Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Smarter Teens Have Less Sex

Posted by CmdrTaco on Wed Aug 01, 2007 09:33 AM
from the still-no-excuse-for-you dept.
Tech.Luver writes "Gene Expression reports, "Tyler Cowen quotes from a new study testing the relationship between grades and delayed sexual activity. Last December I passed a paper along to Razib showing that high-school age adolescents with higher IQs and extremely low IQs were less likely to have had first intercourse than those with average to below average intelligence. (i.e. for males with IQs under 70, 63.3% were still virgins, for those with IQs between 70-90 only 50.2% were virgin, 58.6% were virgins with IQs between 90-110, and 70.3% with IQs over 110 were virgins) In fact, a more detailed study from 2000 is devoted strictly to this topic, and finds the same thing: Smart Teens Don't Have Sex (or Kiss Much Either). ""
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • ohh (Score:5, Funny)

    by SuperDre (982372) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:35AM (#20070541) Homepage
    Well, then I must have been ultrasmart... :(
  • Not me (Score:5, Funny)

    by My name is Bucket (1020933) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:36AM (#20070557)
    I've got a girlfriend in Brazil. She's a model and I can go down and have sex with her whenever I want.
  • by 140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:36AM (#20070579) Journal
    Since slashdotters have typically IQ in the range of 160 to 220, the will remain virgins till age 72 or so by my extrapolation.
    • by BitterOak (537666) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:56AM (#20070913)

      Since slashdotters have typically IQ in the range of 160 to 220, the will remain virgins till age 72 or so by my extrapolation.

      So you're saying that based on the average Slashdot post, you would assign an IQ of 160 to 220 to the general Slashdot population. I assume you're joking. (People with Mod points, however, are actually extremely intelligent and discerning.)

  • Idiocracy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bunratty (545641) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:37AM (#20070587)
    Idiocracy [imdb.com], here we come!
  • by Trivial_Zeros (1058508) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:37AM (#20070591)
    I know this is Slashdot, so the majority of users have not had sex. But if you think this article is implying that means you're smart.. you have just committed a common logical fallacy. Sorry to burst your bubble.
    • by f97tosc (578893) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:01AM (#20071023)
      If groups with different IQs have different sex habits, and I learn about your sex habits, then by using Bayes' theorem I can also make inferences about your IQ. Obviously just statistical inferences ("he has less sex, therefore, he is more likely to be smart"), but still.
    • Could be true (Score:5, Interesting)

      by megaditto (982598) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:01AM (#20071045)
      The real question is, are some teens getting less sex because they are smart, or are they smart because they are getting less sex (for whatever reason)?
  • But... (Score:5, Funny)

    by mwvdlee (775178) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:38AM (#20070605) Homepage
    Isn't the definition of a "smart teen", one that DOES have sex? You gotta admit; the teens that have sex must be doing something smart.
  • by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:39AM (#20070625) Homepage Journal

    That explains the mouth-breathing 14 year olds pushing their babies in strollers and carrying another in their belly I see lumbering around downtown Winnipeg at lunch. They should coat welfare cheques with birth control hormones.

  • by GreggBz (777373) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:40AM (#20070647) Homepage
    I should be a super genius.
  • by TheSunborn (68004) <tiller&daimi,au,dk> on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:42AM (#20070681)
    This would actuelly make a really cool Slashdot vote.
    How old were you, the first time you had sex:
    Below 15
    15
    16
    17
    18
    19+
    What is sex??
  • Maybe smarter kids generally just don't feel the need to lie about having sex. And extremely stupid ones don't think to lie about it. Just a thought.
  • by UbuntuDupe (970646) * on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:43AM (#20070699) Journal
    You gotta love how far-removed this quotation gets:

    Cmdr Taco posts that:
    Tech_Luver writes that:
    Gene Expression reports that:
    Tyler Cowen quotes from a:
    Razib paper showing that:
    A survey found that:

    ***

    I'm worried that if I tell someone that I read about this on slashdot, the universe might implode.
  • by pzs (857406) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:43AM (#20070711)
    In the Victorian era, the celebrities of the time were engineers and scientists - the people who shaped the world, rather than the vapid, talentless bimbos we celebrate today. We can only hope that at some point in the future, it will once again be cool to be smart.

