Infidelity: women, language, religion
credit: a.abcnews.com
Nathaniel Peters, over at the FIRST THINGS blog site, noticed a New York Times article on infidelity, particularly the rise in women reporting their own infidelity.
But what most amazed Peters was the language used in the NYTimes article:
The noticeable shifts came in men and women over 60 and those under 35. One could say many things about the findings, but I was struck by the tone of a few sentences. One, in the print edition, summarized the article:
“More people are cheating, new studies find, and younger women appear to be catching up with men.”
Another did the same, but in the body of the piece:
“Notably, women appear to be closing the adultery gap: younger women appear to be cheating on their spouses nearly as often as men.”
Notice the language. It’s not that women are as unfaithful as men or that women’s infidelity is rising; it’s that women are “closing the adultery gap” and “catching up with men,” the same language you use when talking about women achieving parity with men in the classroom, workplace, etc.
A couple of days later, another FIRST THINGS blogger, Ryan Sayre Patrico, alerted readers to a second piece on the same topic, a Chicago Tribune article using similar language:
How’s this for sexual equality?
Though men are still overwhelmingly more likely to cheat on their spouses than women, the fairer sex is gaining ground.
Patrico’s comment:
Gaining ground? This makes adultery sound like a game of Risk.
These insightful comments had me wondering if religious writers would have used similar language.
And what sort of variable is religious belief, if indeed it is?
The Journal of Family Issues, December 2007, published the results of a study that claims to answer the question, “Are There Religious Variations in Marital Infidelity?”
Although previous scholarship has examined the relationship between religious involvement and a wide range of family outcomes, the relationship between religion and extramarital sexual behavior remains understudied.
The authors investigate how religious affiliation, participation, and biblical beliefs explain differences in self-reported marital infidelity.
This study examines data from the 1991-2004 General Social Surveys and finds that religious factors are associated with the likelihood of marital infidelity.
Both church attendance and biblical beliefs are associated with lower odds of self-reported infidelity.
Additionally, the authors find substantial denominational variations in the odds of marital infidelity, particularly among those who strongly affiliate with their religious group.
If this piques your interest, you will find the full, free pdf file here.
Sherry Tyree, 66, a graduate of John Burroughs School and Washington University, is a founding member (1984) and Vice President of Women for Faith & Family, a national Catholic women's organization that supports and defends traditional church teachings. Sherry is married to Dr. Donald A. Tyree, professor emeritus, School of Business, St. Louis University. 
Sheree, yes the language is certainly suggestive. As a man, I’ve always been vaguely suspicious of infidelity statistics, believing that men will overstate their sexual behavior, and women will understate theirs.
That, however, is beside the point.
For another thoughtful article on this subject, take a look at an article in this week’s New Yorker titled “Red State, Blue State, Good Sex, Bad Sex”. In which they explore the teen pregnancy rate, the divorce rate, the age at first marriage, and the peculiar acceptance among religious conservatives who push abstinence of high rates of teenage pregnancy.
As far as the original article goes, it’s my take that society generally accepts that a certain amount of infidelity is normative. What you’re dealing with statistically is a core population. The better question would be to ask men who cheat WHO they are most likely to cheat with, and how many different partners the typical man who is cheating will have over a period of time. You have to be careful with statistics, as we all know.
Here’s the link to the New Yorker article I referenced: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_talbot?yrail
Language is everything. The words we use are who we are. What we make them mean is even more telling, and something humans do unceasingly.
Statistics work best when non judging,i.e., “closing the gap” can occurr as a reference to the groups becoming statistically even.
My first reaction was to make it mean that women were achieving something desired. Much like the corporate achievement reference. I also jumped to blame something or someone for it. I had to work hard to quite my internal dialogue about what the changes meant.
The finding: the statistical differences are shrinking.
What is the source of the change? Isn’t speculation necessary to shape the next study?
Maybe we are achieving gender parity, and the temptation of being out of integrity is a challenge that comes with freedom and equal opportunity.
My own experience is that both secular education and the major religions are not dealing powerfully with integrity. Being your word, with it your life works, without it doesn’t.