I'm a bit puzzled by a news piece that's whizzing all over the world of internet right now, and it's this: some academics from Washington University are claiming that men who help their ladies with traditionally "feminine" chores - cleaning, cooking and washing, etc - have sex 1.6 times LESS often than other couples, who presumably operate on a Woman does this, Man does that basis.
Before you cry out 'Yes, but the man is doing man things in their place!' - think again.
Because even when men did do typically "male" chores (whatever they are) lady tasks still took up 17 more hours a week than man tasks. And ladies did half the man tasks, anyway. So basically, the laziest guys in live-in relationships get laid the most because life is fair like that.
Interestingly, sociologist Pepper Schwartz says the finding isn't even that surprising, because it matches other studies that indicate egalitarian marriages are less racy. "That companionable part of the relationship turns out not to be so sexy," he told website.
So: I DON'T GET IT. First of all, wouldn't ladies be annoyed their guy didn't help around the house and be less inclined to have sexual relations? Wouldn't women who had decent, equality-minded men feel happier in their relationships, and therefore be more down for bedtime activities?
Maybe the "sort" of ladies who (rightly) expect men to also do chores tend to speak their mind more, so they don't buckle to pressure when their guy is all 'Let's have sex even though you're not in the mood'. And, inversely, maybe the women who don't feel comfortable asking their dude to lift a finger also don't feel comfortable calling the shots in the bedroom? Except that theory relies on men being the ones who want sex more, which isn't always true.