Still a mystery of the universe: men report more sex partners than women.

[Pure]

Almost every poll, asking about partners of heterosexual persons, finds the men report two to four times more partners.

Why do you think that is?

No one really knows the answer to this baffling problem; great minds of both genders have not succeeded. Is it lies? delusions? what kinds?

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Almost every poll, asking about partners of heterosexual persons, finds the men report two to four times more partners.

Why do you think that is?

No one really knows the answer to this baffling problem; great minds of both genders have not succeeded. Is it lies? delusions? what kinds?

women (generally) equate sex and love... (now I'm saying this on Lit, where the balance is probably shifted considerably, so...)

men (generally) have an easier time with sex sans emotional attachment.

----

Or maybe they're all just lying dogs?

 

[Liar]

Theory #1.
Men: "I can't remeber what I did last night, so I probably fucked someone."

Theory #2
Too small a sample? They just happened not to ask the four or five women who have slept with all men.

Theory #3
A gentleman never tells. Nor does a lady. Gentlemen are rare.

 

[Guest]

Theory #1.
Men: "I can't remeber what I did last night, so I probably fucked someone."

Theory #2
Too small a sample? They just happened not to ask the four or five women who have slept with all men.

Theory #3
A gentleman never tells. Nor does a lady. Gentlemen are rare.

I think I'm going with Liar's explanation. I know that, of the guys I slept with when I was young and single, I was more experienced than half of them. For several, I was their second lover (for a couple, I was their first).

But, you know, telling anyone that I'd had more than 3 lovers was a bad thing. When asked, that's what I said, or I just shrugged and smiled. Men don't like a woman who is TOO much more experienced than they are, it seems -- when they are new and fragile, knowing she's a LITTLE more seems to be reassurring. If she's had a LOT more, they get very insecure -- In my experience, that is.

I'm a very reassuring sort of person

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

Different motivations and definitions. I'm just damn glad the concept of zero was developed or I'd never be able to participate in those polls.

Rumple Foreskin

 

[Pure]

speculations

P: Liar, I think there's something to your Theory #2, though it doesn't rule out other factors. My theory is a cousin of your theory.

Suppose one is a hundred women is a prostitute. Suppose the sample size is 1000. It would be easy to have only 5 prostitutes in the sample, *assuming pollsters reached them at all*.

Do the math. 995 women say (on average) 10 men each.
5 women say 500 men each.

The average per woman is only slightly affected,
Of 1000 women, average about 12.5 men each.

Now this assumes that the prostitutes have been reached and tell about their business contacts (count them in). Either assumption may be shakey.

Looking at the male side, suppose 15% see lots of prostitutes.

So, of 1000 men,

850 say 20 women, each.
150 say 200 women, each.

The male overall average shows the impact.

For all men, the average is now 30 each

So the effect was, in percentage terms, a 25% increase in the female average, but a 50% increase in the male average, and the latter had a larger base to begin with.

This of course assumes 1)the men report the commercial contacts as do the women, and 2) those those men were contacted. Well, 2) is far more likely than in the case of women.

As for 1) i think it highly possible, alternatively, that the men include the commercial ones, and the women do not, which would exaggerate the effect.

Of course, neither gender may be reporting them (so no effect, obviously).
---

Liar said in part:

Theory #2
Too small a sample? They just happened not to ask the four or five women who have slept with all men.

 

[R. Richard]

When I was in high school. there were guys who had fucked the 100 best looking girls in school and, in many claims, all in the same night. Of course, the guys were lying. Most of the girls had never fucked and had no idea of even how to do it. Of course, the girls were lying.

It would appear that the truth lies somewhere between zero and 100 per night.

 

[3113]

I like Liar's small sample theory as well--there's always that problem after all--is it a small sample? Is it a represenative sample?

I did tick off quite a few of the choices however (thanks for allowing multiple answers there!)--

I do think both lie.
I do think men round off (and up!) and count certain things that women wouldn't count. I can't see many women as counting a blow-job as sex. But a guy may or may not count it depending on circumstances (for stud factor, count it. If asked by wife about cheating, don't count it. "No, dear, never cheated on you....").

So when it comes to the question of partners in an anonymous poll, it's win-win with the answer. Guys can count all the quickies, near misses, blow-jobs...and, of course, round up to paint themselves as a stud (no need to tell the embarassing truth; that they've only had actual intercourse with two women); women, meanwhile, can downplay all the quickies and blow-jobs and near misses and paiint themselves as NOT a whore (only had intercourse with two men--all those others things don't count).

Of course, that also raises the question...what was the question asked by the poll takers. Did they just say, "How many women have you had sex with?" or did they say, "How many women have you had sexual intercourse with? Count only those involving penetration of the vagina."

If a poll taker leaves the interpetation of "sex" up to the person they're asking, then they really can't trust the answer they get. A guy might think that jacking off over a woman's foot counts as sex.

