Friends with benefits? Study says casual sex doesn’t harm young adults emotionally
Even the headlines are provocative:
Casual sex not bad for mental health, study finds (Chicago Sun-Times)
Casual sex, hookups aren't emotionally damaging, study finds (New York Daily News)
Booty calls not bad for emotional health study says (Creative Loafing Tampa)
It's a sure sign of generational change. Parents worry that casual sex is a threat to their children’s well being, emotionally if not physically. But a new study by University of Minnesota researchers suggests otherwise.
The researchers surveyed more than 1,300 young adults between the ages of 18 and 24 about their most recent sexual encounters. They were also asked questions about their emotional well-being and their overall self-esteem. The study was published in the December issue of the Guttmacher Institute’s academic journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health.
About a fifth of the young adults surveyed said that their last sexual encounter was casual. But their answers to the emotional wellness questions were no different than those who said they were in committed relationships.
"We were so surprised," Marla Eisenberg, an assistant professor at the university's School of Public Health who studies adolescent and young adult health, told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.
"The conventional wisdom is that casual sex, 'friends with benefits,' and hooking up is hurtful,” she said. “That's what we've been teaching kids for decades," especially in the federally funded abstinence-only sex education programs, she said.
“Not that Eisenberg advocates casual sex. Far from it.
"Casual sex is not for everyone" as an emotional matter, she said. Moreover, there is real physical risk: Rates of sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy rates among young adults are rising."
In fact, the United States has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the industrialized world, despite readily available birth control methods. The Centers for Disease Control says that a third of teen girls get pregnant before the age of 20.
We value and respect the experiences of all of our HERWriters, but everyone is different. Many of our writers are speaking from personal experience, and what's worked for them may not work for you. Their articles are not a substitute for medical advice although we hope you can gain knowledge from their insight.
Add a Comment5 Comments
Hey Diane
I'm too old for friends with benefits; actually, maybe I'm not. We're never too old too fool around, are we?! Perhaps I should clarify that I'm too married to have a friend with benefits!
A lot of people in their 20s have friends with benefits. As to whether it's harmful is up in the air. While it may be fine for some - others may simply tell researchers it's fine so as not to show how hurt they are. Studies in sexuality are notoriously iffy because people are not as truthful in this arena as they would be in a study pertaining to say, the impact of a heart attack.
MTV did a "True Life" documentary called "I have a friend with benefits" and it followed three "couples" who were merely friends with benefits. None of them worked in the end because one half of each couple ended up wanting more or less. In two instances, two women wanted the relationship to become monogamous and the other couple broke apart because the man wanted monogamy and a more serious relationship.
So that would show this study to be suspect.
I don't doubt that many do well with a no-strings sexual relationship but I'll take a chance in saying the majority of the time - someone gets hurt, even if they cannot admit it. We may not be hardwired for monogamy, but psychologically and emotionally, I would say "friends with benefits" does not work in the long run - not to mention issues with disease and pregnancy.
December 12, 2009 - 9:49amThis Comment
No kidding ;)
April 23, 2011 - 2:26amI guess people who feel casual sex might be harmful to them in general are wise enough to avoid it.
Even as a (30s) single lady, I would also stray away from a casual sexual relationship with someone. There are way too many cons to the situation (as mentioned above from Susan).
In a technological age, there are many other ways to stimulate yourself without the chance of disease, pregnancy and possible attachment. I say, don't waste your time...or risk the possibility of something you will never be able to remove.
Missie
April 23, 2011 - 9:04amWell - what is good for you, is not necessarily good for everybody else.
April 23, 2011 - 2:33pmHi Anonymous,
Very true...this is why we have options but each and everyone of us has a free will to choose what is best for us.
Good luck,
April 24, 2011 - 5:49amMissie