    Man, I wish I was born in the Victorian era. Sigh.

    Peter
  • by vigmeister (1112659) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:51AM (#20070845)
    becasue we wear tinfoil condoms.

    Cheers!
  • by dominion (3153) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:00AM (#20071011) Homepage

    I'm in my mid-twenties, and I didn't have sex until the very end of high school, and didn't date at all, and I seriously don't feel like I missed out on a damn thing. Sex when I was 18 was awkward and boring, I can't imagine the kind of horrible flopping around I would have had if I had been 14 or 15.

    I know we live in an ephebophilic society where your teenage years are supposed to be when the best years of anyone's life, but let's all be honest here: Being a teenager sucks. You can't drive, you can't drink without having to sneak around, you're kind of an idiot, you don't know what the hell you're doing when it comes to members of the opposite sex, and that's not even starting to mention acne, braces and a bad fashion sense. I much prefer my twenties, and I'm looking forward to my thirties. I'm having a great time compared to ten years ago.

    So maybe being smart and not having sex in high school isn't that groundbreaking of a correlation. Why is it so important to have any sex when you're in high school anyways? Shouldn't it be more important to have good sex when you're older? Where's the study on sex lives of single smart twenty- and thirty-somethings? I'd be interested in that study.

    P.S. Watch the "abstinence only" crowd use this as ammunition: "See! Smart teenagers choose abstinence!"
  • To Quote... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by morari (1080535) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:05AM (#20071115) Journal
    "An intellectual is someone who has found something more interesting than sex."

    Now if I could only remember who said that...

  • by BytePusher (209961) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:11AM (#20071217) Homepage
    There are a few of reasons I think this might be true:
    1. Smarter teens believe that sex can be risky. Namely: Unwanted pregnancy, disease, emotional distress and not to mention social pressures from parents.
    2. Smarter teens may have higher standards as they are able to distinguish better between "good mate" and "not so good mate."
    2a. Finding a good mate may mean finding an intellectual equal.
    3. A deep fulfilling intellectual and emotional relationship may be more important than and a prerequisite to simple sexual pleasure.
  • by petrus4 (213815) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:15AM (#20071323) Homepage Journal
    As an example case, I was a virgin until I was 26. Yes, if I'm honest it's true that I had utterly no clue how to understand or communicate with the opposite sex, but I'll also admit that sex quite simply isn't something that I've ever consistently had a strong interest in.

    Although this is nothing whatsoever against the person who this happened with, even after losing my virginity, I can remember thinking of that experience, while reasonably enjoyable and positive, as not seeming to deserve anything like the degree of hype that most people associate with the act. Most of the people I've known seem to regard sex as being the pinnacle of human experience, and that is an attitude which I find deeply sad.

    I know that a predictable response to this will probably be to speculate that I am in fact homosexual, but I do not believe that to be the case, and to be honest, that is something else about the customary attitude towards sex that I find deeply pathetic. Namely the idea that if a person doesn't have one preference, then they *must* by definition have another, because not being helplessly addicted to sex in either straight or gay form is supposedly completely impossible...in most people's minds, it just doesn't compute.

    Some of us honestly view reproduction as being the domain of animals. Given that we have more than enough other human beings who are quite happy to devote their own lives to that activity, this means that those of us who have that attitude are also able to persue the expansion and enhancement of our minds, without fear as to the possible consequences to the human population.

    If you're someone for whom sex is the most important element of your existence, I'd strongly advocate getting a life.
    • by SIIHP (1128921) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:46AM (#20071897) Journal
      "Some of us honestly view reproduction as being the domain of animals."

      There it is. If you were being completely honest with yourself, you'd admit that you think your ability to do without sex makes you more evolved, more developed. That sentence displays your thinking quite obviously.

      Sadly for you, that's ridiculous. Sex is a wonderful, pleasant, somewhat messy, but ultimately fantastic part of the human experience. Missing out on it is not something to be celebrated.

      Yours is the classic sour grapes position. If I can't have it, it wasn't that good anyway.
  • by segedunum (883035) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:19AM (#20071417) Homepage
    Having thought back to my High School days, much of this sounds pretty accurate. I know there'll be many Slashdot jokes around about this, but think seriously about it for a bit. Those who threw it out there too much at High School, how many of those people who you knew are now living on crap wages, in a crap job, are unmarried, uncommitted and immature parents or single mothers struggling to keep a roof over their heads with no ability to plan for the future?

