Bad science special: the world's worst one-night stand survey
Hello women. Are you having a CRISIS? Are you having a BABY MELTDOWN? Are you in SIZE ZERO HELL? Or, are you just all mooning regret, having shagged someone whose first name escapes you?
If the latter, then first of all, know this. YOU ARE A DIRTY SLAGGY SLUTBAG. And secondly, according to a Daily Mail featurette, also know you are a boring old statistic. Because according to our favourite and best hate-rag, Post Shag Regret is OFFICIALLY the default female response to one-night encounters. It is funny because it is true. And it is true because science says so.
According to Professor Anne Campbell, almost half the women (of 1,743 men and ladies polled) feel "regretful and used the morning after, and worry about the damage done to their reputation".
Now then. It is important not to be too over-awed with science. Yes, so-called people with "professor" before their name are very clever and know their way around things like "emotional inhibitory mechanisms" and "bidirectional mate selection". But it is also important to check that it is not just an excuse for making ordinary girls feel like oddballs, if they happen to occasionally shag a random. And not end up in emotional TURMOIL as a result.
“Biologists have suggested that females could benefit from mating with many men – it would increase the genetic diversity of their children and, if a high-quality man would not stay with them for ever, they might at least get his excellent genes for their child.”
Some things. 1) Get thy head out of thy evolutionary textbook and stop calling us "females". We’re women, you creepy twits. 2) Surely a "high-quality man" is defined by his ability to stay with his family. Ergo, in what sense are an errant man’s genes "excellent"?
“In evolutionary terms it has been generally thought that it was to [women’s] advantage to remain faithful, to make sure that their mate had no reason to believe he was raising another man's child.”
Yes, I realise this is qualified by "in evolutionary terms". But are people faithful mainly just to make sure their partner doesn’t suspect they’ve done the horizontal shimmy with the milkman? You see, I thought there was more to it. You know, like love and that.
“She asked men and women who had experienced a one-night stand to rate it either negatively or positively. Only 54 per cent of women said they had enjoyed the experience.”
Stop the presses, only 54% had a nice sexy time. But even if we round up the numbers and assume half those questioned were women, that makes 800 women, and there are 24,661,000 in the UK. So they spoke to 0.003% of us. I think this is a bit pants.
“Contrary to belief, women did not see taking part in casual sex as a prelude to long-term relationships.”
"Contrary to belief". Whose belief, please, O People of Science. You? Me? Felicity Kendall? Gary Kasparov? Deirdre Barlow?
“One female respondent said: 'I generally felt dirty and unhappy.' Another said: 'The expectation was better than the reality, the sex was rubbish.' They predominantly felt 'used' and were consumed by feelings that they had let themselves down.”
Them’s the quotes, alright. No "he was hilarious and it was ace cos we got pickled as onions and did it every which way 'til the sun came up and it was FLIPPING BRILL". Amazing.
And that is the science of SHAME. Tomorrow, we will claim "all women are raving BITCHES who HATE each other" after asking ten people in the Tesco baguette section. Mine’s a rustic sourdough.
boffin
If anyone is interested, here is the Abstract of the published article: http://www.springerlink.com/content/200557qu080hr117/
I think an important point the author makes, which is obviously glossed over by the DM (boo hiss, we hate them don't we!) is that you have to remember the people are only talking about how they felt AFTER the one night stand, and nothing about what 'drove' them to do it. And doesn't feeling 'dirty and used' sound so much more like what a woman is MEANT to feel like after a ONS? And therefore could you not reasonably say that this report speaks just as much about our attitudes to male/female ONSs - if a man does it, he's a Studly Dudley, but if a woman does it, she's just debased herself, and doesn't deserve having a name that rhymes with what she did.
In other words isn't the important thing *not* to warn women that if they indulge in plentiful sauce they will end up feeling used and grim, but rather that it's OKAY to do that if they're feeling up for it, and it won't make them a squelchy slut, and to stop being so mean to themselves?
Respondents...
Having picked up the Daily Hell after being intrigued that women are becoming more equal than men I read the bit on the sex survey. Apparently it was done on the internet, which suggests that it was voluntary and possibly not all that representative. Also, thost who responded probably WANTED to share the fact that they felt dreadful about tarnishing their reputations. It's also entirely possibly that a number of internet respondents were 14 year olds who were just making it up. Either that or middle aged men in flasher macs.
Thank you Wendy!
Between war and the environment, I really don't think anyone needs a half-arsed bit of ""Evolutionary psychology*"" dressed up as the last word on women. I am sick of these surveys. Since when was it academia's job to provide chip paper?
* I was taught that a good scientist starts with a hypothesis and tests it. Whereas surely evolutionary psychology is all about working out how your results can be fitted to the hypothesis?
Half and half
Typical Daily Hell, picking on the negatives - MORE than half of the women had enjoyed the lovely shagging, but we get the quotes from the head-clutching, now I'll never marry Mr Darcy, forgive me my sins minority. I think it's fab that most women (which is actually what 54% means, Mail subeditors) enjoy their 1-nighters. Certainly enjoyed most of mine before getting hitched to Mr M.
Add your comment
