It’s no match for the real thing.
So, anyone capable should have sex — as much as they can, as pleasurably as they can, as often as they can.

Magdalene J. Taylor is a writer covering sex and culture. She writes the newsletter “Many Such Cases.”
 
I've heard someone say it before, but I'll reiterate in my own words: game is a quality of low value (in terms of character) men and women. Any woman you can get into bed by playing mind games with is not someone you want to actually be with. At best, you'll fuck her and move on. If you could do it so easily, there's likely a dozen other men that already have. Why would you be the one who stays?

If you're just in it for sex, okay. You deal with that mess. I'd rather not bother.
I dunno, man. I've heard horror stories of supposed good quality women completely derailing a relationship because she decided to do a shit test. Maybe I just need to find more of these quality women but they seem rarer than a heterosexual in a democrat rally.
 
You know why "You can have it all" worked so well? Women want opposing things. And when they get them, it leaves them unsatisfied: freedom and security, responsibility and victimhood, power and vulnerability, and to be loved by everyone and to be loved by a special someone. Used to be father would tell them how stupid being undecided was, but their mothers got rid of that. We weren't meant to be dating, a useless ineffective mess for finding a lifetime mate. Men want opposing things too, but we know from actually having to get them having it both ways all the time is impossible.

The reality is you can only have things one way or you'll end up with nothing.

you can keep them
if they could be seduced by 'bad men' they were bad women
I mean there are plenty of nice guys and "good men" who have had keen interest in bad women. It's not always indicative of the person themselves, back when I was more naive one of my first crushes was a mean/bad girl. Yeah, I'm not exactly a "niceguy/good ma" anymore, but I don't think the world is so lacking nuance of good or bad.

This 'game' sounds absolutely exhausting to participate in. You have to know when a girl is genuinely interested but you blew it or if she's still interested and is playing hard to get, you need to know how friendly is too friendly or how aloof is too aloof, etc.

I just want shit to make sense. Girl goes out of her way to show interest and I return it but then she goes cold; why do I then have to play the "in or out" game with risk of looking like a massive creep for guessing wrong? Fucking batshit, man.
Oh no, that's completely fair and I've lost some girls who play some of those games. If they go cold I cut off contact, they have to come to me, if they don't, well I move on fast. It is really shitty and one of those issues in modern dating for certain and it often jades men pretty quickly. A wise man once said treat them like replaceable accessories. If they want to maintain permanent residency in your life, they'll let you know.

I can understand why many give up these days make no mistake, I just think the first step isn't often that big an issue. Don't change for a girl, ever even if you want to keep her. Too friendly, that girl was always planning on friending you. Only advice in that is just tell them up front, if they start drawing distance they're out, they treat you like a friend, you are gone. It worked for my brother and the few successful men (at the moment at least) I know. Sometimes being upfront is a good thing.

I've heard someone say it before, but I'll reiterate in my own words: game is a quality of low value (in terms of character) men and women. Any woman you can get into bed by playing mind games with is not someone you want to actually be with. At best, you'll fuck her and move on. If you could do it so easily, there's likely a dozen other men that already have. Why would you be the one who stays?

If you're just in it for sex, okay. You deal with that mess. I'd rather not bother.
Girls always shit test, that isn't to be confused with game. Sometimes they do to see if you're honest and straightforward and who you say you are. It's not always a test of the woman's characters but the man's as well. If you start to simp and fail the shit test they realize you were never who you claimed to be. It sucks but shit testing has existed as far as I've known girls in general.
 
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
Boomhauer is a ladies' man, to many it seems that he has no trouble picking up women. He drives a sports car, and I assume must be attractive for a middle-aged heavily accented Texan. This is his method. He strikes out 99 times for every women he gets with, which is pretty realistic. What matters is he doesn't give a shit about what the 99 say to him.
 
"The Game" is a meme and we all lost.

Now you're wondering where the meme even came from. The answer is yes.
Also I'm happy the game bullshit is dying fuck thots. Both literally and figuratively.

White chicks trying to earn the "I'm not racist" card.
Also daddy issues mixed with being socially retarded and trying to play "the game."
It's like those catholics marrying at 19 and then divorcing within weeks. They were told something is good. Then reality hits them faster than their husband did.
 
Marriage isn't supposed to be fun. It's a life long commitment for family, not love.
also lol
That's the joke. Those retards think it's a free pass for sex instead of a lifelong commitment. Cuz their upbringing literally taught them the rammifications of not fucking someone they haven't married, all punishment and no instructions essentially.
Then they realized they married someone they should've just pumped and dumped.

It's a paradox created by a bunch of pent up oversexed retards glorifying something as something it isn't due to not having sex. Much like what "the game" is, but in reverse. Hence the analogy.
 
Persistence used to at least work, nowadays if you're persistent with a woman you're at serious risk of social pariahness, if not actual legal trouble.

Goddamn I wish women made sense.

The basic problem is women want to do this hard-to-get game stuff, which is fine, but they also want to be able to have you fired from your job if you lose the game. And if you win, you just get to cum in her a few times before moving on, no family or anything in it for you.

Stakes are too high, prize is too low.
 
There is some element of game that I find ok, women are controlled by their emotions and being resistant makes sense otherwise women would just submit to the worst of men who pressure them. They already do to some extent, but I digress, the good men gotta step up their game or lose to the bad men. Just how it is. I don't endorse going too overboard in such "games." from women but you can always test your luck to see if you can get some success. Haven't been arrested so far... Though to be fair, with how ladies are these days: yet.