    I live in the UK, but the answer in my case is all of the people I could think of scarily. I caught up with a few people from High School not long ago, and the stuff that's happened to many of the people from school who concentrated on sex and immature relationships is shocking. It's a tale of divorce, single motherhood, poverty and immaturity. These people also tend to be extremely crap at romantic and sexual relationships when they're older, as well as pretty immature. Taking one example, how many people in their late twenties think that getting married to someone you only met six months ago, divorcing that person a few years later, getting back together with an ex a few months after said divorce and having a baby with that person after only a few weeks or months of being together is mature? They still act like 15 year olds, and in some cases, worse.

    As for me, I have a good job with good money, working with people who I like and get on with, I have a lovely girlfriend and I'm still as horny as hell from all that High School abstinence ;-).

    Seriously though, looking around from my own personal experience, scarily, I think a whole social underclass is being created. I also think this is largely responsible for the increase in divorce, the increase in single motherhood and the inevitable problems for their children that has brought with it. Those having sex in High School generally just aren't mature enough to handle sex, and that's setting them up for life.
    • Re:I Believe... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Mayhem178 (920970) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:38AM (#20070607)
      Uh huh. And later in life, they're called "Yes sir, right away, sir!"
      • Re:I Believe... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:06AM (#20071129) Homepage
        Actually no. In reality you get to management by who you know and social skills.

        What you know and your IQ actually tend to hurt your chances.

        I hate to burst the geek bubble but it's truth.

        want proof? WOZ is a rich geek but never was upper management.

        Gates was never a geek, he was a poser and the face man. (sorry gate's early code is horrible and first year quality) he had business sense and knew people as well as has social skills in a bizzare way.

        Jobs = Face man he is the guy that makes you like him so much you will sell him your stuff at cost or buy his product by standing in a line outside for hours when there is no supply problems.

        If you are a geek and high IQ I STRONGLY suggest taking etiquette classes, social interaction classes and do everything in your power to have the knowledge to fake being good at party socializing. You have to be the guy that everyone loves in the first 15 minutes of meeting them. Speak eloquently, be good at faking that you really are interested in how well her pedicure went and how that CEO of that company had a horrifying day because he had to way 30 minutes for road service to show up and fix his flat tire.

        Crack the code of socalizing, get that one done and you will become upper management.
        • Re:I Believe... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by molarmass192 (608071) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:18AM (#20071389) Homepage Journal
          This is one of the most insightful posts I have seen on Slashdot. This is the stuff they DON'T teach you in university but they should. Moving into upper management isn't about WHAT you know, it's about WHO you know. You can call it bullshitting, ass kissing, whatever ... but the perception people have of you determines where your glass ceiling lies. Yes, keep your skills up to date, but also keep your address book up to date and send a keepalive on your entire social network every quarter. Crap ... now I can't use my mod points here.
    • by jellomizer (103300) * on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:43AM (#20070691)
      No I wouldn't say that. Slashdot is filled with some smart people and a lot of people who want to be smart... Just because you can use Linux doesn't mean you are smart, just becasue you can't doesn't mean you are stupid. I know some people who use Slashdot and run linux with actual below average IQ's. I would say while the average IQ on shashdot is above average is just because it is a convient source of news (or at least use to be it has been getting dumbed down over the years) of Science/Technical Information so experts in such fields use it to get some information... But just because you are a geek or a nerd it doesn't mean you are smart, just a social outcast.
    • by vfrex (866606) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:44AM (#20070717)
      Now I am conflicted. Half of my inner geek wants to laugh and take the joke, and the other wants to rail on you for creating causation from correlation. But either way, I'm posting on /.
    • by mwvdlee (775178) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:55AM (#20070903) Homepage
      Since I've started reading /., my sex life has never been better!
    • by Opportunist (166417) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:55AM (#20070899)
      I doubt it's less chance for sex. More that there's a lot else to do that's more fun. Like, writing a beautiful piece of code, surely beats wasting a night on hot sex.

