Are you a woman who is looking to increase your personal happiness? Here is a daily schedule that new research claims will increase your life satisfaction!
Last June, I had the huge privilege to speak at ideacity in Toronto. You can see that talk, along with dozens of other wonder speakers, on the ideacity website here.
Photo Credit: Gene Driskell
When you start a new relationship, do you care if your new love has slept with 1, 10, 100 people in the past? If the answer to that question is “yes”, then how about this: When deciding today whether or not to have a casual sexual relationship, do you weigh the benefits of that relationship against the costs in terms how it might affect any future, committed, relationships?
A few weeks ago I had the pleasure of presenting at the ideacity conference on my favorite topic – the economic markets for sex and love (that talk can be found here, if you are interested in hearing the whole spiel). During that presentation I shared my belief that access to the internet is, perhaps counter-intuitively, good for marriage; the benefits of being able to search for love on a significantly larger market outweighs the costs in terms of martial infidelity.
Can slut shaming be explained in an economic model? A recent article by Andrea Cassillo in The Ümlaut argues that it can; and I agree. The article raises many good points. But it seems to me that an economic explanation for slut-shaming that is entirely dependent on the assumption that women are, by nature, less sexual than men is (with all due respect) entirely the wrong way to approach the economic story.
Recently, it has become popular to apply basic understanding of supply and demand to the markets for sex and love but much of that analysis is just plain wrong. If you are interested in reading why, you should check out my latest article at Buzzfeed.
Right behind Christmas and Valentine’s Day, Mother’s Day is one of the biggest spending holidays in North America – a trend that is increasing over time. According surveys conducted by National Retail Federation (NRF), the amount consumers expect to spend on their mothers on the second weekend in May has increased from an average of $97.37 in 2003 to $152.52 in 2013; even after controlling for inflation, that is a 20% spending increase in just ten years.
No one was more surprised than I when my German publisher announced that the title of that version of my book would be Warum man weniger lernen sollte, um mehr Sex zu haben, which, translated into English, is the title of this post. Apparently, if you are German this title is amusing – as evidenced by the two little books doing it “doggy style” on the cover – but I have to admit that it is not a topic that I have ever explored, until today.
The Sunday Times asked me how the new markets for sex and love were affecting marriage and divorce. Here are my thoughts in a column in this Sunday’s paper,
Dirty Money (aka ‘Dollars and Sex’) hits book stores in the UK today! Over the next few days there are many articles appearing in the UK press which I will post on my media page.
A few weeks ago the Wall Street Journal asked me to comment on where marriage is heading in the future as the result of economic forces. You can read the piece I wrote for them here.
Buzzfeed asked me if the outcome of the current budget debates in the US will affect people’s sex lives – you can see that article along with some very cool graphics here.
There’s so much talk about Dollars and Sex in the media this week it is hard to keep up with it all! Please check out my media page for the lastest in TV, radio and print.
Two men are observationally identical — same education, same years of experience — and yet one earns 16% less than the other. Why? Because the lower income earning man has, at some point in the last five years, had sex with another man. That might sound like evidence of workplace discrimination, but new research argues that gay men are trading off higher salaries in favor of working in more tolerant firms.
I am extremely pleased to announce that Dollars and Sex is now being hosted at Psychology Today. I will continue to post my blogs on this page as well, but if you want to join the debate I encourage you to hop over to my new blog.
Dollars and Sex: How Economics Influences Sex and Love hits the shelves in Canadian bookstores today and in New Zealand and Australia tomorrow! Media coverage of the book’s release can been seen on the media page of this site. Readers in the US market will have to wait a few more weeks before they can get a copy and those in the UK will be able to get a copy in May.
Photo credit Mauricio Drelichman, who bought his copy as soon as it hit the shelves.
Two years ago, we were out on a busy street when my darling son turned to me and asked loudly “Oh my god Mom! Are you sure you don’t have syphilis?!” I don’t, of course, but apparently after watching an episode of the medical TV series House he had decided that “Are you sure you don’t have syphilis?” was a perfectly good substitute for the expression “Are you crazy?” Needless to say, he has never said it again.
A few years ago, I attended a graduation ceremony in which the award for academic achievement in every department in the faculty of science was awarded to a woman. At the time, I wondered: if the roles were reversed, would we not be wondering why one group was so over-represented at the top of the class?
A few weeks ago, when we were talking about educated lap dancers, I wondered if any of my students were paying their way through school working in the sex trades. At the time I had in mind lap dancers, sex workers, escorts, et cetera. I never imagined that there were students paying their way through school, not by selling their own bodies (that part was easy to imagine), but by selling the bodies of others. Yesterday in my sex and love class we had a guest speaker (via video) who had done just that; he paid for a commerce degree at a Canadian university working as a pimp.
Media stories on the sugar daddy / sugar baby phenomena are quick to assume that there’s an economic story behind the rise in this type of arrangement, and in that they are right. The question is; are they telling the right economic story? Are these types of relationships on the rise simply because of poor macroeconomic conditions or is there another story that explains the increase in supply of willing participants?