 

[Guest]

Of course, that also raises the question...what was the question asked by the poll takers. Did they just say, "How many women have you had sex with?" or did they say, "How many women have you had sexual intercourse with? Count only those involving penetration of the vagina."

If a poll taker leaves the interpetation of "sex" up to the person they're asking, then they really can't trust the answer they get. A guy might think that jacking off over a woman's foot counts as sex.

Exactly! the great mysterious question -- "What Counts as Sex?"

Does sex require actual coupling -- one body part or pseudo-body part inside another's body? Does it require orgasm? Does it require being in the same room? Does it require physical skin-to-skin contact (sex in a body condom isn't sex!) Is sex purely physical, purely mental, or does it REQUIRE both? Is the definition wide, flexible and variable, or narrow, restricted and easy to explain?

Or is sex just what you say it is?

 

[3113]

Or is sex just what you say it is?

Interesting thing--I *suspect* that not even virginal guys desperate to uphold their reputation would count cyber-sex as sex. Yet many folk, if they found their partner on the computer having cyber-sex would probably get upset (unless, of course, they were already open to their partner having relations with others).

Not talking from any personal experience here, but quite a few spouses would get jealous, even if their partner told them they'd never met the person on the other side of the screen, and didn't even know the actual name of that person.

Now how does that work? You may not even be in the same country as the person you're having "sex" with, let alone in the same room, and in a poll, everyone, including your spouse, would probably agree that you didn't really have sex....but a spouse could still feel as if you've just cheated on them.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I think your answer lies in the the gray area J. For a man, it's pretty socially acceptable to have had several partners. For a woman, it's less aceptable. So when complete stranger walks up nd says, I'm taking a poll, how many partners ahve you had?

No matter how it's worded, there is a natural tendancy in men to use the upper end. If he's really had ten partners, gotten blow jobs from seven, but never got in their pants and a hand job from three, the odds greatly favor him having told his buddies he scored with all 20. So he probably will say twenty. There is no stigma attached, and if he has been listening to his freinds, he probably already feels he's a little light on the action he has gotten.

What if a woman had the exact same expereince level, I.e. she had fucked ten guys in her life, given seven blowjobs but not had intercourse and three whom she gave hand jobs too or other wise got off manually? Her tendancy will be to minimize her overall activity, so she might say ten. On the rationalization she has only had ten active sexual partners.

Neither is actually telling a bold faced lie. But each is interpreting the word partner in a way that allows them to give the least embarassing/more societally acceptable answer.

 

[minsue]

I think your answer lies in the the gray area J. For a man, it's pretty socially acceptable to have had several partners. For a woman, it's less aceptable. So when complete stranger walks up nd says, I'm taking a poll, how many partners ahve you had?

No matter how it's worded, there is a natural tendancy in men to use the upper end. If he's really had ten partners, gotten blow jobs from seven, but never got in their pants and a hand job from three, the odds greatly favor him having told his buddies he scored with all 20. So he probably will say twenty. There is no stigma attached, and if he has been listening to his freinds, he probably already feels he's a little light on the action he has gotten.

What if a woman had the exact same expereince level, I.e. she had fucked ten guys in her life, given seven blowjobs but not had intercourse and three whom she gave hand jobs too or other wise got off manually? Her tendancy will be to minimize her overall activity, so she might say ten. On the rationalization she has only had ten active sexual partners.

Neither is actually telling a bold faced lie. But each is interpreting the word partner in a way that allows them to give the least embarassing/more societally acceptable answer.

Very good point. Personally, if asked how many men I've had sex with it wouldn't even dawn on me to include hand or blow jobs.

 

[Pure]

Here are a couple refs, and a formulation of the question

for those with inquiring minds

----
http://pda.physorg.com/lofi-news-partners-men-brown_10824.html

Lovers and public health officials want an answer to the following question: How many opposite-sex partners have you had in your lifetime?

The answer, statisticians say, ought to be the same, on average, for any large group of men and women. But most surveys in the United States, the United Kingdom and other nations find that men report two-to-four times as many sexual partners as do women.

Are men lying to inflate their sexual reputations? Are women lying to downplay their sexual experience?

Psychologist Norman R. Brown believes this "macho and maiden" hypothesis is the wrong explanation.
=====

http://aspe.hhs.gov/HSP/97trends/sd4-4.htm

[Number of sexual partners]

Differences by Gender. Male youth generally report a higher number of sexual partners than do female youth. In 1992, 31 percent of sexually active males and 18 percent of sexually active females ages 15-19 reported having six or more sexual partners. The number of sexual partners among sexually active females is concentrated at the lower end of the scale, with either one, two, or three partners reported (see Table SD 4.4.A). Among high school students surveyed in 1995, 21 percent of males reported having had four or more sexual partners compared to 14 percent of female students (see Table SD 4.4.B).

 

[Guest]

I've got the answer.

Two guys, both really, really, really drunk, hookup thinking the other one is a woman.

Good thing I only ever get really, really drunk.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Flawed poll.

