• Home
  • About Sungold
  • Scholarly Sungold

Kittywampus

Slightly skewed views on feminism, politics, parenthood, and the occasional kitty.

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Caturday Celebration: Simon’s Back! (And He’s Found a Box)
Salmonella Culprit DeCoster: His Morality Is a Big Goose Egg »

To My Promiscuous Readers

August 21, 2010 by Sungold

And yes, you likely are promiscuous, even though you may not think of yourself that way. At least, that’s the implication of a quiz that appeared at Big Think this week. Now, you know I’ve got a soft spot for internet quizzes, but it usually runs toward Hello Quizzy (aka OK Cupid) and similar silliness. This quiz purports to be serious! scientific! and will tell you about your “sociosexuality.” Blogger Marina Adshade at Big Think found it incumbent upon her to translate “sociosexuality” as “promiscuity.”

Whatever you call it, I found the results shocking – and not because the quiz branded me a slut. I am shocked at the shoddy methodology that’s trying to pass as “science.”

Go take the quiz and tell us how you came out, ‘kay? I will wait below the LOLcat.

(Shocked, shocked kitteh from ICHC?)

I’ll come clean: I landed in Finland, which according to Adshade is the #1 mecca for the promiscuous. Funny thing, though. I answered that I’ve been with just one partner over the past year and expect to stay with him, and only him, for the next 30 years, should we be so blessed to both live that long. I ‘fessed up to the one-night stand, though that’s a real definitional tangle. Does oral sex count? What does it mean when your “casual” partner is never a rank stranger, but always a friend or someone in your larger social network? What about friends with benefits, where the benefits were infrequent and very much subsidiary to the friendship? What about one-night stands that morph into several nights? What about “casual” sex that leads into a years-long relationship? (All of these questions hint at my classic MO until I met my husband.)

I like to see how quizzes spit out different assessments, so I varied my responses some – keeping my truthful answers to the first two questions, and also holding fast to my tolerant (but not really celebratory) answers toward casual sex. I also copped to some fantasies but not to daily ones, and held that answer constant, too. But I played with the number of “one-night stands,” and see here: I stayed in Finland until I claimed (okay, lied) never to have had one. That moved me down just one rank – to New Zealand.

I suspect study-abroad applications will spike for Finland and New Zealand, if this “research” gets out to the general public.

But seriously: what a way to view promiscuity! I don’t like the term anyway, because it almost always leads to slut-shaming. I’d prefer to stick with “sociosexuality.” Whatever you think of the terminology, it seems silly to brand a fortysomething, married, monogamous gal with a handful of youthful adventures “promiscuous” just because she refuses to condemn the pursuit of pleasure, youthful or not. Or because she fesses up to fantasies – which I suspect is what drove my score sky-high. I’d love to know how Jimmy Carter (he who famously “lusted in his heart) would stack up.

I enjoy silly quizzes, but sometimes the line between science and internet meme is very thin indeed. Not to mention, there are also some very good reasons for people to engage in “casual” sex, as Monica Shore reminds us at Alternet (originally at Carnal Nation). Shore’s article is buttressed by a few preliminary stats from Heather Corinna’s much more scientific survey on “casual” versus “committed” sex. I’m eager to hear about Heather’s results once they’re made public, because I think she asked the right questions here and here.

See y’all in Finland? If not, where will I find you?

Share this:

Like this:

Like Loading...

Posted in hypocrisy, memes, science, sex, shame, stupidity, weirdness | 12 Comments

12 Responses

  1. on August 21, 2010 at 11:25 pm sugarmag

    Finland is the most promiscuous country? I always thought of Fins as kind of dour. Shows what I know, LOL.


  2. on August 21, 2010 at 11:47 pm graftonk

    That thing is silly.

    I got New Zealand. I’ve never had a one night stand. I have been with one partner for over ten years and have no intent to change that. It doesn’t take an entire hand-load of fingers to count the lovers I’ve had in my thirty-five years of life, AND I am completely uncomfortable being intimate with a relative stranger so casual sex and one night stands are unthinkable for me.

    I presumed that their question “Is sex without love okay?” was asking for a moral judgment, so I ‘strongly agree’ that it is, even though it’s very much not okay for me. Evidently that thought, and the fact that I regularly have fantasies about having sex with somebody other than my spouse (or rather, fantasies about having sex with some people who are nobody-in-particulars, a distinction the quiz doesn’t accommodate) makes me ‘promiscuous.’ Goofy.


  3. on August 22, 2010 at 3:54 am Melissa

    Haha, not to mention a single one-night-stand anywhere in your history counts for 10 points. (5 for getting counted as a sexual partner, 5 more for a one-night-stand).

