In the kind of news that’s bound to disappoint somebody Em & Lo boil down research on first-date sex to
Once you factor out people who weren’t serious about entering a relationship in the first place, it’s pretty much even-stevens. Meaning, couples who boinked on the first date tend to be just as happy and satisfied in their long-term relationship as couples who held off for a while
This is the kind of report that’s going to disappoint practically everybody. First of all it’s obviously going to upset slut-shamers like Susan Walsh and Caitlin Flannagan who make careers out of saying the best way to get a man is to never have sex at all. But it’s also going to disappoint generations of long-term couples who were madly drawn to each other when they met but held back for fear of jinxing their prospects.
That doesn’t mean everyone should run out and start having one-night stands — I’m still a big fan of waiting till the third date to kiss… followed by carpet-unraveling abandon thereafter. In fact I think it’s unlikely to change people’s behavior much at all.
I mean, I think it’ll be more like the end of the false but once iron-clad rule that you’d die if you went swimming less than an hour after eating: you can do what seems sensible rather than fearful or desperate to you and probably be just fine. Whether it’s on the 1st date or the 101st.




I always thought the “you’ll
Submitted by Lynn Gazis-Sax (not verified) on Wed, 2010-09-08 23:46.I always thought the “you’ll screw up the wonderful relationship you’d have with this particular person if you wait long enough to have sex” reason for waiting to have sex was less persuasive than the “wait long enough to be sure you’ve got all the information you need to screen out the people you don’t want to have sex with” reason. Also, framing it the second way makes it easier to figure out how long you need to wait, since the answer no longer requires reading other people’s minds.