Do men, on average, have more sex partners than women.

[Pure]

Many studies say so. If they are incorrect, how does one explain such findings?


The Myth, the Math, the Sex


By GINA KOLATA
Published: August 12, 2007

EVERYONE knows men are promiscuous by nature. It’s part of the genetic strategy that evolved to help men spread their genes far and wide. The strategy is different for a woman, who has to go through so much just to have a baby and then nurture it. She is genetically programmed to want just one man who will stick with her and help raise their children.

Surveys bear this out. In study after study and in country after country, men report more, often many more, sexual partners than women.
One survey, recently reported by the federal government, concluded that men had a median of seven female sex partners. Women had a median of four male sex partners. Another study, by British researchers, stated that men had 12.7 heterosexual partners in their lifetimes and women had 6.5.

But there is just one problem, mathematicians say. It is logically impossible for heterosexual men to have more partners on average than heterosexual women. Those survey results cannot be correct.
It is about time for mathematicians to set the record straight, said David Gale, an emeritus professor of mathematics at the University of California, Berkeley.

“Surveys and studies to the contrary notwithstanding, the conclusion that men have substantially more sex partners than women is not and cannot be true for purely logical reasons,” Dr. Gale said.
He even provided a proof, writing in an e-mail message:

“By way of dramatization, we change the context slightly and will prove what will be called the High School Prom Theorem. We suppose that on the day after the prom, each girl is asked to give the number of boys she danced with. These numbers are then added up giving a number G. The same information is then obtained from the boys, giving a number B.
Theorem: G=B

Proof: Both G and B are equal to C, the number of couples who danced together at the prom. Q.E.D.”
Sex survey researchers say they know that Dr. Gale is correct. Men and women in a population must have roughly equal numbers of partners. So, when men report many more than women, what is going on and what is to be believed?

“I have heard this question before,” said Cheryl D. Fryar, a health statistician at the National Center for Health Statistics and a lead author of the new federal report, “Drug Use and Sexual Behaviors Reported by Adults: United States, 1999-2002,” which found that men had a median of seven partners and women four.

But when it comes to an explanation, she added, “I have no idea.”

“This is what is reported,” Ms. Fryar said. “The reason why they report it I do not know.”

 

[xssve]

Men brag more, we drink beer and tell lies, it's our biological nature.

I've never know a sexually active woman who didn't have more partners than her equivilent male counterpart, it anecdotal, but frankly, it easier for even a woman overweight and... uncomley by popular societal standards to score than it is for even the average man, let alone the overweight etc.

If a woman can't score, it's because she's actively avoiding it.

 

[angela146]

Women are just more prolific liars.

If you want some real statistics, do some (covert) genetic testing of fathers and children to see if men are really the biological fathers of the children they think they have sired. (Yeah, that would be unethical but covert methods are the only way of getting accurate numbers).

It has always been to a woman's advantage to have multiple men *believe* that they *could* be the father of her children.

In the old days, the non-husband partner was motivated to support the woman if he believed the child was his. He might not have supported her anywhere near as much as her husband but he would usually protect her and the child or provide some kind of covert support.

Also, a woman married to a rich but not necessarily handsome or physically strong husband might conceive a child by a "hunk" and have the best of both worlds: the economic resources of her husband and the good genetics of her lover.

Look at it this way... if women didn't have multiple partners, there would be no need for "sperm wars".

In my own case, my husband and I have had a few sexual relationships outside our marriage and a few joint sexual relationships with other people. I have had more partners than he has *but* that's only if you include the women I have had sex with.

If you count only hetero relationships. It's almost exactly even (at the moment). That's cuz my husband isn't bisexual and I am.

 

[xssve]

Generally speaking, women typically have more to lose by not lying, and/or by being caught - over time, a significant selection stressor for discretion.

Men, of course, enhance their reputations by lying, or more accurately think they do - probobly why they're so bad at it, not a significant selection stressor.

 

[Stella_Omega]

But there is just one problem, mathematicians say. It is logically impossible for heterosexual men to have more partners on average than heterosexual women.

HA! We're talking about sex-- good luck with finding logic in it!

As far as I know, it's more or less true that women on the average have fewer partners than men-- on the average. But there are certainly some women who take up the slack... so to speak.

 

[Pure]

i think 'logically impossible' is a bit stronger than that, stella. it's not just 'logic defying.'

here is an example: it is logically impossible that i have only one child, and she is a teenager, and is 8 years old.

it is logically impossible that tom hit mary, but mary was not hit by tom.


====
my own explanation would be that the *median* woman probably does have fewer partners than the median man, that is lining up the women in order of number of partners, lets say 1000 women, then looking at woman 500 in the lineup.

when there are some women who, as prostitutes, see 500 men in a year, they affect the average; they pull it up, so that the *average* for women is equal to that for men.**

to use an analogy, if you include bill gates and w. buffet in calculations of the 'average income' of americans, it looks substantially higher than one might imagine. a truer picture is the median income. what that 500th man out of a 1000 makes in a year.