    Me, I’m apparently a slutty slutty Finlandish slut too. ;)


  4. on August 22, 2010 at 6:24 am Hanna

    This is kinda funny actually… I’m from Finland and according the test I’m so promiscuous that I fit well here. I have always considered myself rather boring than promiscuous, but I guess I was wrong.


  5. on August 22, 2010 at 10:06 am Melissa

    Did everyone see that they put the information on how they calculated the score at the bottom of the post? Your number of sexual partners in the last year counted X5, and frequency of fantasies counted X4. Expected # of partners in the next 5 years was just added to the score w/o adjustments, one-night-stands were X5 and all the attitude questions were actually X.66


    • on August 24, 2010 at 3:28 pm Sungold

      Melissa, this is info I probably should have dealt with in the post. Thanks for calling attention to it! The fantasies are the real score buster, it seems.


  6. on August 22, 2010 at 4:56 pm FD

    Finland… and I’ve been celibate for the last year and have never been particularly adventurous anyway. Sheesh. Crummy study returns crummy results.
    And wth do fantasies have to do with who/how many people you have sex with anyway? I always thought the point of fantasies was that they are fantasies. i.e. NOT REAL.


  7. on August 22, 2010 at 6:01 pm K

    yep I’m supposed to go to Finland too it seems. Even though I’ve been with the same partner for like 10 years.


  8. on August 22, 2010 at 9:08 pm dcardona

    haha – I’m Lebanese (40 of 48) and I was a virgin until I met my now-husband at the age of 25, the only man I’ve EVER slept with in my entire life. We’ve been together 8 years.


  9. on August 22, 2010 at 10:39 pm PrettyAmiable

    Man, who did they interview that those countries were so low? I out-slut Finland by probably about a significant digit. Five partners in the last year, ten expected in the next five (I was being conservative / hopeful), thing casual sex is awesome, fantasize daily about lots of people who weren’t my last one-night stand (and OH, the one night stands!).

    Sorry Finland. Y’all can’t handle me. No one can.

    I like the idea of sexual privilege however that occurs in high GDP countries. That’s pretty interesting.


  10. on August 23, 2010 at 5:00 pm Marina Adshade

    You are right that the test isn’t perfect when it come to testing individual levels of promiscuity but that isn’t what it is really intended for. It basically tells us how sexually liberal different societies are in terms of their views. So the result that you found on your test really tells you in which country you would be most at home in terms of your own views about sexuality.

    I am sure you already knew you were more liberal in terms of you sexuality that the average person though so your results should not really be that surprising to you. I agree with PrettyAmiable that it is hard to image that some countries have such low scores. The high scores are easy to understand. It is the low scores that seem unfathomable.

    By the way, the test is not intended to be research. It is just a way to get people thinking about the world, and it certainly has accomplished that. It was taken by 5,000 people in the first 36 hours after it was posted from 86 countries around the world. I wish it was research, if it were reliable it would make an awesome dataset. Alas for this purpose the internet is not a very useful tool, as you have demonstrated (i.e. by taking the test several times to see where you land).

    Of course that is not going to stop me from talking about it again at the end of this week. With so much ‘data’, how could I possibly resist?


  11. on August 24, 2010 at 2:37 pm Sungold

    Thanks to everyone who chimed in. It looks as though we are well on our way to making Finland a highly populous country … full of people who are bright, open-minded, and remarkably monogamous!

    I would especially like to thank Marina Adshade for taking the time to explain more fully the thinking behind the quiz. The way it was presented at Big Think really did couch it as “science.” The post notes that it has been been administered by “a team of more than 100 scientists” and it also frames it as an individual assessment, not a cultural one: “The higher the number, the more promiscuous you are.”

    The other thing that’s misleading is that the text really seems to be measuring two different things: one’s own behavior, and one’s attitude toward others’ sexual conduct. As Grafton and others in this thread vividly show, it’s possible to be monogamous lifelong with a partner and yet land in the “promiscuous” category. Wouldn’t it be much more accurate to frame the quiz as being about something like “sexual tolerance” or “liberal attitudes toward sex”? I also think the fantasy category is vastly overweighted.

    The quiz is fun to take. But I would have been a lot less snarky, had it been presented in different terms.

    If you do follow this up with some more rigorous research, I think the really interesting question is, as you note Marina, where all the low scores are coming from. Yes, people lie – systematically – on surveys about sex, but I’m amazed at how many people seem to think that they cannot admit anonymously to a fantasy life! The popularity of George Clooney alone proves that a bunch of people are not telling the truth. :-)



Comments are closed.

  • More Kitty!

