Tag Archives: Mark Regnerus

Nuance, sensitivity about ideal sex from sex god Ross Douthat

7 Mar

Today we have Ross Douthat from the NYTimes getting all conservative-orgasmy over the study that just came out saying American teenagers are fucking less than they used to.

Rather than examine this study, or even talk about it again in the column, Douthat skips over that task and just points back to the Mark Regnerus book about how pre-marital sex is ruining society. It’s so much easier! (Basically no one in the world is as good at selling books as Regnerus.) And it tells us what we have always known: slutty women are miserable.

Female emotional well-being seems to be tightly bound to sexual stability — which may help explain why overall female happiness has actually drifted downward since the sexual revolution.

Among the young people Regnerus and Uecker studied, the happiest women were those with a current sexual partner and only one or two partners in their lifetime. Virgins were almost as happy, though not quite, and then a young woman’s likelihood of depression rose steadily as her number of partners climbed and the present stability of her sex life diminished.

I did a takedown of the crap logic in the recent Slate article that Regnerus penned based on his research, and another one about his findings here. Basically Regnerus seeks to blame social breakdown on how women sleep around and supposedly make themselves miserable in the process since they can’t lock that husband shit down, etc. Anecdotal life evidence should also suggest to a sane person that he’s full of shit.

Douthat, like Regnerus, seems to want to locate the problems of modern sexuality with women’s choices. Why? I don’t know. Douthat has already written about his disgust at trying to have sex with a girl on birth control. Meanwhile, he was also in the room at the time.

Continue reading

Advertisements

“Sex/ women” ruining “everything/ men”

25 Feb

Oh my god THIS GUY AGAIN. I want this guy’s publicist, because he turns up fucking everywhere.

UT Austin sociology professor and conservative opinionator Mark Regnerus has a book about premarital sex he wants to shill, so he’s been around and about on the internet making strenuous arguments about how women — not men — engaging in casual sex is ruining society.

Here is an I-read-it-so-you-don’t-have-to breakdown of the latest turd he has dropped on the world, in Slate:

1. Mark, like other conservative opinion-havers, works on the cosmic premise that marriage is the best relationship endgame for everyone, and the best time for people to get married is in their early 20s. He never states that in this article, but it is implied and he has said it elsewhere.

2. Mark works on the absolute binary that women want committment, men want sex. Just look at the proof from this study he mentions:

In one frequently cited study, attractive young researchers separately approached opposite-sex strangers on Florida State University’s campus and proposed casual sex. Three-quarters of the men were game, but not one woman said yes.

Since women won’t sleep with some random guy who walks up to them, that means women don’t like sex as much as guys do. Good test! Which is why it makes even more sense that he uses this study about how women don’t like casual sex with strangers to set up his argument that:

3. Women are having too much casual (read: premarital) sex. They are giving it up so much that men no longer have to promise to commit in order to get sex.

Yes, sex is clearly cheap for men. Women’s “erotic capital,” as Catherine Hakim of the London School of Economics has dubbed it, can still be traded for attention, a job, perhaps a boyfriend, and certainly all the sex she wants, but it can’t assure her love and lifelong commitment. Not in this market. It’s no surprise that the percentage of 25- to 34-year-olds who are married has shrunk by an average of 1 percent each year this past decade.

Hear that, ladies? You are cheap.

What does Mark blame for all this cheapening?

1. Porn. Always blame porn.

2. Birth control, since no one had sex outside marriage before that.

3. Men earn less than they did in the 1970s, and women are becoming more successful.

There is a dedicated cabal of conservatives (e.g. Kay S. Hymowitz) who seriously view men vs. women’s success as a zero-sum game. Men have definitely been doing worse in life because of women, not because the median wage in the United States has been essentially flat since 1973.

Mark ends his piece on this insightful note:

As the authors of last year’s book Sex at Dawn: the Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality put it, “Societies in which women have lots of autonomy and authority tend to be decidedly male-friendly, relaxed, tolerant, and plenty sexy.” They’re right. But then try getting men to do anything.

So to sum up: women’s autonomy and authority causes men to do nothing. I look around me in the world today and think, yes, that is most certainly true.

Good job, Mark.

[Slate]