Study: Porn Use by Men Could Be Reason For Declining Marriage Rates / Double Standard by Many Single Men: Single Men Too Entitled, Picky About Dating Criteria

Study: Porn Use by Men Could Be Reason For Declining Marriage Rates / Double Standard by Many Single Men: Single Men Too Entitled, Picky About Dating Criteria

So a new study says that the rise of porn use may be one reason behind the declining marriage rates.

But Christian sociologist Mark Regnerus says Christian single women should totally seek out these porn-addicted perverts as potential spouses, LOL. (Seriously, he did argue this point, read this).

I’ve seen Christian men in comment sections on other blogs act all offended or butt-hurt when women like me say, “Thanks, but no thanks, not interested in dating or marrying a porn user or porn addict.”

Christian men who object think we single ladies are supposed to show them all sorts of “grace” about their sexual sin (including porn viewing), and that porn use is just like any other sin, no big deal.

Sorry, no. Some women may not care about porn use or addiction, but some of us do, and that is our right.

I do wonder if the Christian men in the comment sections on other blogs who are butt-hurt that single women want nothing to do with porn addicts/users are porn users themselves.

It’s interesting how men, even Christian men, feel entitled to have criteria in dating or in marriage, but these same men do NOT believe that women should be allowed to have criteria.

Many single men are VERY picky and judgmental concerning who they are willing to date or marry.

Christian single men of all ages, even the 65 year olds, all demand and expect to marry a 25 year old woman, or a 45 year old who looks as though she is still age 25.

If, however, women have any criteria, preferences, or standards concerning whom they wish to date or marry, such as, “I’d rather not date or marry a male porn user,” men get very angry and miffed on web forums and blogs about this.

Men start lecturing us single ladies how we should not limit our dating pool to non-porn users.

But ask these same male idiots if they’d consider dating or marrying a woman who is 15 or more pounds overweight, who is over 35 years of age, or who is a brunette, and they instantly say, NO.

Most men feel it is their right to have criteria in selecting a partner, but we women are supposed to consider any and every man who takes a fancy to us – nope, not gonna do that.

I’d rather stay single. I have a right to choose for myself who I want to date or not date.

(Link):  Free porn could be to blame for decline in U.S. marriage rates, researchers say

(Link): Rise of free internet porn delays people getting married 

(Link):  Shock study: Marriage rate declines with porn use, threatening economy, society

(Link):  Porn getting in the way of marriage?

(Link):  Americans aren’t getting married, and researchers think porn is part of the problem

(Link): Rise of internet porn could be to blame for lower marriage rates, study claims, as men find ‘low-cost sexual gratification’ without being tied to a relationship

  • Pornography is an ‘important factor’ in the decline in marriage formation
  • Researchers said it was ‘disrupting traditional family arrangements’ 
  • And found policies like the UK’s porn filter could reduce useage

  • The team looked at American data on how 1,500 men aged 18-35 years old used the Internet between 2000 and 2004, when Internet porn was nowhere near as prevalent as it is now.
  • In particular they looked at how much time the men spent on the Internet, and how much porn they looked at in the past 30 days.
  • The general trend was that higher Internet use was linked to lower marriage rates.
  • However, more than anything else, the use of porn was associated with men who were not married.
  • By contrast, those who regularly used religious websites were more likely to be married.
  • The researchers found that the increasing ease in which pornography could be accessed was an ‘important factor underlying the decline in marriage formation and stability’.

Here is an editorial by someone who disagrees ~ but this is from liberal Slate, a site whose writers mock virginity (see this critique) and have a very hedonistic view of sex, so take this with a grain of salt:

(Link): A Viral Study Says Porn Is Killing Marriage. Here’s Why It’s Pure Bunk.

I did find another critical page of this porn study, but it was by a very pro-natalistic author who basically shames people for staying single or being single, so I shall not link to that.

(Link): Does Porn Keep Men From Marrying or Not?