      I'll go cry now.
    • Re:The question (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GogglesPisano (199483) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:13AM (#20071275)
      It's our choice of course. However, you may regret those missed opportunities twenty years from now. "Saving yourself" for some conjectured Ms./Mr. Right is quite a gamble - you won't get that time back if the person doesn't materialize, or doesn't turn out to be the perfect mate you'd envisioned.

      At your age, you should be taking in as many new experiences as you can. There won't be many other times in your life where you are as unencumbered by obligations and responsibilities.

        • Re:The question (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Hatta (162192) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:42AM (#20071847) Journal
          So use a condom smart guy. One day you'll realize sex is no big deal and you wasted a lot of time being freaked out about it instead of doing it. I don't think you should go fuck a random girl, but expecting sex to be some magical experience with your soul mate is really setting yourself up for disappointment.

          One day you're going to meet someone you love and respect and want to stay with forever. You want to "sow your wild oats" before that, or you'll spend the rest of your life wondering what sex with other women would be like. It's a lot easer to know you've made the right choice when you've tried a few of the other options.

    • by Hatta (162192) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @09:59AM (#20070979) Journal
      There is plenty of time for sex and sex when you think you know so much when you actually know very little is much more likely to lead to complications.

      But there's only so much time for sex with teenagers. Get it while you can guys.
    • Queue Slashdot Reader Love Life Jokes

      Slashdot readers have such high IQs that they realize that sex leads to babies, contraceptives don't work 100%, having intimate contact with some random person is a good way to get disease, and that one should save themselves for a life-partner so that they're ready for the responsibilities that come with sex while simultaneously avoiding the issue of STDs. So they don't have sex as teens.

      HAHAHAHA! Isn't that funny?

      ...

      Anyone?
      • by phorm (591458) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @11:01AM (#20072157) Homepage Journal
        My observation has been that those who are more hard-working or studious tend to have less time for relationships, physical included, and the other things that come along with them (children, etc). Perhaps it's not so much that they're smart as that they're busy?
            • So you married the first woman that came along that didn't gag in your presence.

              If by "first woman" you mean, the first woman to captivate me with her beauty, grace, and intelligence, then I suppose you could say that. Certainly, I was never attracted to the types of airheads that less honorable boys find so easy to "get in the sack". When a girl took several weeks before she finally got the punchline to "there are three types of people in the world", I did not find it charming or cute. I found it horrifying, and would rather have stayed a virgin for the rest of my life than try to build a relationship with someone like that.

              If all you want in a mate is someone to have sex with, then that is your choice. I believe that God gave me a brain to think with and make intelligent decisions, not allow my loins to drive me. One of those decisions was staying true to who I am when finding a woman to spend my life with. And wouldn't you know it, the woman I chose was also the type to want more than just a physical relationship. She could have had any man she wanted, but she didn't. She chose me instead.

              A relationship like that makes one remember how unique that other person is. And how important it is to make the time, put in the effort, and give the attention necessary to keep that relationship thriving over the years.

              It's easy for me to give a flippant answer to a flippant statement, but I'd rather say something that will actually *help* people. And if there is one thing I can say, it's this: Relationships are about commitment. The best method of telling if someone is for you or not is not their looks or any "compatibility" tests. It's asking yourself if you're willing to devote the rest of your life to them and them to you. THAT is the true test of a relationship.
              • by Psmylie (169236) * on Wednesday August 01 2007, @11:16AM (#20072511) Homepage
                "She could have had any man she wanted, but she didn't. She chose me instead."

                I don't think you intended to say she chose someone she didn't want :)

                In any case, I agree with you. All it takes is 1 or 2 really bad relationships to show you that the best alternative to a good relationship is to be alone. I'm not saying you should hold out for a perfect person (there is no such thing) but focus instead on the qualities of character. Personality, intelligence, humor, etc. is much more important than looks, because honestly... after 40+ years of marriage, s/he isn't going to look all that hot anyway. If you marry someone who is hot but stupid and shallow... after a few decades they'll by ugly, stupid and shallow. Trust me on this.

          • by orclevegam (940336) on Wednesday August 01 2007, @10:47AM (#20071935) Journal

            I'd say grades are a better measure of education than intelligence.

            I'm not quite sure what grades are a good measure of. Being able to color inside the lines? Following instructions and memorizing facts? Rarely they can measure understanding and creativity, but that's highly dependent on the skill of the instructor creating the assignments.