X Close

Is therapy to blame for the sex recession?

'Intimacy is an inherently risky psychological undertaking.' Credit: Getty

'Intimacy is an inherently risky psychological undertaking.' Credit: Getty

September 3 2025 - 10:00am

Americans are having less sex — again. According to the Wall Street Journal, citing a report from conservative think tank the Institute for Family Studies (IFS), Americans of all ages are spurning intimacy.

Data from the 2024 General Social Survey, produced by the University of Chicago, showed that 37% of people aged 18-64 reported having sex at least once a week, down from 55% in 1990. Predictably, youngsters show the starkest decline: 24% of people aged 18-29 said they had not had sex in the past year, twice as many as in 2010.

This is the story that hasn’t quite managed to tell itself to completion, if you will. In 2018, the Atlantic published a piece titled: “Why Are Young People Having So Little Sex?” It used survey data to tell the story of teenage and 20-something Americans shorn of the very libidinal urges, or at least the urge to act on the urges, that used to define the young. Then in 2019, the same magazine published “The Sex Recession Is Making Young Americans Unhappy.”

These alarming statistics and headlines followed #MeToo’s first flush. And while ubiquitous porn use and the anti-intimacy effect of a generation raised on screens and social media were mooted as causes, some put a lot of weight on the deadening effect that the #MeToo movement had on gung-ho approaches to seduction. Consent had become an incredibly thorny issue, and more people were thinking twice before perving, flirting, and asking out — especially at work. In many workplaces, where people often meet their future partners or spouses, romance became severely frowned upon.

Then Covid struck in 2020, and sex fell off another cliff, partly as single people couldn’t easily date, and partly as those cooped up together didn’t necessarily find themselves filled with desire. And now, despite some indication of surging sex rates among certain demographics, such as gay men, we learn that the American sex recession is ongoing and that it extends to all ages.

Like the Atlantic before it, the Wall Street Journal offers the usual array of factors to explain this. But the most dominant — and certainly the most profound, in the sense that it marks a true departure from times past — is the heightened awareness of mental states and psychological ill health. In her book Bad Therapy: Why the Kids Aren’t Growing Up, Abigail Shrier argued that the emphasis on therapy and therapeutic paradigms across education and day-to-day care of children and young people was making them miserable.

According to Shrier, this explained rocketing rates of depression, anxiety and other disorders. Therapy, and the constant self-scanning for answers to the question of “how am I?” induces rumination and locks people in cycles of gloom and paralysis. This clearly has an effect on sexual vim, since intimacy is an inherently risky psychological undertaking. For people who are taught to be hyper-vigilant about their mental health, with potential triggers, traumas, and micro-aggressions all combed over and rooted out, sex goes from being fun and exciting to a terrifying minefield.

In its report, the IFS is mainly interested in the effect of cohabitation and non-marriage, which it says lowers rates of sex and sexual satisfaction — although this would seem to contradict other sources. The soul-destroying nature of dating apps is also mentioned.

Ultimately, it seems that the ennui of atomized, expensive, uncertain contemporary life hits young people hardest. Even still, it affects people right across the generations, even to the ripe age of 65, when rates of sexual activity remain roughly stable because they tend to be relatively low in the first place. Maybe it’s because pensioners have finally discovered that there is more to life than sex and feelings.


Zoe Strimpel is a historian of gender and intimacy in modern Britain and a columnist for the Sunday Telegraph. Her latest book is Seeking Love in Modern Britain: Gender, Dating and the Rise of ‘the Single’ (Bloomsbury)
realzoestrimpel

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

July 1 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam