Mating Market Dynamics, Sex-Ratio Imbalances, and Their Consequences
- Mark Regnerus
- … show all 1 hide
One of the most interesting and significant facts about coupled sexual behavior is the underlying market economy to it all. Once you peer into it, it’s remarkable how it works. You might think it doesn’t or shouldn’t work this way when it comes to this most intimate and private of actions. But it does. And mating market dynamics continue to be consequential for how people live their lives, the options they’re afforded, and the choices they make. At face value, the mating market concept is fairly elementary and certainly very old. Notable changes, however, have emerged in recent decades, and social scientists and social scientists are detecting their consequences.
The Economics of Sex
Sex is, among other things, a social exchange. There is a basic economics that typically precedes emerging-adult relationships and constitutes the setting in which they develop, end, or continue. In their 2004 Personality and Social Psychology Review article entitled “Sexual Economics,” social psychologists
- Akerlof, G. A., Yellen, J. L., & Katz, M. L. 1996. An Analysis of Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing in the United States. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 277–317. CrossRef
- Armstrong, E. A., Hamilton, L., & England, P. 2010. Is Hooking Up Bad for Young Women? Contexts, 9, 22–27. CrossRef
- Banks, R. R. 2011. Is Marriage for White People? How the African American Marriage Decline Affects Everyone. New York: Dutton.
- Barber, N. 2000. On the Relationship between Country Sex Ratios and Teen Pregnancy Rates: A Replication. Cross-Cultural Research, 34, 26–37. CrossRef
- Baumeister, R. F. 2010. Is there Anything Good about Men? How Cultures Flourish by Exploiting Men. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. 2004. Sexual Economics: Sex as Female Resource for Social Exchange in Heterosexual Interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 339–363. CrossRef
- Bogle, K. 2008. Hooking Up: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus. New York: NYU Press.
- Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. 1989. Gender Differences in Receptivity to Sexual Offers. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 2, 39–55. CrossRef
- Cohen, L. L., & Shotland, R. L. 1996. Timing of First Sexual Intercourse in a Relationship: Expectations, Experiences, and Perceptions of Others. The Journal of Sex Research, 33, 291–299. CrossRef
- Ellingson, S., Laumann, E. O., Paik, A., & Mahay, J. 2004. The Theory of Sex Markets. In E. O. Laumann, S. Ellingson, J. Mahay, A. Paik, & Y. Youm (Eds.), The Sexual Organization of the City (pp. 3–38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Guttentag, M., & Secord, P. F. 1983. Too Many Women? The Sex Ratio Question. Beverly Hills: Sage.
- Regnerus, M., & Uecker, J. 2011. Premarital Sex in America: How Young Americans Meet, Mate, and Think about Marrying. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Reichert, T. 2010. “Bitter Pill.” First Things, May.
- Schmitt, D. P. 2006. Short- and Long-term Mating Strategies: Additional Evolutionary Systems Relevant to Adolescent Sexuality. In A. C. Crouter & A. Booth (Eds.), Romance and Sex in Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood: Risks and Opportunities (pp. 41–47). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- South, S. J., & Trent, K. 1988. Sex Ratios and Women’s Roles: A Cross-National Analysis. American Journal of Sociology, 93, 1096–1115. CrossRef
- Uecker, J., & Regnerus, M. 2010. Bare Market: Campus Sex Ratios, Romantic Relationships, and Sexual Behavior. The Sociological Quarterly, 51, 408–435. CrossRef
- Mating Market Dynamics, Sex-Ratio Imbalances, and Their Consequences
Volume 49, Issue 6 , pp 500-505
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Mark Regnerus (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Sociology, University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station A1700, Austin, TX, 78712-0118, USA