TITTERZZ

Titterzz quicky 19-05-2011: Another oldy (2003), to remind us women we have to go a looooonnngggg way! Double standards as a mean to ‘control’ female sexuality. Wow. It has effects on how women are perceived who are active in the search for sexual experiences, that eventual rape is judged less serious, etc. In fact, women sacrifice their sexual autonomy due to these standards, one way or the other. You can read it online. Titterzz has selected some pieces of the article. In: Journal of Sex Research, ‘Sexual double standards: A review and methodological critique of two decades of research’, 2003, 40: 1, 13-26.

By: Mary Crawford and Danielle Popp

Abstract

A review of 30 studies published since 1980 found evidence for the continued existence of sexual double standards: different standards of sexual permissiveness for women and men. Experimental studies have included predominantly White North American college students; ethnographies, focus group and interview studies, and linguistic analyses have included more diverse samples. Studies show that sexual double standards are influenced by situational and interpersonal factors (e.g., the target’s age, level of relationship commitment, and number of partners), and that double standards are local constructions, differing across ethnic and cultural groups. This review discusses methodological issues, including the strengths and limitations of quantitative and qualitative approaches. It also discusses implications for women’s high-risk sexual behavior and sexual identity, and suggests directions for future research.

Women may be judged more negatively than men for having had sex with many partners in the past, having sex outside of a committed relationship, or for having sexual experience at an early age (Sprecher et al., 1987). Martin (1996) found that merely having sexual intercourse was not enough to elicit a negative evaluation for the adolescent girls in her sample; however, a girl was labeled a slut if she was believed to be sexually active and was judged “too young” by her peers. Men in particular may judge women’s sexual behavior in more restrictive ways when they are asked to view the target as a potential marriage partner versus a dating or casual sex partner. Sexually permissive women may be preferred as dating partners; however, those who say no to casual sex may be more acceptable for long-term relationships (Fromme & Emihovich, 1998). When it comes to marriage partners, men may prefer women who have less sexual experience (Oliver & Sedikides, 1992). Moffat’s (1989) findings suggested that the college men he studied felt entitled to have casual sex with “sluts” until they were ready to settle down with a “good woman.” An important aspect of sexual double standards in many social groups is that women are judged more negatively than men for initiating heterosexual interactions (Green & Sandos, 1983). Eder et al. (1995) found that middle school girls who initiated any type of sexual activity were labeled bitches, sluts, and whores. The double standards of sexual experience and agency lead to differential judgments of culpability when sexual activity results in negative consequences. Women who initiate physical contact on a date or who are more sexually experienced are judged as more culpable than passive or inexperienced women if they are the victims of rape (L’Armand & Pepitone, 1982; Muehlenhard & MacNaughton, 1988). Contemporary double standards allow some women greater sexual freedom than in the past. However, these standards still represent a covert means of controlling women’s sexuality by judging its expression more harshly than men’s sexual expression is judged.

Impact of Double Standards on Women’s Sexual Identity

Double standards may be internalized and used by women to evaluate themselves. Women often believe that they should conform to societal-based standards of morality by resisting their own sexual urges (Katz & Farrow, 2000). Sexuality and the desire to be attractive as a dating partner present conflicting ideals for women. Girls learn to look sexy but say no, to be feminine but not sexual, and to attract boys’ desire but not to satisfy their own. They experience dissonance when they are depicted as sexual objects yet defined in terms of sluts and whores when they express their sexuality (Durham, 1998). These conflicting messages may cause many women to develop a negative sexual identity (Katz & Farrow, 2000). Research on the likelihood of sexual initiation has shown that both men and women report that males are more likely to initiate sexual behaviors including kissing and intercourse (DeLamater & MacCorquodale, 1979; O’Sullivan & Byers, 1992). Traditional sex role norms give men greater freedom to initiate sexual intercourse and to act as sexual experts, whereas women are expected to refuse sex, acting as sexual gatekeepers and limit-setters (Lips, 1981; Safilios-Rothschild, 1977). The role of gatekeeper can have many implications for women’s sexuality. It is a less powerful image than the man’s role of expert or teacher, further objectifying women and inhibiting them from taking responsibility for their own sexuality (Lips, 1981). This encourages women to think of themselves as objects or victims of the sexual encounter as opposed to willing, active participants.

Experimental person-perception research has shown that violating a gender role expectation can result in social rejection, even when the norm violations are seemingly small. Green and Sandos (1983) showed that male targets who took the initiative for either a conversation or a dinner invitation were rated more positively and more socially acceptable than female targets who did the same. The effects of norm violation extend to perceived culpability for sexual violence. When women initiate dates, they are perceived as more willing to engage in sexual intercourse and their rapes are rated as more justified than when men initiate the dates (Muehlenhard, 1988a). Women who initiate physical contact on a date are likely to be viewed as more responsible for being raped (Muehlenhard & MacNaughton, 1988). Further, if the victim of a rape is described as sexually experienced, the rape is judged as less serious, the perpetrator receives less blame, and the victim receives more blame (L’Armand & Pepitone, 1982). Women who want to engage in sexual intercourse with their partners but believe that their partners endorse a sexual double standard are forced to make a choice between openly acknowledging their desire for sex (which can result in being labeled easy or a slut) or refusing and saving their reputations. Such a refusal acts as a way to legitimize women’s sexual desires within the confines of a sexual double standard. A woman’s initial resistance to sexual intercourse and eventual concession to her partner’s wishes is known as token resistance: refusing or resisting sexual activity while intending to engage in that activity (Muehlenhard & Rodgers, 1998). Muehlenhard and McCoy (1991) found that women who used token resistance were more likely to believe their partners accepted sexual double standards than were women who had openly acknowledged their sexual desires. Interestingly, women’s own endorsement of sexual double standards was unrelated to their use of token resistance.

Sexual double standards may lead females to sacrifice their sexual autonomy in exchange for social desirability. A woman who only engages in sexual activity when her partner wants to may find it difficult to become aroused when she desires sexual activity (Muehlenhard, 1988b). Refusing intercourse when they are willing can cause women to become disconnected from their own desires.

Titterzz Events Calendar