US Rates High on Positive Sexual Relationships


I thought the US was supposed to be “hung up” about sex. Turns out we’re doing pretty well compared to the rest of the world, if you want to lend any credence to a new study. And I’m not saying I do, but here you go anyway.

A survey of nearly 30,000 middle aged and older people in nearly 30 countries, says that men are “more satisfied with their sex lives than women in the same age group” and that age has little to do with sexual well-being.

The survey also revealed that sex is better in Europe, North America and Australia than it is in the Far East.

Even better news: in the US “about three-quarters of men and two-thirds of women” reported they were very satisfied with their sexual relationships.

Still, a big caveat. I’m skeptical about some of the details — with these kind of surveys you get an awfully high “selection bias” that skews the results. You have to ask how the people who were willing to participate in the project differ from society at large. And I also wonder about the variables they were looking at to differentiate between the factors that contribute to a good sex life. The news report attributes having “more or less equal relationships” to positive findings. But that begs the question: what does “more or less equal” mean?

Well, it’s not rocket science, and you don’t need high-priced studies to tell you the answer. It’s just basic common-sense — a good sex life is rooted in a committed, married relationship founded on deep, enduring respect and consideration for each other. We have to be careful about the political freight “equality” brings — if equality degenerates into keeping score, you’ve lost the essence of caring for each other that keeps a love relationship alive.

Hat tip: My Way News.


You may also like...

1 Response

  1. Picnic 2006-04-24

    Today’s picnic basket of items from my blogroll.

    Jack Yoest has 10 simple rules…

    The Steel Deal says it’s time to cross the border … heading south

    Michelle Malkin looks at Penn State’s latest round of censorship


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *