Summary youth and sexuality
Sanchez, Fetterolf & Rudman, 2012 Eroticizing inequality in the United States: The
consequences and determinants of traditional gender role adherence in intimate
relationships
Traditional gender roles may influence sexual behavior at an early age during initial stages of
sexual exploration. In these traditional gender roles, men are seen as dominant and women
are seen as submissive. In this article, the authors review research on traditional gender-role
adherence and sexuality for heterosexual men and women, focusing on the consequences
and predictors of this.
To understand the sexual roles that men and women occupy in a sexual relationship, the
Sexual Script Theory can be used. According to this theory, the majority of sexual behaviors
in heterosexual relationships tend to follow a prescribed social script that reflects the cultural
norm. In general, the dominant cultural script involves men performing a more agentic role,
while women are expected to take on a more submissive role during sexual activity. Thus,
men act more as the initiators and directors of sexual activities who determine the pace of
sexual interactions and what activities occur, and women submit to these desires and wait for
their partner to initiate and direct. This affords men greater power and control during sexual
intercourses than women. Other prevailing sexual scripts are:
- Women more often report having had unwanted sex (e.g. willingly engaging in sexual
activities of any sort that are contrary to one’s true desires). A reason for this is that
they want to preserve their relationship. However, when men report having had
unwanted sex, their reasons are often related to gaining or keeping social status.
- Women are seen at the sexual gatekeepers or restrictors of sexual activities.
- The traditional sexual script of male dominance increases men’s sexual risk by
encouraging them to engage in sex with multiple female partners to prove
masculinity, ultimately creating a sexual situation that may create sexual pressure
(e.g., pressure to obtain sex or pressure to acquiesce to sexual advances) that
disservices both men and women.
There is some evidence that sexual behaviour is becoming more egalitarian, with women
sometimes initiating sex in committed relationships and man desiring sexual initiation of
women and wanting an equal part in sexual decision-making for men and women. Despite
movements toward more egalitarian scripts and role reversals, most men and women in
heterosexual relationships continue to rely on the traditional sexual script.
Does romance lead to traditional gender-role conformity?
Research has shown that man and women are more inclined to conform to traditional gender
norms only when they believe doing so will make them more desirable to a prospective
partner. For example, women score worse on a math test when romantic goals are
prominent. This implies that romance indeed leads to traditional gender-role conformity, both
for men and women.
Does sex prime traditional gender-role conformity?
The reasons that romance motivates gender-role conformity might be that thinking about sex
primes gender conformity (i.e., thinking about the self in gendered terms). This idea is
investigated by Hundhammer, who found that sexual contexts may be one in which men and
women feel particularly inclined to fulfill gendered scripts of male dominance and female
submissiveness. In other words, sex does prime traditional gender-role conformity.
Consequences of eroticizing inequality (female submissions & male dominance)
The eroticizing inequality has consequences for both men and women. For women, their
submissive role might lead to lower levels of sexual satisfaction and higher frequencies of
,sexual problems and sexual inhibition, relative to men. This could be explained by the fact
that their submissive behaviour predicts lower sexual autonomy. Sexual autonomy refers to
the extent to which an individual perceives that they are in control and can exercise choice in
their sexual encounter. It is an important predictor for sexual satisfaction. Thus, when women
have lower sexual autonomy this might lead to sexual dissatisfaction. This in turn predicts
lowered satisfaction among their sexual partners.
While men’s prescribed dominant role affords them more agency, following restrictive gender
roles may also have consequences for men. For example, impaired sexual autonomy or an
automatic sex-dominance association which may be problematic if dominance translates into
coercive sexual behavior. Moreover, the dominant sexual script for men is problematic for
society because it plays a role in socializing men into a culture of violence; masculinity and
aggression are strongly correlated. Therefore, men may be especially prone to use
aggression, and possibly violence against a partner, when they are pressured to prove their
status as men. This might also spill over to heterosexual relationships: men’s sex-dominance
beliefs and gender-role conformity may perpetuate sexual aggression against women and
thus, further promote women’s lack of sexual agency.
Why do people conform to gendered scripts?
There are different reasons why people conform to gendered scripts, even though they might
negatively impact sexual relationships:
- Media messages about men with dominance and women with passivity might
reinforce the automatic sex–power associations both genders develop.
- Backlash effects (e.g. penalties for counter-stereotypical behaviour), which make men
and women likely to avoid violating gender roles and instead, strive for gender-role
conformity.
- The sexual double standard, which causes women who express sexual interest or
desire to be stigmatized as ‘‘sluts,’’ whereas men’s sexual dominance and
expressions of sexual desire are applauded as evidence of manhood.
- Intrapsychic reasons, such as investment in gender ideals and norms; people who
believe that sexual scripts are prescriptive (i.e., should be followed) show greater
conformity to sexual stereotypes of female submission and male dominance.
- Personal factors, such as women with more egalitarian beliefs or feminist attitudes,
and parental influences. These two factors might both lead to less acceptance of
male dominance/gendered scripts.
What factors moderate the consequences of sexual scripts?
In the table below, factors that moderate the consequences of sexual scripts and its effects
(+-) will be shown
Moderating factor Effect (+-)
Behaviour is consistent with personal desires +
Sexual fantasies involving the eroticization of male dominance and female +
submission
Desire for submissive behaviour -
Partner’s sexual desires +-
Behaviour motivated by outside pressures -
Future direction of gender-role and sexuality research
There are two areas of research that represent important next steps in the arena of gender
roles and sexuality:
,1. Identify the psychosocial mechanisms that account for the automatic links between
sexual cognition and traditional scripts. The sexual cognition model of gender-role
conformity might identify possible mechanisms and conditions under which sexual
cognition evokes traditional script adherence.
• Sexual cognition: thought about sex.
• First path: attractive (romantic) prospect salient: potential or current
relationship partners which are attractive.
➔ Sexual thoughts about a partner who may or may not accept a sexual
offer should similarly activate goals to appear desirable
• Second path: pursuit of approval: presenting the self as having desirable
personality traits and adjusting one’s physical appearance to garner
approval.
➔ People may feel freer to deviate from traditional gender-role scripts
when they are confident that they have their partner’s love and
approval (i.e., they are high in relationship confidence). Conversely,
insecurity in relationships should breed greater approval-seeking.
• Last path: pursuit of approval leads to conforming to traditional sex roles,
provided (a) the individual perceives that male dominance and female
submission are culturally prescribed, and (b) the individual perceives that
the desirable partner (whether long term or short term) possesses
conventional beliefs
2. There is a need for interventions. In the article, a twofold intervention that focuses on
shifting perceptions of cultural standards and partner preference is described:
1. To shift perceptions of cultural standards, which include sexual stereotypes, the
authors propose a counterstereotype induction because such inductions have
successfully reduced implicit stereotypes in other domains. Counterstereotype
induction works by reducing the tendency for social category activation (e.g.,
woman) to elicit gender-role consistent semantic knowledge (e.g., submissive).
Importantly, the counterstereotype stimulus should focus less on appearance and
more on the agentic behavioral component of the sexual stereotype.
2. To change the perceptions about the other gender’s desires (a romantic prospect
or long-term romantic partner), interventions should aim to shift women’s
perception of their partner’s desires, because many male partners want their
sexual relationship to be more egalitarian, despite women’s beliefs to the
contrary.
, Vanwesenbeeck, 2009 Doing gender in sex and sex research
In this article, Vanwesenbeeck addresses ten difficulties in the treatment of gender in sex
research, reflects on their origins, and reviews theory and evidence. Eventually, this has
three aims: (1) consider the relative strength of gender/sex as an explanatory variable
compared to other factors and processes explaining differences between men and women
on a number of sexual aspects,(2) inform an understanding of gender and its relation to
sexuality as an ongoing, open-ended, multi-determined, situated, interactional process, with
the body as a third player, and(3) argue in favor of a nuanced, well-balanced treatment of
gender in sex research.
Introduction
Gender is central to sexuality, and vice versa. Consequently, gender is often studied in
sexological studies, such as homosexuality, intersex, gender dysphoria, transgenderism, and
(particularly) heterosexuality. In this study, heterosexuality refers to all sexually inspired
social interaction between women and men (alone or in groups), and the (institutionalized)
normativity surrounding it. However, there are some difficulties in the treatment of gender in
(hetero)sex research, ten of which are discussed in the article.
1. Gender versus sex
The concept ‘gender’ is often used when biological ‘sex’ is referred to. Biological sex refers to
concrete, embodied men and women, and has a biological determinist perspective. On the
other hand, gender refers more to the social cultural norms about masculinity and femininity.
Because gender is now often used when biological sex is meant, the concept now refers
more to all aspects of the distinction and division between male and female. A reason for the
raising use of the word gender might be the confusion between sex as referring to males and
females and sex as referring to sexuality. Researchers might therefore be more likely to use
gender since that doesn’t lead to confusion.
2. Gender and sexuality
Gender is mostly seen as preceding and determining of sexuality, despite at least some
claims of gender and sexuality being mutually related in a two-way process. For example,
Richardson illustrated in her study that the prioritization of gender over sexuality has been
dominant throughout sexuality as the basic driving force. Therefore, it is constitutive of
gender. In addition, she stresses that the relationship between gender and sexuality is
dynamic, fluid, and unstable, although certainly patterned as well, characterizing it as
‘patterned fluidity’. She used ‘the shoreline’ metaphor to describe this.
3. Preoccupation with difference
There is a persistent preoccupation with gender/sex difference in sex research, showing that
categorical thinking is very strong. This emphasis on gender/sex differences is intensified
with the popularity of sociobiology (e.g., in evolutionary psychology), in which it is claimed
that sex differences are hard-wired. Arguments in favor of categorical thinking are:
- There are conceptual reasons for thinking difference in sexology, especially between
women and men.
- Research-technical reasons.
- There is a principal necessity to make distinctions.
- Political reasons to be sensitive to sex differences: gender sensitivity is essential is
gender emancipatory processes, particularly the emancipation of women.
4. The evidence for difference
Gender/sex differences are often exaggerated, even if evidence shows that they are small.
However, there is much scientific evidence about gender differences. The most often
discussed sex differences are discussed in the article:
