Search This Blog & Get A Rife

Thursday, February 16, 2017

No Sex In Marriages And Crappy Surveys And Newspaper Reporting

There's a new report by The Guardian (click HERE, if you want to later) that points out that a record number of Japanese couple live in sexless marriages... and many that do, report only having sex once a month.

Well fug me. No wonder my exploits 25 years ago seem unreal to some readers. Ha!

Let's not beat a dead horse too much here... we already know that Japan is suffering a negative population growth...

But let's take a look at what media darlings, The Guardian, is reporting and see if the study, and thus its reporting is indeed reliable.

The article is based upon a recent survey conducted by the Japan Family Planning Association… who discovered that nearly  (NEARLY - IE less than 50 percent) of married couples have not had sex for more than a month, and did not expect that to change in the near future.

Someone get these people a new crystal ball... one with a crack in it.

Josephine Suzuki: "Magic EightBall, will we have success in the near future?" 
Magic Eightball: Define 'near future'.

 Okay… so how many people did the Japan Family Planning Association ask?


The survey ASKED 3,000 people between the ages of 16-49 at the end of 2016…

So… the key word is ASKED. How many people actually responded to the survey?

Uh… that would be slightly above 1,200 people.

Okay… that’s not much.

Let’s see… the United Nations estimates that as of February 12, 2017, Japan has a population of 126,150,318… which is interesting because the 2013 census of Japan has it at 127,300,000 or so people.

We all know that Japan has a negative population growth owning to reduction in children being born (owing to the whole lack of sex thing), as well as very, very limited immigration… 

Anyhow, of that 126,150,318 people, we know that not everyone is between the age of 16-49… 

So let me just take an arbitrary number of 40% of the entire population as being a decent enough approximation for the country of Japan, and let me do some math.

So, with a base of 50,460,127 people to represent Japan’s entire 16-49-year-old base… the study’s 1,200 people represents 0.00002378115 percent of the entire 16-49-year-old Japanese population.

That’s a frickin’ minuscule representation of (my guesstimate) Japanese population for that age range.

Can you really write a newspaper article or a study based on such piddly representation like that?

You shouldn’t.

But… let’s go a step further…

The study talked about sexless marriages… that nearly half of all Japanese marriages are essentially sexless.

Okay “The Guardian”… let’s look at the veracity of that bold and misleading statement.

How many married Japanese couples responded to the survey?  


That’s right… 655 married couples responded to a survey… and let’s say it was 1/2 that said they weren’t getting much sex… well… that means these results are based on… COUPLES... did couple actually respond together? Doubt it... why are they responding to surveys instead of having sex?

So... of those 655 married couples, does that mean that there were only actually 327 people who responded? The Guardian was not clear on that fact.

Heck... let's just suppose The Guardian meant 655 individual married couples responded.  

Screw it… I’m not even going to do the math… because it’s just so bloody ridiculous.

How come the Japan Family Planning Association only sent out 3,000 surveys?

Why not to everyone… or to every couple that has an official marriage license in Japan that is still currently living there?

3,000 survey questionnaires sent out… 1,200 respondents… and of those, 655 who are part of a married couple.

Did the survey ask if the respondent was male or female? (Probably)

Would a male be more likely to tell the truth, as opposed to the female wife? Doubt it. I believe women to generally be more honest when it comes to answering intrusive and personal questions like in the survey.

And look… I just found a newspaper article in the Toronto Star (click HERE, afterward if you believe everything mainstream media tells you) based on a study that Ryne Sherman and his co-authors published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior earlier this year showing, which says that  millennials in their 20s and 30s — the so-called “hookup generation” — are anything but.

And recall that THIS is NOT about Japan!!!! This is about the U.S.... but the Toronto Star didn't really mention just which country these results were about.

Sherman, an associate professor of psychology at Florida Atlantic University (Go Owls!) found that about 15 per cent of American 20- to 24-year-olds have never had penetrative sex - virgins. Been there, didn't like it, but am basically a born-again virgin.

Their parents... (IE my age), that virginal percentage was just 6 percent.
Apparently this latter data was culled from the General Social Survey, and does not specify what sex is... though I'm pretty sure in this case anyone reading a question about whether they have had sex or not, would realize it to mean full on penetrative intercourse (Bill Clinton, excepted).

The Toronto Star fails to mention anything about what the older General Social Survey was... or when it was... blah-blah-blah. Screw it... I'm not even going to look it up, because the way the article was presented was bogus.

The newspaper article says: "Researchers floated a few possible reasons for the trend: It’s a hangover from fear-based sex-education of the ’90s; It’s part of a trend toward less risk taking — today’s young people do drugs less, drink less and use condoms more than their parents did; It’s a failure to launch — economic trends have landed many millennials at their parents’ place, not the most conducive environment for sexytimes."

Lots of wonderful puns included, and yet someone still couldn't take the time to present numerical facts - such as how many people were surveyed...

Anyhow... for one minute, let's assume that the general findings of the article/study are correct... that Millenials aren't getting it as much as people like myself did a mere 25 years earlier.


Me... I blame it on the fact that people don't meet people anymore... that there's this thing people started saying back in the 1990s, that being promiscuous is bad... or that you shouldn't date anyone where you work, or other crap like that. 

There's the Internet... if you just want sex, you could probably find that... but love and a long-lasting relationship.. while not impossible, it seems like finding that perfect match is difficult... especially for people that are used to doing all of their talking via texting and e-mails or cell phones... 

People don't know how to communicate anymore. 

Trust me. 

No really. 

My gift has been the act of communication... to be able to read people... to notice things about them... a haircut... a new blouse or earrings... to smile when I talk... to be able to talk about things I know little about, but also to listen to learn about things I know little about. 

There was another study I heard about that say that because of the ways in which people get their information (social media et al) ... those same people seem to have developed an attention span of somewhere around eight seconds. 

Holy ADHD, Batman!

Eight seconds... you can't find out anything about anything in eight seconds. 

You ever notice that I don't write brief blogs? No sh!t eh? People USED to like to learn about people and things... 

Do you think that 25 years ago when I was in Japan, and was rejected by Noboko after I wrote a haiku for her, that my attention would have wandered elsewhere and I would have given up?

No... what if it was in Japan now, and texted her...  asking if she wanted to go for o-cha (green tea), and she said no... would that be it? Probably... because you can't have a conversation... can't truly express oneself adequately simply by texting, IM-ing or via e-mails. 

You can't hear the rich timbre of my voice that could melt snow during an ice storm... you couldn't see the glint in my eye... the confidence in the way I stand... how much of a slick sumbitch I was... hmmm... okay, that might have worked against me... but photographic evidence shows my confidence in winning a woman. (That sounded sexist, and I didn't mean it to be... but you know what I mean.)

If we were doing the whole digital/virtual date asking out thing, then I wouldn't have been able to see the confusion in Noboko's eyes after I handed her a haiku I wrote in 20 seconds telling her it was for her: 

Her beautiful eyes
Seem to hypnotize my soul
Capturing my heart

I wrote that within minutes of first seeing her... actually gasping audibly as I turned to another teacher to ask "WHO is THAT?"

I might be a writer... and fairly capable one... but there is no way in hell typing crap on a screen could ever equal actually being beside a person and exposing their own true feelings.

After seeing Noboko's confusion... it meant I knew what I had to do next... not really... but I did know that I had to do something, because I knew she knew I had just written her a "love haiku"... and I could see that she wasn't impressed... or she was scared...

I'll bet I was the first ever foreigner who had ever had the nerve to hit on her... the first person to hit on her immediately after being introduced... the first person to hit on her at work and not at an office enkai (party).   

I also knew from seeing her, that it was love at first sight. It happens.

How does love at first sight work via Instant Messaging? 

What would you do in 2017? How do you text someone you don't know?

Yes, I've "met" people on-line... and luckily my intelligence shines through better than most... and luckily enough, those women were smart enough to recognize that.

