Quality of insertion; frequency of insertion; cost per insertion.
A table immediately follows. After that, common adjustments to CPI are discussed that reorder this table. Finally, a brief statement about condom usage provides an important adjustment to QOI that can move masturbation far up the list.
| Type | QOI | FOI | CPI (combined sex etc. – see below quality adjustments) | Notes |
| Hot marriage | Great | Multiple times per week | Cost of dates; costs of unwanted children; amortized divorce costs; marriage adjustments | See below notes for explanation of marriage adjustments |
| Hot dating | Great | Multiple times per week | Cost of dates; higher costs associated with increased risk of VD and unwanted children | |
| Hot affair | Great | Once per week or less | Cost of dates; cost of broken marriage/relationship; higher costs associated with increased risk of VD and unwanted children | |
| Happy marriage | Good or great | Probably no less than once a week | Cost of dates; costs of unwanted children; amortized divorce costs; marriage adjustments | |
| Satisfying dating situation with sex | Good | Once per week | Cost of dates; higher costs associated with increased risk of VD and unwanted children | |
| Mediocre marriage | Average or good | Once a week, maybe less | Cost of dates; costs of unwanted children; amortized divorce costs (note increased costs relative to happier marriages); marriage adjustments | |
| Friends with benefits | Average or good | One a week, often less | Cost of “dates”; higher costs associated with increased risk of VD and unwanted children | |
| Mediocre affairs | Average or good | Once per week or less | Cost of dates; cost of broken marriage/relationship; higher costs associated with increased risk of VD and unwanted children; amortized betrayal costs (see note) | This is about the point where the possibility of false accusations of rape, blackmail, etc. come into play. |
| Regular hookup partners | Average or good | Likely less than once per week | Cost of dates; higher costs associated with increased risk of VD and unwanted children; amortized betrayal costs (see note) Higher risks than with friends with benefits (but not easily distinguishable from the increased risks associated with affairs) | The distinction here with friends with benefits, is that in hookups, there isn’t solid regard for the other person’s ultimate well being. Consequently, rape, VD, and unwanted children are more likely, and a woman has a stronger circumstantial basis to falsely allege rape. |
| Masturbation | Average* (see notes) | As often as desired | Close to zero | Masturbation can’t be directly compared to any kind of sex. However, if we have to place this in the hierarchy, we should refer to the ratio of people who masturbate or go sexless instead of staying in iffy dating situations or going to prostitutes. According to this metric, the average quality of masturbation is higher in women and men who dislike condoms (which, aside from cost of insertion, can be a precondition of higher listed relationships, but if the use lowers the quality of sex, then that would bring down the quality of the higher listed relationships, putting masturbation at the top. See more quality notes below) |
| Unsatisfying dating situation with sex | Average or bad | Once per week, maybe less | Cost of dates; higher costs associated with increased risk of VD and unwanted children; amortized betrayal costs (see above note) | |
| Prostitution | Average or bad | As per funding and desire | As per rates set by prostitute, but typically in the hundreds of dollars per insertion; guaranteed severe VD exposure; possible blackmail issues due to legality etc. | One way to think about the QOI is that if you find a prostitute you like, it’s probably average, but if you aren’t satisfied, it’s probably bad. |
| Average casual sexual dating that ends | Average or bad | Once per week, maybe less | Cost of dates; significantly higher costs associated with greatly increased risk of VD and unwanted children; high risk of false rape allegations and blackmail; increased risk of rape | |
| One night stands and similar activity | Probably bad | Once or a few times; averaging over time, once per week, maybe less (if very active) | Cost of dates; very high costs associated with VD and unwanted children; very high risk of false rape allegations and blackmail; greatly increased risk of rape |
While this combined list is compact for laying out the activity descriptions, it does not adequately convey that the CPI is greatly reduced for most women (e.g. not Catholic and therefore willing to abort children) due to:
- Women having veto power over any children
- Women (outside of rape) being able to choose condoms, etc. or not, greatly mitigating VD risks
- Women being in demand, and therefore able to get men to pay for dates, and less likely to have men initiate divorces
- Low male probability of being able to get a court to pass a rape conviction against a woman
However, there still are betrayal risks (for proper affairs), some VD risks, and the greatly increased risk, of rape and other sexual assault. These risks are far greater in the lower QOI relationships.
