|
Sexuality Standards, Sexual Attitudes and Sexual Behavior
Betty A Harris
http://dataguru.org/love/sexstd/index.asp
In recent years a
major public health effort has been directed at slowing the rise
of teen pregnancy and halting the spread of sexually-transmitted
diseases. The appearance of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
(AIDS) on the sexual scene has added new urgency to these
programs since there is currently no vaccine or cure. Behavioral
change is the only way to limit the spread of AIDS. Abstinence
and using condoms if sexually active can reduce the spread of
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and can also effectively
reduce the transmission of other sexually transmitted diseases
and prevent pregnancy.
Have public
health education efforts resulted in a reduction of risky sexual
behavior in heterosexuals?
Current statistics indicate that heterosexuals may not be
altering their behavior to the extent necessary to prevent the
spread of AIDS in that population. Current data on the
first 500,000
AIDS cases from CDC indicates that during 1993 to
1995 heterosexuals accounted for a larger proportion of AIDS
cases than ever before. The proportion of AIDS cases due to
heterosexual transmission increased from 2.5% during the 1981 to
1987 time period to 6.1% of diagnosed AIDS cases during the
1988-1992 time period to a new high of 10.1% of diagnosed AIDS
cases during the 1993-1995 time period. During the 1993-1995
time period 20 to 29 year olds accounted for almost 17% of
diagnosed AIDS cases, 30 to 39 year olds accounted for 45% of
AIDS cases and 40 to 49 year olds accounted for about 26% of
diagnosed AIDS cases. Given the long period between HIV exposure
to development of symptoms, most people were probably exposed to
HIV during adolescence or young adulthood.
Sexually transmitted diseases would also be an indicator of
risky behavior. In 1995 in the United States, there were over
150 cases of gonorrhea per 100,000 population and almost 200
cases of Chlamydia per 100,000 (
PLUTO III State Profile).
Teen pregnancy would also be an indicator of risky sexual
behavior. In 1995, almost four teens out of 100 teens aged 15 to
17 gave birth (PLUTO
III State Profile).
In
a study conducted with Texas college students (Hursey,
Diletto, et al, 1991), over half of the sample (n =
500) had been sexually active with the last person they dated.
Less than 20% of those sexually active individuals reported
using a latex condom all of the time during sexual activity. It
seems from these data that a sizable portion of young people are
engaging in behaviors that place them at risk for sexually
transmitted diseases including AIDS.
We need a theory
based approach to understanding nonmarital sexual behavior. This
will allow us to understand the major factors that affect
whether or not people engage in sex in new relationships and may
allow the development of interventions designed to reduce risky
behavior.
The Origin of the Sexuality Standard Concept
In 1960, Ira
Reiss identified four standards for premarital sexual behavior:
Abstinence--sexual
relations are acceptable only after marriage;
Permissiveness with affection--sexual
relations are acceptable in the context of a stable, loving
relationship;
Permissiveness without affection--sexual
relations are acceptable based on physical attraction alone; and
the Double Standard--nonmarital
sexual relations are acceptable for males but not for females.
In the 1960's the
double standard was the predominant standard for sexual behavior
in our society (Reiss, 1967). Today, it is commonly accepted
that permissiveness with affection is becoming the predominant
standard for both males and females (DeLamater & MacCorquodale,
1979; Robinson and Jedlicka, 1982).
The Developmental Origins of Sexuality Standards
If we agree that
sexual arousal is an inherently enjoyable state, then
socialization from significant others regarding sexual behavior
must be how we learn to place restrictions on our sexuality
(Abramson, 1983; Fisher, Byrne, & White, 1983, Reiss, 1960;
Reiss 1967). This socialization may consist of informational
feedback (factual information, as well as reward and punishment)
regarding the contexts in which various sexual activities are
acceptable. According to the sexual behavior sequence (Byrne,
1983; Fisher, 1986; Kelley, 1983) one early form of feedback
consists of classical conditioning of emotional responses. For
example, the parent's reactions to the child's genital self
manipulation evoke negative emotional responses that the child
begins to associate with sexuality. However, the parent's
reaction to the child's self manipulation is a function of both
the self manipulation and the context in which it occurs. Some
parents may handle the situation by punishing the child with
verbal and nonverbal signals that self manipulation is 'bad' and
totally unacceptable in any situation. While other parents may
make the distinction between public and private self
manipulation--it is not acceptable to masturbate in public but
it is acceptable to masturbate in private. These
behavior-situation-reinforcer contingencies provide two types of
related information: information about the context in which a
specific behavior is, or is not acceptable which in turn become
associated with the affective responses evoked by the type of
reinforcement. If this premise is tenable then a person's
premarital sexuality standards may be the result of
informational feedback as to what preconditions must be present
for sexual behavior to become acceptable. Since Reiss's
premarital sexuality standards represent beliefs as to the
acceptability of sexual activity prior to marriage, sexuality
standards could be considered the cognitive or informational
component of sexual attitudes. Sexuality standards may provide
the context for the evocation of emotional/affective reactions
to premarital sexuality. For the person who requires love prior
to the onset of sexual relations, sexual overtures may be
aversive without love. However, within the context of a loving
relationship sexual activity would probably be considered a
positive thing.
