Denver, Colo., Oct 24, 2018 / 10:08 am (CNA).- People who have had only one lifetime sexual partner have happier marriages than people with two or more lifetime partners, according to a new report from the Institute for Family Studies.
The study’s author, Dr. Nicholas Wolfinger of the University of Utah, found that women who have been sexually intimate only with their spouses are most likely to report having “very happy” marriages, at 65 percent. Among women with between six and ten lifetime sexual partners, only 52% reported being “very happy” in their marriage, the lowest in the study.
Among men, 71% with one partner reported being very happy with their marriage, according the study. For men who report two or more sexual partners, the number drops to 65 percent.
In addition, 40% of the study’s respondents reported having had only one or zero sexual partners before getting married. Wolfinger pointed out that the rate among younger Americans, who have married since 2000, is closer to 27 percent. The median American woman born in the 1980s has had three sex partners in her lifetime, and the median man six; just five percent of all women marrying in the 2010s were virgins.
“The surprisingly large number of Americans reporting one lifetime sex partner have the happiest marriages,” the study reads. “Past one partner, it doesn’t make as much of a difference. The overall disparity isn’t huge, but neither is it trivial.”
The study controlled for the religiosity of its subjects, which Wolfinger said has been shown by other studies to be a major factor in happy marriages, but not the only explanation. He said the data he has is not conclusive on this point.
“Coming into this beforehand, I would have expected religion to be one reason why people who don’t have a lot of sex partners would have happier marriages,” Wolfinger told CNA.
“Church attendance, in itself, produces happier marriages…but be that as it may, controlling for [denomination and church attendance] did not substantially affect the relationship between how many premarital sex partners you have and whether you’re in a very happy marriage.”
What this means, Wolfinger clarified, is that people are more likely to have a happy marriage if they have fewer premarital sexual partners whether they are religious or not.
One major factor affecting this result, he said, is the fact that premarital sex can often result in children born out of wedlock, which unfortunately tend to strain future relationships. Moreover, people who have had previous sexual partners before marriage may later compare their spouse to those previous partners, leading to a decline in the happiness of their marriage.
In a similar 2016 study, Wolfinger examined the divorce rate in relation to the number of sexual partners a woman has had in her lifetime. He found that survey respondents who had not had sexual partners before marriage had the lowest divorce rates, and those with ten or more partners in their lifetime were the most likely to spit up, with a 30% chance of divorce in the first 5 years of marriage.
Of those women who married in the 2000s without having first had sex, nearly 70% reported regularly attending some kind of church services, while less than 30% of women with ten or more partners were churchgoers.
“Everything should be on the table”
Father Brian O’Brien, a priest of the Diocese of Tulsa in Oklahoma, told CNA that the statistics presented in the IFS study are confirmed by his experience working in marriage preparation for 11 years. He said he often presents statistics to the couples he counsels, to try to help explain how premarital cohabitation and premarital sex can negatively affect the happiness of their marriage.
“Ultimately it comes down to: we’re not meant to be used,” O’Brien told CNA.
“I think what happens in a lot of cases is [people think]: ‘I’ll just sleep with a whole bunch of people, and maybe one of them will work out.’ And that’s exactly what happens in the movies…but the idea that you can just use somebody and move on as if that didn’t happen, I think is where the unhappiness sets in.”
People will remember the sexual partners that they had “along the way,” because sex bonds people together, he said. A bond with a person who is no longer in a person’s life will remain with them even if they start a new relationship, leaving a “lingering guilt,” “unresolved issues,” and “baggage” that makes new relationships that much more difficult.
“Marriage is hard enough, and it’s even harder if you’re bringing in a bunch of baggage,” he said. “For couples that are going to enter into a marriage covenant, everything should be on the table.”
O’Brien said that the broader trend in society of couples coming into marriage with multiple sexual partners, as evidenced by statistics cited in the IFS study, has also manifested itself among the couples he counsels.
“I go into [marriage prep] assuming, until I talk to them, that the couple is probably living together, and I assume that they are sexually active,” O’Brien said.
“I tell [couples] that I want their marriage to be as happy and holy as possible, and your marriage will be happier and holier if you abstain from sex and if you don’t live together.”
O’Brien said he thinks most couples who are living together know what they’re doing is wrong, especially when it comes to being sexually active. He said he suspects that there are many couples that don’t see anything wrong with cohabitation before marriage, viewing the move primarily as an economic decision.
“It’s not that they’re sort of ‘trying each other out,’ it’s that ‘we don’t want to pay two rents,'” O’Brien explained. “So I think in that way they’re not really flaunting Church teaching, they’re trying to make good economic decisions.”
He said he takes a pastoral approach to the couple’s situation, affirming them in their good decisions and “meeting them where they are.”
“If they’re not living together, and they’re not sexually active, it’s my chance to say: “Awesome! Great job!” and to really affirm them in those decisions,” he said.
He said generally in the second or third marriage prep meeting, he’ll ask some basic information such as the couple’s home address. If the couple is already living together, they will often admit it at that point, if reluctantly.
“They’ll look at each other like: ‘Oh no. Should we give him the same address?’ And as soon as they do that, I’ll ask ‘So do you guys live at the same place?’ And they have this guilty look on their face, and they’ll say yes,” O’Brien said.
“And I’ll say: ‘Ok, I’m not yelling at you, but obviously you guys feel bad about it.’ So then we’ll kind of take that and discuss it as we go.”