I chose not to list bad marriages above, because some of them have no sex at all; and in this case the metrics are irrelevant.
Economically, the most challenging variable to summarize, are the costs associated with divorce. However, to give an indication of likely CPI, here are some stereotypes:
| Type | Relationship Duration | FOI | Total Cost | CPI |
| Upper middle class breadwinner with divorce after 3 kids and 12 years | 15 years | 3x/week (average) | $1M for remaining child support; $500K for alimony, housing, etc. Deduct $600K for $60K/year childraising labor value. | ~$385 |
| Wealthy divorce after e.g. a single child, prenup effectively ignored because children | 5 years | 4x/week (it was hot in the beginning) | $5M all-inclusive divorce settlement (a lowball number, many rich people have it way worse) | ~$4,800 |
| Poor or low middle class (no wealth) divorce with no kids | 7 years | 2x/week (longer courting period and struggles at the end) | $50K for all procedural costs including lawyers and fees; consider that all dating and other relationship costs equaled $200K | ~$350 |
| Middle-class post-children divorce due to sexual nonperformance | 30 years | 2x/week (due to less sex in the final years) | Split retirement savings and the house, so $1.5M | ~$480 |
All these figures underestimate CPI, e.g. because sometimes there are affairs that transmit VD. However, this conveys by cases, the principle that large amounts of wealth loss, boost the dollar value of the CPI to prostitution levels (notionally say, $600 for a quality night with a prostitute)
Regarding marriage adjustments: these can be benefits or costs. While the precise balance can vary a lot by jurisdiction, and depend a lot on wealth, income, and its forms, as well as legal arrangements, some of the common ones include:
- Immediate tax benefits as a result of marriage
- No gift or inheritance taxes
- Access to special pension extensions for the surviving spouse (e.g. for 10 years of Social Security)
- Forced inheritance (“elective share”) or other will modifications (which can cause a massive CPI increase if you are old and have a lot of money)
- Community property forced transfers
- Certain legal protections, forgiveness of debts, etc. for property associated with the marriage
Moreover, the marriage relationship implies several other cost adjustments such as:
- Shared housing
- Having children (can be positive or negative, depending on the aspect and personal outlook)
- Changes to lifestyle in order to live together
Another factor that does not admit of easy generalization, is how to capture the VD exposure costs associated with what was brought into the relationship. That is to say, there is a toll that has to be paid; and if that toll is significant e.g. infertility caused by transmission of incurable VD, it clearly will blow up the CPI. Likewise, the costs of VD are far less for someone who already picked up e.g. HIV, so guaranteed exposures from prostitutes are a much lower hurdle.
Offhand, I think the easiest way to capture the concept of relative VD cost is:
- If you want kids, the amortized cost of VD exposure is on the order of $500K or even more (cost of fertility treatments, surrogates, etc.), if you really want them to be your genetic children. (but even that might not be possible)
- If you want a quality, but relatively chaste, person to be in a long-term relationship with you, the cost of VD exposure is the reduction in your dating pool, when you tell them (or they find out) you have VD. (This is particularly important because such people are going to be able e.g. to resist affairs.) The end result could be a cost of millions of dollars, if you wind up e.g. marrying someone who doesn’t share your values because that’s the only class of person you can hold onto with your VD status.
- Otherwise, the cost is largely the additional risk of damage to your health, which, due to associations with dementia, could be on the order of millions of dollars.
Finally, a common reordering of the QOI column occurs when (usually male) people dislike condom usage. If the use of condoms significantly degrades the sexual experience, then anything up to and possibly including a satisfying dating relationship with sex, could be less enjoyable than masturbation. A common outcome is that while the use of condoms lowers CPI due to decreased VD and pregnancy risks, it also lowers QOI and makes the prospective or current relationship not worth the price.
This list does not adequately cover situations of slavery, such as:
- Women in misogynist societies (e.g. Pakistan) who are slaves of their husbands.
- Men living in jurisdictions where a woman (such as a single mother) can accuse the man of rape and get a conviction regardless of the facts. (slavery through terror)
In these situations, the amortized CPI is practically infinite (e.g. 20 years in prison and being poor for the rest of your life), and so you would not choose a relationship except in the following case:
- When both parties truly love the other person and are highly compatible, so that while the impact of the risk is practically infinite, the probability of the risk is very low.