There are other possibilities that aren't so "racy" or "shocking" or "accusatory".

Some include:

1) Maybe there is an uneven concentration of partners for men and women, such that sample populations reveal very different averages.

2) Maybe the study (studies) don't include zero-partnered people--of which, there could be more men than women.

Personally, though, I vote for the whole "women more sensitive about the number and less likely to report it accurately" option.

 

[Pure]

issue of sexual activity

Should one focus on those persons of each gender who are sexually active? I can see a good argument for this, and it was done [among other approaches) in one study I quoted:

The number of sexual partners among sexually active females is concentrated at the lower end of the scale, with either one, two, or three partners reported (see Table SD 4.4.A). Among high school students surveyed in 1995, 21 percent of males reported having had four or more sexual partners compared to 14 percent of female students (see Table SD 4.4.B).

What is the effect, as Joe W suggests, of (excluding) including the sexually INactive? And, it occurs to me, such an effect might depend on age:

For instance, among midteens, there are likely fewer young women sexually active. In that case, however, taking ALL female midteens, one would have an even lower figure for average # sexual partners--because the zeros are averaged in.

 

[FallingToFly]

When I was in high school. there were guys who had fucked the 100 best looking girls in school and, in many claims, all in the same night. Of course, the guys were lying. Most of the girls had never fucked and had no idea of even how to do it. Of course, the girls were lying.

It would appear that the truth lies somewhere between zero and 100 per night.

Yeah, what you said, lol

 

[3113]

For instance, among midteens, there are likely fewer young women sexually active. In that case, however, taking ALL female midteens, one would have an even lower figure for average # sexual partners--because the zeros are averaged in.

Well, there we get the represenative sample question. If the young men are having sex with older women, but the poll people are only interviewing young men and women then the numbers are going to be lop-sided.

Ditto if the poll people aren't interviewing prostitutes. Let's imagine that all girls except prostitutes are going to remain virgins till marriage and then ONLY have sex with their husbands; the guys, on the other hand, will have sex with prostitutes whether married or not.

Now IF the poll folk do not talk to the prostitutes then they get very strange numbers. The guys are saying they've had 20 different women (prostitutes) but the women are saying they've only had sex with one guy (their husband).

Prostitution is outragously top-heavy with women. So men can have sex with several women even if the general, female population says "no." The opposite is not true...but then, men don't usually say "no" to sex.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Don't forget homosexuals too.

 

[JamesSD]

Personally I like the prostitute theory. If a woman accepts money for sex she's not likely to add it to her number, but the guy who pays will.

Also, there's probably some rounding effects, especially among those who have had more partners. If every man unintentionally rounds up by an average of one, and every woman unintentionally rounds down by 1, that could have a significant effect.

As for small sample size: mathematically you'd be surprised how small your sample can be and be fairly accurate, especially if you make sure to make the sample pretty diverse. Also, if an experiment is repeated by different researchers using different methodologies and gets the same results, it adds a ton of credibility.

 

[3113]

Don't forget homosexuals too.

Well, but the question did specify "opposite" sex. But that raises another question...transexuals?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Well, but the question did specify "opposite" sex. But that raises another question...transexuals?

Good one.

Also, remember, there are more of y'all than there are of us. That has to be a factor somehow. Historically, in fact, the sex disparity was much wider. There are probably far more men than there ever used to be. There being fewer major wars and all. War tends to be another of Nature's ways of reducing our numbers and keeping a disparity between the sexes.

 

[the captians wench]

I think it is a matter of keeping the expectations that people think they need to keep. I have a male cousin who's never been with a girl in any form, and I've heard him talk about before how it upsets him and how he must be some sort of freak because other guys have been with 20+ by his age. On the other side of that, one of his sisters actually prostituted herself for a while when she came home pregnat, she claimed that one man was the baby's daddy and that she had never been with any other. A simple blood test proved that wasn't true, not to mention the fact that we found this little run away by one of my uncles going out and ...eh hem... requesting her. She tells me stories of parties she's gone to and gotten so trashed all she could remember is waking up naked next to a naked man. But of course she's only ever been with 3 guys, tops.

It's all about keeping up appearances. I think anyway.

 

[fifty5]

1 Guys have less incentive to underestimate
2 A small number (proportionally) of professionals can have a significant effect on a large number of punters (see above) - and may well be deliberately excluded as untypical, and even if they are included, I doubt if many working girls keep accurate accounts.
3 It could be true. Trivially, if 3 women each have sex with the same two men... (and we know there are fewer men than women). I'm certain that the inactive (and is that now, but yet to become, and what about 'not any more I'm not') do have to be included to balance the results, but can't quite work out if 'how many times' also needs to be factored in; I think that cancels out, but I'm not certain.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

I'll tell you what I learned from my time in Psychology...

If you ever find a sample of the population whose answers and statistics can be trusted to be (1) totally honest and (2) general enough to represent the whole...

...don't tell anyone where you found them.