According to
Fisher, et al, the process by which attitudes about sexuality
are acquired is this pairing of sexual cues with positive or
negative affective responses. When sexual cues are paired with
negative outcomes, negative affective responses are associated
with sexuality and erotophobia results. Conversely, when sexual
cues are paired with positive outcomes, erotophilia results. We
assert however that affective responses to what constitutes
acceptable sexual behavior are specific to the type of sexual
behavior and the context in which that behavior occurs. In the
case of vaginal intercourse, it is our premise that
socialization as to what preconditions must be met prior to the
onset of vaginal intercourse (sexuality standards) is a major
determinant of affective responses to the act of vaginal
intercourse.
Sexuality
standards can be conceptualized as a continuum that is defined
by the amount of affection and public commitment which is
necessary prior to the onset of sexual relations (See Figure 1).
Figure 1. Requirements prior to sexual activity
According to
Reiss' theory, people have different criteria for love and
commitment that must be met prior to the onset of sexual
relations. People who believe in abstinence require not
only love but public commitment within the socially sanctioned
institution of marriage prior to the onset of vaginal
intercourse. Those who adhere to the permissiveness with
affection standard require some degree of affection or love
within a stable relationship prior to the onset of vaginal
intercourse. Whereas people who subscribe to the
permissiveness without affection standard require no
affection or public commitment only physical attraction prior to
sexual relations. Within the context of premarital sexuality
there exists a person - situation interaction--For which person
is sex acceptable in which situations?
Several studies
were conducted to examine relationships between sexuality
standards, beliefs and behavior. There should be a strong
relationship between measures of sexuality standards and
beliefs, attitudes and behavior:
People with different sexuality standards should differ in terms
of the amount of love and commitment they need prior to engaging
in sex with a partner.
People with differing sexuality standards should differ in their
q-sort similarity ratings of vignettes written to illustrate
couples in various relationship stages either abstaining from or
engaging in sexual relations.
People with differing sexuality standards should also differ in
their reports of onset and diversity of sexual behavior.
People with differing sexuality standards should vary in their
affective reactions to sexually related material.
We
should be able to predict whether or not people report having
had sex with a partner using information about their sexuality
standards and the context of the relationship in which the
behavior occurs.
Methods.
How was the research conducted?
Findings
Changes in
Sexuality Standards over time. Overall, it
appears that Permissiveness with affection is the predominant
standard for sexual behavior in our society. It's also
interesting to note that across all of these samples, a higher
percentage of males chose permissiveness without affection than
did females. Generally the reverse was true regarding the
Abstinence Standard-females showed a slightly high endorsement
rate of the Abstinence standard than did males.
Sexuality
Standards by Age Younger people are less
permissive (require more love and commitment prior to the onset
of sex) than older people in the
The Love Test
Sample.
Sexuality
Standards for the Oklahoma, Texas, and Love Test Samples.
Responses to the Sexuality Standards Item (RRRS) for the
Oklahoma, Texas and Love Test Samples and descriptives for the
sexuality standards groups used in the following analyses.
Relationship
Between the Various Measures of Sexuality Standards.
The various measures of sexuality standards are highly
correlated indicating that it's likely that they are tapping the
same construct and that there is not much difference between
using the single item measure and the 5 item measure of
sexuality standards.
Acceptability
of Various Behaviors as a Function of Relationship Type and
Sexuality Standards. Over all, sex if engaged and
sex if in love were rated as acceptable behaviors for self on
average by the Texas sample, however abstinence if engaged, sex
if only friends and sex if they've just met the person were
rated as not acceptable for self. People who require engagement
or marriage prior to sex rated only abstinence if engaged as
acceptable for self. The group who said they require love prior
to engaging in sexual relations indicated that they believe that
it's OK for them to engage in sex if they are engaged or in
love. The group who said they require friendship or casual
acquaintance prior to sex, believe that it's OK for them to
engage in sex if engaged, if in love, and if they like the
person, however abstinence if engaged in unacceptable.
Sexual
Opinion Survey (SOS). People who require more
love and commitment prior to sex score as more erotophobic (have
more negative affective reactions to sexually related material)
on the Sexual Opinion Survey then those who require less love
and commitment prior to the onset of sexual intercourse.