  • Jordan Weissmann of Slate says, “not so fast.” He calls the study “pure bunk” and “deeply silly.” And his criticism is based on methodology and the old bugaboo “correlation vs. causation.” Just because one thing seems to be connected to another thing, does not mean one caused the other. Weissmann telegraphs his general skepticism with concerns about porn use. He says the paper is getting a lot of attention “because, you know. Pornography. Tearing our society apart. Or something.”
  • Weissmann’s main concern is the two authors’ use of something called “instrumental variables.” Instrumental variables are the use of one seemingly unrelated thing to help explain another.
  • Weissman uses smoking and public health to explain. Suppose you’re measuring the effect of cigarette smoking on public health, “and your data tells you that people who smoke tend to be sicker than the rest of the population.” But there could be other reasons than smoking, so why not measure public health in correlation with increased cigarette taxes; higher cigarette taxes mean better health. That is an “instrumental variable.”
  • But, Weissmann says the “instruments” chosen by the authors are “strange.”
  • The authors used the father’s level of education to measure overall Internet usage since “children of educated parents have access to more technology.”
  • For porn use, the authors used urbanization because of “availability, speed and cost of Internet access.” Porn is bandwidth-heavy, and the authors looked at data from 2000-2004, a time when dial-up Internet was still common.
  • Weissmann says, “The problem is that there are lots and lots of other ways, aside from Internet or porn usage, that have having an educated dad or living in a city could change your propensity for getting married.” For instance, someone in the city might have more dating options and therefore puts off getting married.
  • It is unclear whether Weissmann contacted the authors to discuss his concerns. He quotes the authors but only from their paper.
  • The two authors shared their reactions to Weissmann’s piece with Breitbart News.
  • George Naufal told Breitbart News, “If one reads the paper carefully, all of the data issues are discussed in details. The wording in the paper is careful and takes into consideration the contribution of an instrumental variable approach while not ignoring the potential weakness of such methodology.”
  • Professor Malcolm went into much greater detail with us: “Regarding the criticism of our instruments, these instruments are common in the literature” and that such criticism as Weissman’s can be used on almost any “instrument.”
  • “Even the author’s own cigarette tax example could suffer from the same problem,” said Malcolm. “The idea is that cigarette tax is different in different areas, and this is an exogenous reason for variations in smoking rates. But there could be all kinds of unobserved differences between these locations that are endogenous to smoking behavior, and maybe different people move to areas with more favorable attributes that are correlated to the cigarette tax rates. Think Kentucky versus New York City.”
  • Malcolm said, “The deep causal structure is always difficult to disentangle, and I believe we have qualified the results properly (many are quoted in the Slate article). You will find these caveats in basically any paper that uses instrumental variables analysis. I would venture to say that the only time a researcher can be 100% sure that the causality is right, is to run a randomized experiment. But, again, no better data are available. Are there valid criticisms of this approach? Sure, but it’s not like we’ve gone off the rails. We would love to have better instruments, and we said so in the paper. But, in the absence of better data, this is not an uncommon approach in economics. Properly qualified, we think it is informative.”

———————————–

Related posts:

(Link):  Woman Partner Competes with Porn for Her Boyfriend’s Attention (Ask Amy)

(Link):  Study Says Your Spouse’s Porn Habit Might Not Be So Harmless After All

(Link): Regnerus’ Misplaced Blame – Blame the Wimmins! Common male refrain, even from Christian men

(Link): America’s Lost Boys by S. D. James (Why Men Are Not Marrying)

(Link): Young Men Turning to Viagra, Cialis Due to Porn-Induced Impotence; 26-Y-O Talks of Porn Addiction That Started at 12

(Link): Married Preacher Hides Porn Addiction By Faking Terminal Cancer

(Link):  Is Internet Porn to Blame for Millennials Leaving the Church?

(Link): Slate’s  Marcotte on Anyone Choosing To Be a Virgin Until Marriage: “It’s a Silly Idea” – What Progressive Christians, Conservative Christians, Non Christians, and Salon’s Amanda Marcotte Gets Wrong About Christian Views on Virginity

(Link):  Male Christian Researcher Mark Regnerus Believes Single Christian Women Should Marry Male Christian Porn Addicts – another Christian betrayal of sexual ethics and more evidence of Christians who do make an idol out of marriage

(Link):  The Joy of Sex is Over 

(Link):  Churches Would Rather Hear From Ex Porn Stars Than Adult Celibates or Virgins – Church Invites Ex Porn Star to be Guest Speaker

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s