Britons 'saving money with sex'

[leighonigar]

What's up with these researchers anyway? What's wrong with being proud of sexual liberties?

I would be inclined to say nothing but for STIs. These are a big deal. Of course condoms stop the worst ones, like HIV, at least usually, but there are other viruses which can be more casually transmitted. As a general rule, less partners => less death.

 

[Dejavu]

You can save a lot more with solo sex. In fact, the only cost is perhaps Internet connection.

 

[Sesshi]

I would be inclined to say nothing but for STIs. These are a big deal. Of course condoms stop the worst ones, like HIV, at least usually, but there are other viruses which can be more casually transmitted. As a general rule, less partners => less death.

Or at least, itchy nether regions.

Obviously the original survey must be for couples in a steady relationship. There have been frequent instances in which the then-other-half has thrown a strop and I end up thinking "You know, it would be cheaper to pay for sex".

 

[0098386]

I would be inclined to say nothing but for STIs. These are a big deal. Of course condoms stop the worst ones, like HIV, at least usually, but there are other viruses which can be more casually transmitted. As a general rule, less partners => less death.

As well as unwanted pregnancies. Condoms aren't 100%, even in the best situations (lulz) it still only works 98 out of 100 times. In that 2% you're potentially exposing yourself to any nasty virus or disease going.

 

[iJohnHenry]

They found that when it comes to one-night stands, numbers of partners and attitudes to casual sex, Britain leads the field, ahead of even liberal nations such as the Netherlands and the passionate Italians.

I believe this is accounted for by the "OMG, what was I thinking" syndrome.

As Rod Stewart said: "Just don't be here in the morning when I wake up."