Bem Sex Role
Inventory. There was not a significant
relationship between the BSRI femininity scale scores and
sexuality standards, however, masculinity was significantly
related to sexuality standards. People who require less love
and/or commitment prior to sex score higher in masculinity than
those who require more love/and or commitment prior to the onset
of sexual intercourse.
Self
Monitoring. People who require more love and
commitment prior to sex tend to be more attentive to
dispositional cues whereas those who require less love and
commitment prior to sex tend to be more attentive to situational
cues.
Correlations
Between Sexuality Standards and Other Self Report Items.
Correlations between sexuality standards and: factors that
people say have increased or decreased their requirements for
love and commitment prior to sex (e.g., religion, friends,
parents, fear of STDs, sex drive, etc.); control to increase or
decrease the likelihood of having sex with a date; ratings of
how much one is affected by the emotions of the moment in terms
of having sex with a partner; enjoyment of sex, comfort with
self sexually, fantasizing about sex with another partner,
frequency of thinking about sex, etc.
Number of
Sexual Partners in the Last Year. People who
require more of a love and commitment prior to sex reported
fewer sexual partners in the last year as compared to those who
require less love and commitment prior to sex. Over both samples
approximately 34% of participants report being abstinent during
the last year, 32% report having one sexual partner, and 34%
report having more than one sexual partner. It seems that in
terms of the number of sexual partners, the
sample is fairly evenly divided between abstinence, monogamy and
sex with multiple partners.
Number of One
Night Stands in the Last Year. People who require
more love and commitment prior to sex reported fewer one night
stands in the last year than did those requiring less love and
commitment prior to the onset of sexual relations. The Texas
sample reported from 0 to 15 one night stands in the last year
(mean = 1.13, sd = 1.93). The majority of the Texas
sample reported having 0 (59%) or 1 (27%) one night stands in
the last year. However 24% of the Texas sample reported having
two or more one night stands in the last year.
Age of First
Sexual Intercourse. People who require engagement
or marriage prior to sex reported a older age of onset of sexual
intercourse than did those who require only love prior to the
onset of sexual relations or those who require friendship or
casual acquaintance prior to the onset of sexual intercourse.
Age of Onset
of Various Sexual Acts. Overall, there is not
much difference in age of onset of the various sexual behaviors
between those who require love prior to sex and those who
require casual acquaintance or friendship prior to sex. However,
those who require engagement or marriage prior to sex report a
later onset of the various sexual behaviors including oral sex
and vaginal sex.
Church
Attendance. People who require engagement or
marriage prior to sex reported attending church more frequently
during the last month than did 1) those who require only love
prior to the onset of sexual relations and 2) those who require
friendship or casual acquaintance prior to the onset of sexual
intercourse. Self reports of religiosity were also related to
sexuality standards: only 19% of the people who require
friendship or casual acquaintance prior to the onset of sex,
rated themselves as moderately or very religious, as compared to
28% of people who require love prior to the onset of sex, and
69% of people who require engagement or marriage prior to the
onset of sex.
Correlations
between Sexuality Standard Vignettes and Ratings of Self.
Over all, Abstinence and Permissiveness with Affection were
rated as more similar to self than was Permissiveness without
Affection. However correlations between self ratings and ratings
of the sexuality standard vignettes varied as a function of the
person's sexuality standards. People who require engagement or
marriage prior to sex rated the Abstinence vignettes as most
similar to self. People who require love prior to sex rated the
Abstinence and Permissiveness with Affection vignettes as most
like self. There were mixed finding for the group containing
people who require friendship or casual acquaintance prior to
sex: the Oklahoma Sample rated the Permissiveness with Affection
vignette as being most similar to self, however in the Texas
sample there were no statistically significant differences in
self- vignette correlations between the sexuality standards
vignettes for this group.
Correlations
between ratings of Typical Male, Typical Female and ratings of
the Sexuality Standards Vignettes. The Oklahoma
sample rated the typical female as being most similar to the
abstinence vignette. They rated the typical male as being most
similar to the permissiveness without affection vignette.
Scores on The
Love Test by Sexuality Standard Group.
Descriptives for Passion, Intimacy, and Commitment Scales by
sexuality standard group and Descriptives for Love Test items by
sexuality standard group.
Predicting
Whether or Not They had Sex with a Partner. Using
measures of sexuality standards and various measures of
attachment to the person, I was able to correctly predict for
almost 80% of participants whether or not they had sex with
their romantic interest. The addition of the Sexual Opinion
Survey (in the Texas sample) did not increase the ability to
predict whether or not people had sex with their past date.
|