---

** a slightly different point, is that the studies, in gathering data for their averages, likely excluded the very busy prostitutes.

 

[Stella_Omega]

i think 'logically impossible' is a bit stronger than that, stella. it's not just 'logic defying.'

here is an example: it is logically impossible that i have only one child, and she is a teenager, and is 8 years old.

it is logically impossible that tom hit mary, but mary was not hit by tom.

SO-- you're saying that SOME women should have reported such high numbers that it would balance the reports out? I guess-- they didn't ask the right women-- Or perhaps someone was lying, huh?

That's what I mean by logic and sex being incompatible!

 

[impressive]

I can't comment ... 'cause it'd make me look like a slut.









Oh, wait ... nevermind.

 

[Belegon]

I can't comment ... 'cause it'd make me look like a slut.

Oh, wait ... nevermind.

wanton slut.

..and we're all very happy for that, ain't we AH????

Damn straight! errr..... Bi! errr.... oh whatever.

 

[Sapphire_O]

Maybe it's semantics. I have male friends who count the times they did oral or even manual. But I only count penetration. So they look sluttier than me bc we count differently.

 

[JamesSD]

Men overreport. Women underreport.

When you have totally anonymous surveys as opposed to giving an answer to a questioner, the gap narrows. What's interesting is that even in totally anonymous surveys, there's still a difference.

One popular hypothesis is that it has a lot to do with mental rounding. A man who has had 13 sex partners might just think of it as "about 15", where a woman might say "about 10". The effect of this could be even greater in higher ranges, where a man with 34 partners might round up to 40, where a woman with the same number might go down to 30.

There's always the possibility too that men are folding surreptitious bisexual experiences into their heterosexual partners.

 

[rgraham666]

I'm with Stella.

Getting honest figures would require people to be honest about their sex lives.

We can't even get most people to sing the national anthem in the same key. Good luck getting them to not lie about sex.

 

[Chantilyvamp]

I'm with Stella.

Getting honest figures would require people to be honest about their sex lives.

We can't even get most people to sing the national anthem in the same key. Good luck getting them to not lie about sex.

Or even to agree on what is countable sex

 

[jomar]

I thought the numbers that way because all the guys were having sex with the same 12 cheerleaders and Tri Deltas.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

So, there can be mean differences but also modal differences?

How is that not reasonable?

 

[Pure]

maybe you could explain your comment a bit, joe?

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Well, we're saying that stats tell us that men claim 7 partners on average and women claim 4 (let's just make it simple and go with that) and we're having a problem figuring out how that can be true--given a finite number of people are interacting exclusively together (another 'just to make it simple" kind of thing).

Well, first off--averages are not just a matter of adding up numbers and dividing by the subjects. There's a lot more information in a set of numbers than that.

So, there can be mean differences (difference in the average for men and women), but what about the rest of the sample--and the study listed median differences? What about the modal differences? How many partners did men have /most often/? 7? 5? And then, how many partners did women have most often? 4? 3?

Is it the case that men can have a mode of 7 partners and women 4? Well, sure. If there are a few women having many many partners, but most women only have 4--perhaps the averages would be more similar in that case.

How did the study deal with outliers? What was the standard deviation from the mean? Was that the same for both men and women?

I'm one of those people that don't think "stats can mean anything" or "statistics are lies" or "you can manipulate statistics to say anything" or any other such stuff--I think that's naivity (sp?) and a lack of understanding of stats talking. There's a ton of information in there and there can be many differences and similarities between the samples of men and women that we're not getting with just mean average.

 

[JamesSD]

I also would be quite interested in looking at the raw data sets for these studies. It's important to note that they looked at median, not mean.
Still, there's going to be misreporting no matter what, especially among women with very high numbers and men with very low numbers (especially zero).

 

[WRJames]

Part of the discrepancy may be in the interpretation of what a "sex partner" is. Yeah -- I know, this sounds pretty obvious, but look at this link

Conceptualization and measurement of homosexuality in sex surveys: a critical review

To quote

Definition of "sex"

The 1992 U.S. National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS) 18 focused on sex partners dividing questions about sexual behavior into sections devoted to primary partnerships (marital or cohabitational partners), partners in the previous year, and total lifetime partners. Questions about first sex were asked later in a section dealing with childhood and adolescence. The primary definition of sex appears at the beginning of the section on recent partners (previous year) and defines "sex or sexual activity" as "mutually voluntary activity with another person that involves genital contact and excitement/arousal, i.e., feeling really turned on, even if intercourse or orgasm did not occur" 18 (p. 622). Since partners are enumerated in this section, homosexuality is not mentioned directly and instead is inferred from the partner's gender.