Girls who put out easily usually come with a whole host of other baggage. More and more guys are making the cost benefit analysis and find "the game" draining, as well as having to deal with a girls drama.

The ones that have everything together usually have other demands of you. Status/Economic demands. And they are still as stupid an emotional as the girls above.

All for what? 30 mins of fun? Where they barely have anything interesting to say afterwards.

Fuck that.
 
Girls who put out easily usually come with a whole host of other baggage. More and more guys are making the cost benefit analysis and find "the game" draining, as well as having to deal with a girls drama.

The ones that have everything together usually have other demands of you. Status/Economic demands.

All for what? 30 mins of fun?

Women can go fuck themselves.
Personally I find the more women interested in a man the more valuable that women find him. You don't have to screw pumpndumpers, or even do more than be friends with some female friends.

In the same vain women use orbiters, and simps to "heighten" their value, I believe the same is a good tool for men. A good women shouldn't need super status, but having potential competition, understanding you have worth, and options doesn't hurt. That may be just me. I'm not saying the game of dating these days isn't shit, but merely if we're going to play poker, deal with the cards you are dealt and make the best of it.

I compare it to online gaming, many games are full of modding douchebags these days, you can abstain from online games, and just say "Fuck hackers and modders" or you can improve a bit, to the point you can beat most but the most severe hacks and mods and beat their ass, and mock them for it. The former is easier option, but the latter is far more satisfying by using the metrics to your advantage. Or you could compare to jobs being shit these days and bosses being total faggots, life sucking for most people, etc.

I don't blame those who give up, but I prefer to turn the tables instead of submitting to the easiest outcome in any of those scenarios.
 
Personally I find the more women interested in a man the more valuable that women find him. You don't have to screw pumpndumpers, or even do more than be friends with some female friends.

If you find one of these female friends in todays modern culture that is capably of holding herself together, and have an interesting convo,I owe you a drink.
 
Personally I find the more women interested in a man the more valuable that women find him. You don't have to screw pumpndumpers, or even do more than be friends with some female friends.

In the same vain women use orbiters, and simps to "heighten" their value, I believe the same is a good tool for men. A good women shouldn't need super status, but having potential competition, understanding you have worth, and options doesn't hurt. That may be just me. I'm not saying the game of dating these days isn't shit, but merely if we're going to play poker, deal with the cards you are dealt and make the best of it.

I compare it to online gaming, many games are full of modding douchebags these days, you can abstain from online games, and just say "Fuck hackers and modders" or you can improve a bit, to the point you can beat most but the most severe hacks and mods and beat their ass, and mock them for it. The former is easier option, but the latter is far more satisfying by using the metrics to your advantage. Or you could compare to jobs being shit these days and bosses being total faggots, life sucking for most people, etc.

I don't blame those who give up, but I prefer to turn the tables instead of submitting to the easiest outcome in any of those scenarios.
sweet jesus why doesn't anybody just get married
 
I'd argue the opportunity to be around "decent people" simply isn't that compelling. People just aren't sufficiently interesting to endure a lot of nonsense for.

Internet interaction is alluring because, shallow as it may be, the small effort you put in is commensurate with what you get out of it.
Agreed. Normies are horribly boring and talk about the stupidest shit. I don't care about sports ball. I don't care about what's on TV. I could give a toss about the latest Marvel or Star Wars product there is to CONSOOM.

You know what gives you rather reliable sex and some other neat perks?

A long-time relationship or marriage.
Shocking, I know.
That's a good one. Women change. They always change.

The reason people are having less sex (and less meaningful rekationships) is because people have less friends in general nowadays. You don’t have to get to know anyone in your community, or join any groups, or even go to a workplace to meet people now that you can get all your social stimuli and fulfill all your obligations over the internet. The internet is just easier for a lot of people. Who are you gonna have sex with when you’re isolated human interaction?

Just like watching porn is the path of least resistance for getting off, making Discord friends and keeping up with social media is the path of least resistance for establishing a relationship with another human being. Doesn’t help that the parasocial allure of camgirls, ethots, and vtubers are seemingly irresistible to the terminally online.

 
This 'game' sounds absolutely exhausting to participate in. You have to know when a girl is genuinely interested but you blew it or if she's still interested and is playing hard to get, you need to know how friendly is too friendly or how aloof is too aloof, etc.

I just want shit to make sense. Girl goes out of her way to show interest and I return it but then she goes cold; why do I then have to play the "in or out" game with risk of looking like a massive creep for guessing wrong? Fucking batshit, man.
From a risk/reward perspective it makes zero sense to participate in this unless you place extremely high value on being sexually active. And even that itself carries a fairly high degree of risk. Maybe this is just sour grapes because I am far too socially awkward to engage in "game", but even if I could I don't think I'd want to anyway.
 
From a risk/reward perspective it makes zero sense to participate in this unless you place extremely high value on being sexually active. And even that itself carries a fairly high degree of risk. Maybe this is just sour grapes because I am far too socially awkward to engage in "game", but even if I could I don't think I'd want to anyway.

What even is the end goal of the game? Is the goal to be like one of those elderly Hollywood stars that still manages to have a different twentysomething snatch to bust in every few weeks?
 
What even is the end goal of the game? Is the goal to be like one of those elderly Hollywood stars that still manages to have a different twentysomething snatch to bust in every few weeks?

Well..... yeah

19yr.jpg
 
Back