Sunday 26 August 2007

Pic of the day: You did not really think I'd illustrate this with a picture of real fornication, did you?

Masters of fornication

My native Norway has another record, but I'm not sure how we feel about it. I certainly am not proud of it, but then again I am not exactly contributing to it. In the entire Durex-selling world, nobody has as much unprotected sex as Norwegians. This graph (published in The Economist) shows that over 70% of the relevant population does it, and with more partners than most as well. (Although we are a bit from the world record there with only 12 partners on average, well below Turkey's 14. Then again there is a saying here in Norway, the most important is not to win but to beat the Swedes, and we just barely do that.)

Given this carefree and careless behavior, it should surprise no one that our beautiful country also has one of the highest rates of Sexually Transmitted Diseases in the developed world. I am honestly not sure why my countrymen do this: We have one of the highest education levels in the world, and quite possibly the highest literacy. For a while now, we have had sex education in schools. Condoms are conveniently placed by the checkout in the supermarket as well as in gas stations, and supposedly automats in hotel lobbies (I haven't been there in a while). People aren't ashamed to be seen buying condoms. My best guess is that they just don't care. They are rich, they are healthy, and they live in a state that cares for them like a mother nothing bad could happen to them. Theoretically, sure, but not really.

Also, Norwegian are very trusting people. This is probably why we have this extensive welfare state as well. In more cautious populations, such as the Americas, people would not trust the government with that much money and power, since they would suspect that the money would go into deep pockets and the power would be abused. But we generally expect people to do what is best for us. Well, at least as long as they are fellow Norwegians. If my countrymen were aware that they were only three [intercourses] away from an African or Arab, they might put on the rubber sock after all. (It's not that we have anything against people of darker colors, of course, we are not racists. It's just that we can't trust them?

***

But why are economists interested in this topic, anyway? We are not famous for our interest in what goes on under the sheets, unlike certain other groups of people. Well, scientific curiosity aside, there is the matter of diseases, which do have an impact on the economy. STDs may sound like second-rate diseases, inconvenient at worst, except for AIDS. It is not quite that easy. Yes, they are mostly nuisances if they are discovered early. But to discover them early you have to suspect them; and if you suspected them, you would probably not have acquired them in the first place. (Although being sober does help. Norwegians don't drink a lot by global standards, but they tend to drink it all during Friday and Saturday nights.) Anyway, syphilis may no longer be the death sentence it used to be, and you will most likely receive treatment before you go insane, but it is still not a trip in the park. And there is always HIV.

Despite intense research, there has been little progress against the HIV virus since 1990. We still don't have a vaccine. We have various combination treatments, which patients typically have to alternate between. These keep the infection in check, if all goes well. But they have nasty side effects, more for some people than for others. It may not seem like a big deal when you are drunk and making out, that you will have to take medications for the rest of your life. But when you're barfing instead of working, it was a big deal after all. And a number of tonight's happy fornicators - and their spouses! - are indeed going to drop off the workforce, even if they survive. It depends on their job, of course, and their physical and mental constitution, and even the particular strain of HIV they are infected with. But it will definitely have economic repercussions, not only for themselves but for society.

Add socialized health care and the very high cost of treating HIV. Despite the mass production, the cost of keeping some patients alive is on the same order of magnitude as what some of us earn. It would be sheer lunacy to think that this won't influence taxes. The more my countrymen fornicate this weekend, the more tax I'll pay if I'm still around in a decade. This is grade school math.

***

Another important lesson can be drawn from this study. It will hopefully bury forever the notion that religion is the cause of unprotected sex. According to this hypothesis, religious people don't have more sex before marriage than others, possibly less, but they are more likely to have unprotected sex. Because good boys and girls don't buy condoms, they don't have them around when they need them. Also they are wary of being seen buying condoms if they live in a small town where the shop personnel may know them. So when their instincts finally run off with them, they have unprotected sex while their heathen brothers have the latex in place. Or that was common wisdom until now. You'll find this idea is alive and well if you discuss with leftists and atheists.

The Scandinavian countries are thoroughly post-Christian, with Christians making up only a steadily dwindling minority of the populace. We are also blessedly free of taboos when it comes to sex. As I mentioned, you can buy condoms anywhere, and people generally don't take much interest in your premarital sex unless you are a member of a small conservative congregation. The fact that Norway still holds the world record in unprotected sex, with fairly close competition from our neighbors, shows that real life is not like atheists and leftists have figured out it ought to be. (Big surprise there?

Rather, it seems that conservatives have been right all along. Separated from God, people sink to the level of barnyard animals, at least when it comes to sex. I'm slightly wary of this view as well, not because I disagree completely but because it is not relevant. If people really live in the presence of God, it will certainly influence their sexuality, as it will many other things in life. But this only applies to scattered individuals, not to entire countries. Even in a religious society, most people will still only be religious on the outside. There may be more people who have a genuine spiritual life, because there are more people who believe it is possible and therefore search for it. But it seems more likely to me that the difference is cultural rather than spiritual, when we look at numbers large enough to influence national statistics.

My personal theory, then. If you look at the chart from the distance, you will see that there is a broad correlation between the number of sex partners and the lack of protection. In other words, the more casually you approach sex, the less likely you are to protect yourself and your partner from diseases and unplanned pregnancies. Not exactly a revolutionary idea, but significant. We are a country of fornicators because we don't take life seriously. I'm sorry, but money will often do that to you. That's where the concept of "playboy" comes from, you know. We're a country of playboys and playgirls. You did not expect to hear this from me, but perhaps we should grow up a bit.