In the British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (NATSAL) 17, the first sexual behavior question is about "sexual experience" in a Kinsey scale format and is asked in the face-to-face portion of the questionnaire on a card which is handed to the respondent. It defines "sexual experience" as "any kind of contact with another person that you felt was sexual (it could be just kissing or touching, or intercourse or any other form of sex)" 17 (p. 402). This question is used to determine whether or not respondents receive the self-administered portion of the questionnaire detailing sexual partners and activities.

Now -- is it possible that men and women might classify the same event differently?

 

[Stella_Omega]

I also would be quite interested in looking at the raw data sets for these studies. It's important to note that they looked at median, not mean.
Still, there's going to be misreporting no matter what, especially among women with very high numbers and men with very low numbers (especially zero).

I'd think women with median numbers are more likely to downplay their encounters-- but now we're getting off on a tangent...

 

[Liar]

Now -- is it possible that men and women might classify the same event differently?

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky."

("She just blew me now and then.")

 

[CharleyH]

Many studies say so. If they are incorrect, how does one explain such findings?


The Myth, the Math, the Sex


By GINA KOLATA
Published: August 12, 2007

EVERYONE knows men are promiscuous by nature. It’s part of the genetic strategy that evolved to help men spread their genes far and wide. The strategy is different for a woman, who has to go through so much just to have a baby and then nurture it. She is genetically programmed to want just one man who will stick with her and help raise their children.

Surveys bear this out. In study after study and in country after country, men report more, often many more, sexual partners than women.
One survey, recently reported by the federal government, concluded that men had a median of seven female sex partners. Women had a median of four male sex partners. Another study, by British researchers, stated that men had 12.7 heterosexual partners in their lifetimes and women had 6.5.

But there is just one problem, mathematicians say. It is logically impossible for heterosexual men to have more partners on average than heterosexual women. Those survey results cannot be correct.
It is about time for mathematicians to set the record straight, said David Gale, an emeritus professor of mathematics at the University of California, Berkeley.

“Surveys and studies to the contrary notwithstanding, the conclusion that men have substantially more sex partners than women is not and cannot be true for purely logical reasons,” Dr. Gale said.
He even provided a proof, writing in an e-mail message:

“By way of dramatization, we change the context slightly and will prove what will be called the High School Prom Theorem. We suppose that on the day after the prom, each girl is asked to give the number of boys she danced with. These numbers are then added up giving a number G. The same information is then obtained from the boys, giving a number B.
Theorem: G=B

Proof: Both G and B are equal to C, the number of couples who danced together at the prom. Q.E.D.”
Sex survey researchers say they know that Dr. Gale is correct. Men and women in a population must have roughly equal numbers of partners. So, when men report many more than women, what is going on and what is to be believed?

“I have heard this question before,” said Cheryl D. Fryar, a health statistician at the National Center for Health Statistics and a lead author of the new federal report, “Drug Use and Sexual Behaviors Reported by Adults: United States, 1999-2002,” which found that men had a median of seven partners and women four.

But when it comes to an explanation, she added, “I have no idea.”

“This is what is reported,” Ms. Fryar said. “The reason why they report it I do not know.”

Men like to think they have more lovers - but in my experience? Men like to cuddle more than women.

 

[3113]

Do the surveys only count heterosexual encounters? Ask a guy how many sexual partners he's had and he may answer "5"--and two of them might have been guys. Even if you specify "heterosexual" he might lie and toss in the two guys.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I voted "yes" for a couple of reasons. One is double counting. A man might have sex with a woman, have sex with her again two years later, and again five years latr, and count her as three women. She would count him as one man.

And, of course, there is out and out lying, with men overstating and women understating, or rounding up and rounding down.

And, of courwse a definition of sex. If a male got a hand job, he might have counted that, while the girl or woman did not.

And, of course there are prostitutes. One woman will service thousands of men, but those partners will not be included in the totals if you don't ask her. Even if you do ask her, she might not even count them, thinking of it as business, rather than sex.

 

[Pure]

the why.

i think w r james and othes are right that different definition of 'sex partner' are being used, or different definitions of 'sex'.

i can see that, *as a rule* the man may count blow jobs [as 'sex], and the woman may not (nor pussy lickings).

these are practices in answering an ordinary, question about 'sex-partners'. and they are in line with the well noted propensity of the man to 'up' his numbers and the woman to lower hers.

put the man in front of a grand jury on a 'fornication'-with-a-minor charge, or in front of a suspicious wife (Has you cheated on me?) or the local priest (Have you committed adultery?), and you'll see him lean the other way, in the manner Clinton made famous (bj's don't count as 'sexual relations').