In Slate, Tim Harford advances a rational choice hypothesis on why stats show a rise in oral sex among teens. It’s one, as he says, for the economics nerds.
Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas
Larvatus Prodeo was an Australian group blog which discussed politics, sociology, culture, life, religion and science from a left of centre perspective. more»
The real reason is, of course, that it’s the only way to make other teenagers stop talking.
The hysteria that tends to go with this issue is quite funny – I’ve seen quite a lot of articles for a few years now. Obviously, what teenagers who are sexually active are doing is changing, but my personal experience makes me think it’s the same for adults as well – oral sex simply isn’t as taboo as it used to be (or in economic terms, the disincentives have been reduced). The very fact that the media now mention it regularly very clearly shows that. However, stuff like “The moms in my set are convinced—they’re certain; they know for a fact—that all over the city, in the very best schools, in the nicest families, in the leafiest neighborhoods, 12- and 13-year-old girls are performing oral sex on as many boys as they can” says far more about the parents than the kids, or the reality. (I note the article acutally indicates the number of teenage virgins has actually increased by 15%).
My other thought in regards to the hysteria is:
“The indecent foreign dance called the Waltz was introduced … at the English Court on Friday last … It is quite sufficient to cast one’s eyes on the voluptuous intertwining of the limbs, and close compressure of the bodies … to see that it is far indeed removed from the modest reserve which has hitherto been considered distinctive of English females. So long as this obscene display was confined to prostitutes and adulteresses, we did not think it deserving of notice; but now that it is … forced on the respectable classes of society by the evil example of their superiors, we feel it a duty to warn every parent against exposing his daughter to so fatal a contagion.”
- The Times of London, 1816
Tim Harford is good value, isn’t he? He writes like an angel, always chooses interesting case-studies and links his work to cutting edge Freakonomics style research very skilfully.
Like most of his stuff, this explanation makes sense.
Well I’m shocked, scandalised and horrified at the youth of today, even if none of the rest of you are. Why aren’t the boys reciprocating?
Straight to the shame file.
Silly Liam, the boys aren’t reciprocating because vaginas are TEH ICKY, rug-munching is for fags, and only mighty penis-magic can brave the foul cavern like a real man. DUH.
Make my day, tigtog, and tell me you’re directly quoting somebody. Please, ecumenical omnipotent interventionist God, please let somebody somewhere have sincerely uttered this phrase.
I know it came up in the Sopranos – Uncle Junior did not want his proficiency (“Seriously, Corrado, you’re like a great artist”) to become common knowledge, and when it did, Tony ribbed him mercilessly. But that was a revelation to me of Mob culture. I have not heard it elsewhere.
Regarding the link between legalised abortion and lower crime rates 20 years on – my thoughts, which wasn’t alluded to in the research was that States who have ‘progressive’ rather than prohibitive ideas around abortion, most likely are the very same states with preventative and pragmatic harm minimisation policies towards juvenile offending rather than punitive ones (and therefore progressive educated parents who voted these policy makers in.).
‘Crime’ rates are slippery subjective things at teh best of times.
As for rug munching – not heard that one before though i once had a very young client who was notorious for giving blow jobs in order to buy cigarettes, but I steered away from enshrining ‘the $10 buck suck’ into Dept of Family Services casenotes.
Liam, I’ve heard it as a joke “shorter raving wingnut” thing somewhere and it’s become a bit of an in-joke at some sex-positive-feminist blogs. One of those earnest Townhall types was going on about how oral sex was generally decadent and degrading but was particularly enfeebling for any man who gave oral to a woman (men giving oral to another man was glossed over entirely, because for that type of wingnut man-on-man is all about the butt, baby).
I wish I could remember who it was, but I can’t.
I’ve always heard it described as “carpet munching” myself… (also in a tongue in cheek kind of way – no pun intended!).
At the risk of invoking Godwin’s Law, Adolf Hitler was known (presumably behind his back) as Teppichfresser, literally “rug-muncher” because of an alleged propensity to fall to his knees in a rage and chew the edges of a carpet. Because it was a real rug, rather than a metaphorical one, he was able to retain his vegetarian credentials.
Those interested can find a description here.
“Because it was a real rug, rather than a metaphorical one, he was able to retain his vegetarian credentials.”
I better not tell my vegetarian boyfriend this
Serendipitously, I was just sent a pointer to a most apropos webcomic (Safe for work except for workplaces which frown on the word cunnilingus, in which case why are you reading this thread?).
[link]