Does a typed love haiku have the same passion as one written by pen on paper?

I could smell Noboko's shampoo... and let me tell you... when it comes to physical attraction between two people... being able to smell one another... pheromones.

How do I love thee?   
Let me count the ways... 

The 21st century is screwed, man... and not in a good way.

Back to that survey crap... 

At no point in the Toronto Star article does it discuss HOW many people were surveyed... WHERE those surveys were distributed... WHO those people were (social background)... WHAT exactly was asked (what does "sex" imply, relative to previous sex studies - and are we talking between men and women, men or just women?) WHEN was the survey conducted... the WHY seems pretty obvious.

The Toronto Star article does then mention plenty of people commenting about how they too were virgins... but again... how many people commented versus the number of people who aren't bothering to comment versus how many people are there?  

Now... I think I did a pretty decent job in debunking the Japanese study, and have noted that the article written by The Guardian is irresponsible and misleading.

And while The Guardian did report the survey response numbers, it still implied that the data it represented was important and did indeed represent the entire country of Japan.

It does not represent the country of Japan. It represents those few married couples/people who responded to a small survey.

Do me a favor... anytime you see reports based on a survey... question how many people participated, and then determine if it is a fair representation of a block of people for the survey results to be considered truly valid.

Andrew Joseph


  1. Yeah!! I do hear about that in CNN or in other major news company. I don't really believe that Japanese couples have a sex problem, but then again, I believed that many people in Japan don't think about the benefits of having sex, especially couples. Sex is a normal thing for human life.

    1. I agree that it is a normal part of life... human contact even... funny how people believe anything without questioning the source...

    2. Plus, I do hear that a lot of foreigners will try to solve the sex problem by having sex with the Japanese girls. I don't really know if it is a reasonable solution....

    3. I mean yes Japanese girls are beautiful and sexy, but what about helping the Japanese men becoming more bold take more risks

    4. Hi Justin... helping Japanese men to be more bold? That almost smacks right into the face of the Japanese concept of "wa", which I just wrote about:
      The problem for many is that Japanese men have to follow a so-called work culture.. which mans lots of time spent at work, and bonding with co-workers after it (drinking).
      They need to resolve the issues around that first... or go back to the old ways of "arranged marriages" which I have no opinion on... that I wish to discuss at the moment.
      How do you make 1/2 the population take more risks? The lack of sex thing is cultural... societal... psychological... and I don't necessarily believe that it affects men only, as you seem to think... it's not Japanese women having sex with foreign men... because it does not seem to be true anymore. I think women are trying to have a career... and don't want to be tied down by such things.

    5. Yeah. You're right about that. Because of the constant work ethic that Japanese males have, social life can be a drag for them.

  2. My husband teaches a critical thinking course at our local community college, and this is exactly the type of exercise he TRIES to take his students through. Many don't get it. If he can get half of his students to ask questions about validity (not to mention statistical significance), he considers the course successful. Some semesters he can't. But I tell him at least he is able to plant a seed in the mind of his students that may grow in the future. {sigh} Dream on ...

    1. It's okay... it ensure people like your husband can earn a few extra bucks... also on the plus side, it provides us all with more people to feel superior to - even if for just a moment.
      To me it sounds strange to have to TEACH critical thinking...
      I ask the W5 and H with everything... but do so quickly so as to not get bogged down too much. If I slowed down, perhaps I could make money teaching a course, too. Naaaaaaaw. :)

    2. Funny you should say that ... teachers at community colleges get paid next to nothing and no benefits. It's the American educational way ... OK - I'm bitter about it (for the hubby whose passion is teaching). I'll be totally sexist here and say I more than make up the difference monetarily for the family (it's Bizarro sexism). And you are right about it being strange that colleges have to teach critical thinking. It's a remedial course to help the returning students who had a poor education (through their own fault or the system) or have a large gap since their last educational course (unplanned pregnancy or stay-at-home parent, job switchers, and even those just released from jail -- hubby's favorite {no sarcasm}). Writing is your passion and strength ... and your living. A trifecta. ;-)