Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Rich libido

Since my blog is not a "family blog" like MR , I should be able to talk without inhibition about this :-). So I try. Not that we didn't have already a hunch about this, wealth comes with better sex lives (bloody Joop, he kept telling me this all the time- money and women and sex and the rest- ok, ok, you've got a point my friend, though not the whole truth...). So, assuming that the results of this survey study have external validity, you should immediately check how you fit in the global income distribution, relative to the average person surveyed, and work hard on getting higher if you're not anywhere near the threshold yet. This if you care at all about orgasms (global or not) and do not think that the adrenaline intensive jobs can give you, would work as a substitute (I think the people surveyed above - most of them in intensive, high responsibility jobs- cannot but agree with me on that).

But general conclusions aside- "more money equals more magic in bed." full stop- , the very interesting part of this study is that women's sex lives seem to be much more responsive to wealth status than men's ( the survey seems to have been assuming only heterosexual sex, though I don't see that mentioned explicitly in the article). Surprised? Me too. Particularly given that the article expressly dismisses the 'pool boys' as new accessoires for the rich lady (I have to admit this is the first explanation that came to my mind: of course I cannot but envy the pool boys in that respect). One problem with the whole discussion is the different way in which men and women appear to have defined "better sex" in the survey:


Fully 63% of rich men said wealth gave them “better sex,” which they defined as having more-frequent sex with more partners. That compares to 88% of women who said more money gave them better sex, which they defined as “higher quality” sex.

This is vague enough and I don't think the subjects were asked the right question(s). Otherwise I would have to ask, among other things, who the hell were the 63% male morons who totally ignored quality in favor of sheer quantity. That still leaves the door open on what is "higher quality". Based on my own intuition (and my humble and limited experience in this area...), answering to that question should not differ a lot between the two sexes, despite widely circulated stereotypes. Comments are open.

A plausible candidate to explain the sex differential here could be the difference in the way the 'self-esteem is boosted' for women, compared to men. Not that it is wholly convincing (for me, not at all)... But here's the "ego booster" rationale advanced in the Wall Street Journal piece:

...especially for women, sex is closely linked to self-esteem. And since wealth usually brings greater self-esteem, it can improve a woman’s sex life.

“For the minute percentage of women who are that wealthy, this wealth can be a big ego booster and allow them to feel very comfortable and relaxed about sex,” he says. “They have a strong sense of identity and they know they don’t have to be inhibited about communicating their needs. It’s about the confidence and power and opportunity that comes with having a lot of wealth.”

If any very rich gal reads this, maybe we can get a more detailed version of the "confidence and power and opportunity" part (after all a man came up with that: obviously he couldn't have been clearer).

No comments: