The Economics of Virginity Loss

Tim Harford advises;

The economist Alan Collins, in a paper titled Surrender Value of Capital Assets: The Economics of Strategic Virginity Loss, assesses whether men and women lose their virginity in different circumstances. The key conclusion is that almost 60 per cent of women say they lost their virginity because they were in love; just over 35 per cent of men offered this reason. Collins believes this supports the socio-biological view that women are making an investment when they lose their virginity, and so need to choose their partners with care. Men are simply engaging in consumption – that is, having fun.

Collins also discovers that people who found out about sex by talking with friends (rather than, for instance, from books) were more likely to lose their virginity for non-romantic reasons. Perhaps they wanted something to talk about. I suggest that you get some friends over for a girly chat about the facts of life. All investments should begin with research

Related;
Excerpts from the paper;

The result of estimating logit equations, for the probability of giving `being in love' as a reason for virginity loss, are shown in Tables 2 and 3. Results for other model specifications were also examined including gender specific adjusted models with an AGE squared term plus some interaction terms to capture the possible effects of particular religious upbringing and development (FAITH*GOD16 interaction terms and EDUCATION* GOD16 interactions). The results of these alternative models were not generally dissimilar and so the simplest full model with a full set of shift variables to discern gender specific differences is presented.

Females are significantly more likely to offer romantic reasoning for virginity loss. No clear evidence is found for the direct impact of religious denomination on asset value, since none of the denomination dummies exhibits the expected sign. The negative significance of the MUSLIM variable, however, suggests that romantic considerations are less likely to account for virginity loss amongst those within this religious denomination. Arguably this religion tends to discourage romantic notions and encourage bride wealth payments and other non-romantic objectives. Religious beliefs at age 16 (GOD16) is, however, significant reinforcing the general role of religion in preserving virgin capital value as a strategic asset. That said though the relevant shift variable (GOD16XSEX) is significantly negative and indicative of a real but arguably counterintuitive gender difference.

Within the model the significant negative impact of the FRIENDS dummy supports the marketization argument since it implies significant open discussion and learning took place prior to virginity loss. Further, it is notable that learning from friends has a marketizing effect for males but apparently not for females. This represents the stereotypical dichotomy of asset value of virginity by gender. In economic terms, this dichotomy can be reduced to the statement that sex is for males more of a consumption good, whilst for females it pertains more to the nature of a capital good. Turning to the age coefficients, the significant variable is the relevant shift term (AGEXSEX) which suggests that for women romantic considerations are more important when younger but with age more consumption-focused thinking in this context develops. This offers some support to the Shorter thesis outlined earlier. The embarrassment term is also significant and shows the expected sign. Subsequent work might explore the use of this term to adjust or at least qualify statistical results on sensitive sexual topics more systematically.