Women Who Lost Virginity Early More Likely To Divorce: New Study

There might be a new argument to try when convincing your teen to wait to have sex. According to the a study conducted by the University of Iowa, women who lost their virginity in their young teens are more likely to divorce.

The study, published in the Journal of Marriage and Family, surveyed the responses of 3,793 women and found that 31 percent who lost their virginity as teens divorced within five years, and 47 percent divorced within 10 years. On the flip side, the divorce rate for women who had waited to have sex was only 15 percent at the five year mark, and 27 percent by the time 10 years rolled around.

But the study also found that a first sexual experience before the age of 16 -- wanted or not -- was still strongly associated with divorce.

Of course early sexual experiences can have lasting effects on relationships later in life. So it's not surprising that with 42 percent of participants claiming their first sexual experience before the age of 18 wasn't completely wanted, that it could affect them in their adult life.

The study's author, Anthony Paik, said in a press release that one explanation for his findings is, "If the sex was not completely wanted or occurred in a traumatic context, it's easy to imagine how that could have a negative impact on how women might feel about relationships, or on relationship skills. The experience could point people on a path toward less stable relationships."

The study did not examine the divorce rates for men who lost their virginity in their teens, but Paik said he thinks it would make an interesting follow up.

Comments

[commchf]

06:58 PM on 06/20/2011

Best joke ever:
"I may have lost my virginity but I still have the box it came in."

[evesapple]

03:34 PM on 06/20/2011

I'd like to see a correlation of successful deflection of unwanted sexual advances at an early age and their effect on losing virginity, marriage and divorce. Wonder if it causes a delay in the age of first sex? In my experience, it makes you think twice about putting yourself in a sketchy situation in the future.

[Randybostonterrier]

08:32 AM on 06/20/2011

Maybe this study does have some validity. When you place a value on being intimate with someone versus I have to get rid of my virginity because it's a disease, than this is a good thing. Why in the heck would anyone want sex before 18 anyway? It's silly I waited until I was 24 and glad I didn't have sex as a child. Since then I haven't had the need to be pleasing a man or being with a variety of men, I respect myself more than just being an orifice for someone's private parts.

[glowbug25]

09:24 AM on 06/19/2011

So let me get this straight...based on less than 4,000 responses out of the millions of women in the U.S., early loss of virginity indicates they are more likely to divorce? Hmm.. can the sample size be any smaller? I'm tired of all of these so called studies that are supposedly representing statistics in the U.S. with tiny non-representative samples. Its a joke and these studies shouldn't even be published.

[EmCeePee]

05:40 PM on 06/24/2011

It is not a joke, the sample is not tiny nor non-representative, and if they did what they say they did, then it is representative of the millions of women in the U.S. That is, of course, women who were in the sampling pool, were contacted, agreed to participate, completed the survey, and tried to answer truthfully and completely. We must assume they compared both the sample frame (the pool of eligibles) and the respondents with some rigorous estimate of the actual population of women in the US aged 15-44.

That said, 3700+ respondents is more than enough to support the apparent analysis (multi-variate regression?) and to test the statistical significance of the relationships among the variables of interest. I haven't been able yet to get a copy of the article online, so I must hedge my support for their research methodology a bit--but it looks OK as explained in the article. Amazing how well a few hundred or few thousand people can represent a larger population if they are truly randomly selected from a well-defined and accessible group.

[ironman062]

09:18 AM on 06/19/2011

I agree the purity myth is quite silly. Relationship & marriage problems don't stem from purity, but from immaturity & selfishness by men AND women. It's sad and disgusting how many people today just cheat & lie because they can't handle maturity.

[RealistBC]

04:47 AM on 06/19/2011

The title of the sponsoring magazine makes me suspicious of the validity of this "study" - and its conclusions.

[EmCeePee]

06:03 PM on 06/24/2011

The Journal of Marriage and Family is a professional publication, not a magazine. Articles are refereed by experts on the topics. Authors and referees are unknown to each other. Most proposed articles are not published or are revised to take care of issues raised by reviewers. Those that still have major problems are usually not published. As for the validity and conclusions, neither is guaranteed by the journal or even by the authors. They do explain why they think their findings are valid and how their conclusions are supported by their evidence. They tell you who, what, when, where, why, and how they did the study. They stipulate that they did what they planned, that the data were not made up, that no one got special treatment or big rewards for cooperation, that experts other than the authors looked at the paper and found it had value, that any important problems (e.g., missing data) have been identified, that the study has some basis beyond the authors curiosity (e.g., theory, prior studies), and that other experts can get access to the full study and perhaps the data. Anything else would be unethical and all heck would break loose in Academe. So, why be so suspicious? Yes, be skeptical, be careful, ask questions, have doubts, seek further information, look for studies whose findings differ, read widely, read the whole article, etc. Whatever might be the shortcomings of this article, it is not the "sponsoring magazine."

[Chad Brewer]

12:04 PM on 06/17/2011

I'm glad this study didn't comeo out when I was 16 haha

[NaomiG]

04:12 PM on 06/16/2011

@Remy Arrr I think you're right, although this article comes off a bit like a statement of doom, I can't draw the conclusion that if you had sex at an early age you will get divorced. Perhaps, like others have pointed out, early sexual experience is more related to bad experiences that affect your ability to form healthy relationships in the future. But I think that being in a marriage is more about learning the skills of how to communicate, make decisions, built trust, etc. and these are skills that can be learned by anyone, especially with a bit of marriage counseling.

[FiredUpRTG]

01:57 PM on 06/16/2011

What about Weiner?

[Oilygarch]

03:11 PM on 06/17/2011

All I can say is his name is appropriate. ;-P

[dawnbe1229]

12:44 PM on 06/16/2011

What? No study about guys who lose their virginity early? Shocking! Once again putting all the responsibility on the women. What nonsense.

[angelcakesinc]

09:59 PM on 06/16/2011

Alas, the dominant group usually goes unexamined. But at least the one who did this is considering doing a study on men.

[Rachel Ann Kelson]

12:41 PM on 06/16/2011

Palk thinks it would be an interesting follow up? Try a extremely critical follow up study so that we can stop perpetuating this stupid purity myth!

[WriterInThePink]

10:55 AM on 06/16/2011

Continue to perpetuate the purity myth and make women feel bad for something that is natural. Curious how there is no article correlating to the problems men have in relationships that stem from having sex too early. By the way, people who agree with things like this are probably the same ones watching MTV's pregnant teen shows.

[Checquoline]

09:30 AM on 06/16/2011

I think Huff Po needs a section on stupid articles that say nothing. This one could go into it.

[backpackjack]

06:53 AM on 06/16/2011

This isn't a "new" finding at all. We've known at least since the 70s that women who have sex earlier tend to have less stable relationships across their lifetimes, and we've also known for almost as long that the same holds true of men. (Age of first sex and relationship stability, by the way, though correlated, do not show a *causal* link). Look up a paper by Draper and Harpending if you want a good discussion of this topic.
This is an example of an article for the general public written by somebody who clearly knows little about this area of research. But hey... why not pretend this is "new" and not 40 years old? You can't write an article on a 40 year old finding, I suppose.

[syrius]

06:47 AM on 06/16/2011

The key to never getting divorced- don't get married!

[EmCeePee]

06:09 PM on 06/24/2011

I think there is nearly a 100% correlation between never marrying and not getting divorced. It might even be thought of as causal.