Turns Out Body Count Does Matter, and Other Interesting New Research
The Mystery of High Lesbian Divorce Rates (Part 2); A (Potential) Snowball Effect of Low Fertility; We Need to Talk About the Isolation of Remote Work; How Back-Up Childcare Varies by Class + more
Happy WEDNESDAY everyone,
Almost on time this week. We’ll get there. Above the paywall, we have a study suggesting that there is no sexual double standard when it comes to the number of previous sexual partners someone has: both men and women prefer partners with a lower body count. Below the paywall, we’ve got:
The Mystery of High Lesbian Divorce Rates (Part 2)
A (Potential) Snowball Effect of Low Fertility
We Need to Talk About the Isolation of Remote Work
Half of Highly Educated Workers WFH Sometimes
How Back-Up Childcare Varies By Class
Low-Income Parents Are Really Worried About Their Kids’ Safety at School
Americans’ Ideal Family Size Holds Steady
Reduced Abortion Access Increases Economic Hardship and Crime
College Makes Men More Egalitarian
Some more stuff in the Seems Interesting section, which is weirdly long today.
Turns Out Body Count Does Matter
First things first, I need to give a shout-out to the Institute for Family Studies for flagging this study for me. It was published in July, but I simply could not resist covering it here because it has Family Stuff written all over it. It investigates whether the number of previous sexual partners someone has influences whether people would consider entering a long-term relationship with them. Or in Discourse speak: does body count matter? Across three different studies covering 11 countries spanning 5 continents, they found that the answer is a pretty firm yes.
The effect size varies a bit by country, but as you can see in the chart below, the basic pattern of a higher body count reducing one’s appeal as a long-term mate holds everywhere. And the authors found very little evidence of a sexual double standard: “Sex differences were minimal, but when present, showed no evidence that the sexual history of a suitor was judged more harshly by men than by women.” Importantly, the negative impact of body count on partner appeal was smaller “when the frequency of new sexual encounters decreased over time.” And people with “more unrestricted sociosexuality,” or openness to casual sex, were less put-off (but, to be clear, still kinda put-off) by a higher body count than others.
The authors put it all down to evolution: “Modern humans are descended from ancestors who effectively navigated the costs, benefits, and risks of sex and relationships.” As such, even modern mate preferences are shaped by an inherited sensitivity to people’s sexual histories.
