There are many predictions economists could makes about how a modern Great Depression will affect frequency of sex. Two would most likely be:

Prediction 1: Society pulls the covers over their heads and wallows in their measly unemployment checks. Alone.

Prediction 2: Society douses themselves in debauchery and spends their unemployment checks on vibrating condoms and sour apple body lube.

Well, if a recent article by Great Britain’s News and Star is to be believed, society is inching their way (very rapidly) to Prediction 2.

Melanie Wilson, Superdrug’s healthcare buyer, has noticed a 60% increase in lubricant sales alone. She says the chain has seen a “phenomenal rise in the sales of products designed to enhance sexual pleasures and a rise in the sales of condoms compared to this time last year.”

She also notes that pregnancy tests have been flying off the shelves in the past 4 weeks. Uh oh. A bad economy coupled with cheap sex is fantastic, but a bad economy coupled with pregnancy and babies could be disastrous.

Should we expect a baby boom?

The article addresses how in times of economic hardship birth rates have, ironically, increased (they note the early 90s as an example). However, Siobhan Freegard, co-founder of Netmums a social networking site for new mothers, doesn’t seem to think so.

“Funnily enough, I saw something on our forums about mums being extra careful with contraception because they can’t afford any mistakes,” she said.

Hm. So maybe we have a silver lining to this rotten economy after all. If we can’t control the downfall of Wall Street, at least we can control an upswing in the bedroom.

Blaming your parents for messing up your life is about as cliche as pointing out that kids speak the truth. A Divine Caroline post featuring children’s advice on relationships reveals both ideas really are kinda sorta… true. The site polled a bunch of rugrats on the topics of love, marriage, dating and kissing. The responses range from insightful:

What do most people do on a date?
On the first date, they just tell each other lies and that usually gets them interested enough to go for a second date.
Martin, age 10

…to slightly disconcerting:

When is it okay to kiss someone?
When they’re rich.
Pam, age 7

…to downright hilarious:

How would you make your marriage work?
Tell your wife that she looks pretty, even if she looks like a truck.
Ricky, age 10

While utterly endearing, these responses also offer an interesting case to the nature/nurture debate about gender roles. Kids start picking up on relationship behaviors and attitudes long before they have the vocabulary to address what’s going on.

For example, when asked what her parents had in common, one 8-year-old girl responded: “Both don’t want any more kids.” Freddie, a 6 year old, said only a “fool” would get hitched, and 10-year-old Alan offered this advice about how to know whom to marry:

You got to find somebody who likes the same stuff. Like, if you like sports, she should like it that you like sports, and she should keep the chips and dip coming.

Besides amusement, these responses reveal that watching Mommy deliver snacks while Daddy watches sports on the couch are gendered behaviors that don’t go unnoticed. So, if kids grow up to see their parents both heading off to work, both doing dishes and cooking (and fetching the chip and dip) will they in turn take on Equally Shared Parenting-like duties when they’re older? Clearly we don’t know for sure, but it’s certainly something to ponder.

Today’s weird sex news comes from Australia, where police are hunting for a man who broke into three sex shops, had sex with a blow-up doll named “Jungle Jane,” and left the dolls in an alley near the stores.

To perform his unusual crime, the man broke holes in the walls of the store and squeezed through the small opening. Instead of leaving pieces of wood and plaster everywhere, the polite fellow cleaned up the mess he created breaking through the wall. A shop owner expressed worry:

“It is totally bizarre. It is a real concern that someone like that is out on the street.”

He won’t be in the street for long, as the offender will likely be caught—police have collected DNA and fingerprints from the crime scenes.

Apropos of yesterday’s post about hiring a private eye to investigate your date’s past, does an offense like this make a man undateable? We’d be pretty creeped out if we found out that Mr. Online Date had commited this crime of, uh, passion. But if it were a few months in that we discovered his past, perhaps we’d be able to overlook it—provided our sex drawer remanined properly stocked after he’d spent the night. Thoughts, dear readers? What type of criminal past would prevent you from dating a man?

The female psyche will never recover from the pop cultural icon that was (is) Sex and the City’s Samantha Jones.

There she was. A blissfully single and liberated woman pushing fifty, who had zero desire to allow conventional wisdom or age slow her sexual prowess. (Not to mention tarnish her good looks.)

Women. Everywhere. Ate. It. Up.

The appeal was undeniable for lots of reasons, but Samantha Jones certainly took the edge off female aging. She made sex after forty seem not only attainable, normal, and smoking hot but aged to perfection. Like a fine wine.
Britain’s Sun attempted to put a damper on this particular female fantasy by reporting some random skin care survey saying “younger” women have sex 10.4 times a month and “older” women only 4.5 times a month.

Wisely, the paper chose to consult with three women over 40 to find if they’re less, more or equally as sexually satisfied as when they were younger, “slimmer” whipper-snappers.

Survey said? Hands down. Sex after forty is best. By a long shot. It just seems to get better for women, they say. Mostly because of our pesky body issues (stop it girls!) and other inane insecurities. Ironically, our bodies are probably at their most conventionally attractive. (Unless you’re Jennifer Aniston) So cut it out ladies.

Sarah Bennet, a 42-year-old mother of two, still doesn’t feel like she’s hit her sexual peak.  As did all three women, she complained about low self- esteem as a twenty-something. She’d have sex “just for the sake of it” because she wanted guys to like her.  Now she’s “more able to talk about what she likes and doesn’t like.” And still enjoys the random one night stand every once in a while, too.

Deborah Crew, a happily married 47-year-old avoided sex while in her 20s due to a nasty bout of anorexia. She was needy and insecure (i.e.. not sexual). After a failed marriage, she met her current husband who “loves every wrinkle and line.” The unconditional love makes her feel all warm and fuzzy, and her increased work success makes her “ooze sexual confidence. “She and her husband have sex as often as possible, she says.

Lastly, Ann Lee a 49-year-old single mother of two, says “without a doubt, sex gets better as you get older. It’s all to do with confidence.” Although she’s “bigger” she’s much happier and more comfortable in her skin as she approaches fifty. She married and had children young, but thinks back on the sex with the ex as “functional” and “probably wasn’t great for either of us.” She attributes her fantastic sex life not to feeling secure in her current relationship.

Unfortunately, it seems the fairer sex is a complicated breed when it comes to the bedroom. So the next time you catch an unflattering glimpse of yourself immediately hit “delete.” Hon, there ain’t nothing but you getting in the way of you enjoying smoking hot middle-aged Samantha Jones sex decades earlier.

This past weekend, the New York Times’ Social Q’s column published a letter from a woman who wanted to know: “At what point in the dating process is it correct to perform a background check on a prospective partner?”

Their answer: Um, never. Just get to know the person, you crazy harpie.

We’re kidding, of course. They didn’t use the word “person.”

Their real answer: “Feel free to consult a private eye anytime after you feel that certain spring in your step, but safely prior to sharing your Social Security number or the secret code to your A.T.M. card.”

Ah, yes, the old private investigator. We’ll just call ours up right now on our speed dial.

Seriously, though. Are we just completely behind the times? Is everyone besides us hiring private investigators before embarking on magical overnight date number three? Or is the New York Times just targeting a different readership than us? You know, the kind that likes Matlock and fears that 20/20 might be right about the guy who’s developing your film.

We recommend keeping it simple. If you meet your date through friends, ask the compatriots a few probing questions.

When you’re out on dates, do that crazy thing we refer to as talking. Get to know them. Pay attention to how they interact with others. Don’t share information you shouldn’t (e.g. your mother’s maiden name, your credit card numbers, the fact that you cry when you watch The Ghost Whisperer). As with food preparation and sex, keep it safe. If you feel that something’s not right or too good to be true, don’t waste your time.

If you can’t resist, allow yourself a few minutes with that sacred tool of stalkers the world over: Google. Just bear in mind that you might come across something you’d prefer not to, and we’re not talking about insurance fraud (e.g. ambiguously affectionate Facebook postings from other gals, Dungeons and Dragons fan club memberships, bad art).

Finally, remember (as even the New York Times concedes) that no amount of investigating with a private eye or online will tell you if that special someone will treat you well, irritate you, or embarrass you. Only time will tell you that. So don’t just search your new crush for signs; listen, and listen carefully.