O’Brien said despite popular opinion that may suggest that fewer people are seeking marriage in the Catholic Church, he and his fellow priests in Oklahoma are engaged in marriage prep and presiding at weddings “all the time.”
“I’m not ready to throw in the towel on the young people of the Church,” he said. “Because I think there really is a desire to have God as part of their marriage, and they’re not finding that in other places.”
Father Zach Swantek, a chaplain at Seton Hall University, offered his thoughts about his experience with modern marriage prep in an email to CNA.
“Often priests are afraid to discuss issues such as pre-marital sex, chastity, cohabitation, contraception and even participation in the Church with [couples], for fear that they will be offended or scared off,” Swantek wrote.
“On the other hand, some priests boast about how they refuse to marry couples that fail to live in strict adherence to the teachings of the Church, yet do not help these couples to understand and live these teachings,” he added.
“Marriage preparation must be viewed as an opportunity to accompany the couple, gradually leading them to the fullness of truth about faith, sacraments and marriage. This requires patience and work, but it is well worth the effort.”
[…]
As William F. Buckley once apologized to Gore Vidal, in a National Review article, Gore’s homosexual activity was quite okay, but it was not okay for Buckley to simply use the word; “bottoms up,” he ended.
Biden might not be certifiably stupid, but he is an evil puppet by now redefining Title IX to include gender identity. Also, at least sorta stupid, given the science–and evidence of underlying problems–which cannot be suppressed forever.
https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/executive-summary-sexuality-and-gender
“[….] Compared to the general population, adults who have undergone sex-reassignment surgery continue to have a higher risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes. One study found that, compared to controls, sex-reassigned individuals were about 5 times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times more likely to die by suicide [….]”
Mr. Beaulieu;
I was not familiar with the particulars of Mr. Buckley’s apology to Mr. Vidal, so your quoting it – particularly the phrase ‘bottoms up’ gave me a much-needed laugh, for which I thank you.
Were Bishop Gruss my Bishop I would be proud of him and I would tell him so. He had to know in advance that what he said would get him in trouble.
1) He said it
2) He got in trouble
3) He made the proper apology
ergo
4) Mission accomplished
Never apologize for speaking the truth, your Excellency.
Maybe he should have referred to Biden as a moral imbecile. Still harsh, but true nonetheless.
I have said a lot worse about Biden and I don’t apologize for it. Whether his senility has rendered him stupid is an interesting question. He certainly was smart (and unscrupulous) enough to eventually occupy the most powerful political position in the world, even though he is not calling the shots.
Bishops Gruss should have ignored whatever backlash he may gotten from his offhand remark. It was a nonstory that didn’t deserve a reply. Of course, he did just the opposite, offering an apology and even saying that he doesn’t harbor any anger towards this Catholic president who has relentlessly and consistently implemented extreme anti-Christian policies. Apparently, His Excellency does not think there is such a thing as righteous anger. It was a pathetic performance, so typical of what we get from the hierarchy of the Church. We would be much better off if they didn’t say anything.
I think the word, “unwise” would have been more accurate and more acceptable to Pres. Biden and his supporters. Also, the adjective should have been connected with Pres. Biden’s words, not with him personally.
Perhaps you are not aware that at this time in history, children are not permitted to use the word “stupid” in most school, sports, or childcare settings. It antagonizes others and can lead to a counterattack, which for children, often means hitting, slapping, etc. Among older children, insults like this can lead to even worse and more violent retaliation.
If children can’t use the word, adults should set the example and not use the word. There are many words in the English language that can communicate a message without insulting the person.
It’s intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that Bishop Gruss’s choice of this adjective in describing Joseph Robinette Biden Jr is entirely accurate regardless of the offense that the thin skinned cabal may take to it.
stupid stu·pid adjective
a: slow of mind : obtuse
b: given to unintelligent decisions or acts : acting in an unintelligent or careless manner
c: lacking intelligence or reason
thank you
Well Mrs. Sharon, you are correct that we shouldn’t insult others. Especially as Christians.
But I think stupid is a perfectly good word and I hate to see the thought police clamp down on the English language.
Really dreadful obscenities are a routine part of our entertainment industry these days but we get more upset over old fashioned words like stupid. And I’m not picking on you Mrs. Sharon. I just mean our current culture.
Well Sharon, mark me down for “couldn’t care less” what the kiddies are allowed to do. I am not interested in having my use of language confined to what is appropriate for slap-happy toddlers, just because some woke administrator says so. I am not interested in the leftist playbook of suppressing acceptable speech, or distorting it with made up words, but I am sadly aware of efforts in that direction by our “educational” institutions. “Stupid” is a perfectly good English word, which means showing a lack of intelligence or common sense. There are a great many stupid politicians to whom the word applies.Joe Biden is one of them. His mental acuity has deteriorated to an obvious and considerable degree, and his fantasy stories of uncles eaten by cannibals ( along with MANY other proven lies and exaggerations) does not help his intellectual profile.
As for kids hitting each other, I am aware that some schools are so extreme as to prohibit children striking a blow to DEFEND themselves. Here is what I always told my sons: Never let me discover you were the first to hit someone. But if they hit you first, hit them back hard enough to make certain they will not attempt to hit you again. Pacifist is another word for willing victim.
I needed a good laugh this morning. Thank you!