Prevalence and types of sexual inactivity in Britain: analyses of national cross-sectional probability survey data

Abstract

ObjectivesTo examine how prevalence and context of sexual inactivity varies across the life-course, assess dissatisfaction with sex life among those who are sexually inactive and identify associations with factors that may represent reasons for sexual inactivity.DesignAnalysis of cross-sectional probability sample survey data.SettingBritish general population.Participants14 623 participants (n men: 6045 unweighted, 7245 weighted), aged 16–74 years, of the third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3), undertaken in 2010–2012.Main outcome measuresSexual inactivity, defined as not reporting oral, vaginal or anal intercourse in the past year and further categorised into those who were sexually inexperienced (had never had sex), single or in a relationship.ResultsOverall, 15.9% (weighted n 1155/7245) of men and 22.2% (1646/7410) of women were sexually inactive (p<0.001). The proportion of sexually inactive individuals who were sexually inexperienced was larger among men than women (26.3% (304/1155) vs 16.3% (268/1646)), while the proportion who were singles was larger among women (49.8% (820/1646) vs 40.4% (467/1155)). Sexual inexperience was the most common type of sexual inactivity in early adulthood, with this declining with age. A minority of those who had sexual experience but were sexually inactive—34.8% (293/842) of men and 23.6% (319/1349) of women—reported being dissatisfied with their sex lives. Associations with sexual inactivity was observed for a range of sociodemographics and sexual behaviours/attitudes, for example, religion, ethnicity, Body mass index, height, employment status and index of multiple deprivation; these associations varied by type of sexual inactivity and gender.ConclusionsWhile sex is important for well-being, a non-negligible proportion of the population at all ages are sexually inactive, yet many are not dissatisfied with their situation, with implications for sex and relationship counselling.

Changes in Penile-Vaginal Intercourse Frequency and Sexual Repertoire from 2009 to 2018: Findings from the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior

“…Because our sample was limited to individuals ages 14–49, we were unable to examine sexual behavior trends among people aged 50 and older. However, our findings align with studies that have found greater proportions of young people reporting no partnered sexual behaviors in the prior year (e.g., Burghardt et al, 2020 ; Ghaznavi et al, 2019 ; Ueda & Mercer, 2019 ; Ueda et al, 2020 ).…”

Sexual Inactivity in Methadone Maintenance Treatment Patients

“…The prevalence of sexual inactivity in this study is higher than in other populations. The prevalence of male sexual inactivity in the general population in the US and Britain are 15.2% and 15.9%, respectively [10,20]. The prevalence reported in patients receiving opioid replacement treatment by Lugoboni et al [18] was comparable to the general population, but was four times lower than found in our study.…”

“…Disturbance of sexual function can affect quality of life [7,8] and relationships [9]. In the male general population, sexual inactivity ranges between 15.9% to 17.6% [10,11]. The prevalence of sexual inactivity is higher in people with comorbidities such as diabetes, hypertension, psychiatry conditions, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), than the general population [12][13][14].…”

“…Sexual activity tends to reduce with age [15]. Factors associated with sexual inactivity are multifactorial and include increasing age, relationship status, educational status, and employment status [10,16,17].…”

Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018

“…showing associations between lower income and measures of sexual inactivity [12][13][14]29 and decreased appeal in the mating market for men. [30][31][32][33] Given the widening disparities in economic security (some of which are more pronounced among young men), 34 the preference for men of higher socioeconomic status, and the larger number of college-educated young women than men in the US, it has been suggested that a subset of young men find it difficult to establish themselves in the heterosexual mating market.…”