      Subscribe in a reader

    Subscribe to Kittywampus by Email
  • Grey Kitty

    gkprof Patron cat of Kittywampus (1985-2001)
  • Comments: Please Play Nicely

    I love critical but constructive feedback. I'm happy to entertain opposing arguments. I'm not willing to host mudslinging, ad hominem attacks, disrespect, unkindness, or hate - especially toward other commenters. Obvious trolls, jerks, and spammers will see their comments deleted and future comments blocked.
  • Recent Comments

    Rob F on Anti-Authoritarian Caturd…
    Ryan on Anti-Authoritarian Caturd…
    ballgame on Anti-Authoritarian Caturd…
    hydraargyrum on Anti-Authoritarian Caturd…
    Sungold on Anti-Authoritarian Caturd…
  • My site was nominated for Hottest Mommy Blogger!
  • Categories

  • cats dystopia election 2008 embodied experience ethics feminism gender stereotypes Germany health history hypocrisy kids local news LOLcats lucky me masculinity media medicine parenting politicians reproductive rights sex sexism shame silliness stupidity teaching violence weirdness wingnuts
  • Recent Posts

    • Anti-Authoritarian Caturday
    • Has the War on Women Met Its Waterloo?
    • The Littlest Lobbyists (Oh, Oh, Ohio! Your Abortion Politics Shame Me)
    • SOPA Is Dead. Long Live SOPA!
    • My Christmas Note to Our Pres
  • Twittywampus

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • Archives

    • September 2012 (1)
    • February 2012 (1)
    • January 2012 (2)
    • December 2011 (4)
    • November 2011 (1)
    • October 2011 (1)
    • September 2011 (5)
    • August 2011 (7)
    • July 2011 (6)
    • June 2011 (2)
    • May 2011 (7)
    • April 2011 (13)
    • March 2011 (8)
    • February 2011 (19)
    • January 2011 (21)
    • December 2010 (17)
    • November 2010 (26)
    • October 2010 (13)
    • September 2010 (11)
    • August 2010 (20)
    • July 2010 (26)
    • June 2010 (18)
    • May 2010 (13)
    • April 2010 (9)
    • March 2010 (23)
    • February 2010 (15)
    • January 2010 (19)
    • December 2009 (27)
    • November 2009 (20)
    • October 2009 (25)
    • September 2009 (30)
    • August 2009 (38)
    • July 2009 (33)
    • June 2009 (30)
    • May 2009 (31)
    • April 2009 (30)
    • March 2009 (32)
    • February 2009 (34)
    • January 2009 (28)
    • December 2008 (34)
    • November 2008 (31)
    • October 2008 (34)
    • September 2008 (43)
    • August 2008 (31)
    • July 2008 (34)
    • June 2008 (30)
    • May 2008 (35)
    • April 2008 (30)
    • March 2008 (31)
    • February 2008 (35)
    • January 2008 (18)
  • Blogroll

    • 922 Cats
    • Alas, a Blog
    • Astarte’s Circus
    • Badtux the Snarky Penguin
    • Blue Gal
    • Blue Milk
    • Bookworm
    • Brilliant at Breakfast
    • Broadsheet
    • Daisy’s Dead Air
    • Dohiyi Mir
    • Echidne
    • Feministe
    • Feministing
    • Fetch Me My Axe
    • Figleaf
    • Firedoglake
    • Flip flopping joy
    • Glenn Greenwald
    • Henry’s Travels
    • Hexpletive
    • Historiann
    • Holly’s Self-Portrait As
    • Hugo Schwyzer
    • Hullaballoo (Digby)
    • Jon Swift
    • Jump off the Bridge
    • Knitting Clio
    • Loserdust
    • Lynn Alexander
    • Mirabile Dictu
    • Mom’s Tinfoil Hat
    • Monkeyfister
    • Mothers for Women's Lib
    • Natalia Antonova
    • No Cookies for Me
    • Noli Irritare Leones
    • Pandagon
    • Pharyngula
    • Plain(s)feminist
    • Professor, What If …?
    • Questioning Transphobia
    • Racialicious
    • RH Reality Check
    • ROTUS
    • Sadly, No!
    • Screed
    • Shakesville
    • Skippy the Bush Kangaroo
    • Sociological Images
    • Sugarmag’s Random Thoughts
    • The American Virgin
    • The Curvature
    • The Feminist Underground
    • The Political Cat
    • The Second Awakening
    • The Smirking Cat
    • The Well-Timed Period
    • Tiger Beatdown
    • Tiny Cat Pants
    • Viva La Feminista
    • Womanist Musings
  • Wherever you go, there you are

    Locations of visitors to this page
  • wordpress stat wordpress stats plugin

Blog at WordPress.com.

Theme: MistyLook by WPThemes.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 37 other followers

Powered by WordPress.com
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
%d bloggers like this: