Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Heterosexual Dating Double Standards in Undergraduate Women and Men

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Traditional heterosexual dating and courtship scripts (e.g., men pay for date, women take partner’s last name in marriage) reflect different standards of desirable behavior for women and men. Analogous to sexual double standards, dating double standards reflect the greater agency and power traditionally accorded to men in society. In the present study, we investigated factors related to young heterosexual adults’ endorsement of dating double standards. Participants were 330 female and male U.S. undergraduates at a California public university (57 % female, ages 18–25 years-old) from diverse ethnic backgrounds. In the Heterosexual Dating Double-Standards Scale, respondents rate the desirability of five dating and courtship behaviors (initiate date, hold door open, pay for date, propose marriage, take spouse’s last name) separately for women and men. Preliminary analyses revealed participants generally expressed double standards by rating the desirability of behaviors differently for female and male characters in the traditional direction (e.g., paying for a date rated more desirable for a man than for a woman). We predicted dating double standards would be positively related to factors previously found to predict traditional gender roles (viewing popular media, religious attendance) as well as attitudes that reflect traditional views (conservative political beliefs, benevolent and hostile sexism, disavowing a feminist identity). These hypotheses were generally supported. Among these correlations, dating double standards were strongly associated with benevolent sexism (among women and men) and with hostile sexism (among men). Implications for future research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Axinn, W. G., Young-DeMarco, L., & Ro, M. C. (2011). Gender double standards in parenting attitudes. Social Science Research, 40, 417–432. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.08.010.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Backus, F. R., & Mahalik, J. R. (2011). The masculinity of Mr Right: Feminist identity and heterosexual women’s ideal romantic partners. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 318–326. doi:10.1177/0361684310392357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bang, E., Hall, M. E., Anderson, T. L., & Willingham, M. M. (2005). Ethnicity, acculturation, and religiosity as predictors of female college students’ role expectations. Sex Roles, 53, 231–237. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-5681-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bay-Cheng, L., & Zucker, A. N. (2007). Feminism between the sheets: Sexual attitudes among feminists, nonfeminists, and egalitarians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 157–163. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00349.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bermúdez, J. M., Sharp, E. A., & Taniguchi, N. (2015). Tapping into the complexity: Ambivalent sexism, dating, and familial beliefs among young Hispanics. Journal of Family Issues, 36, 1274–1295. doi:10.1177/0192513X13506706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordini, G. S., & Sperb, T. M. (2013). Sexual double standard: A review of the literature between 2001 and 2010. Sexuality and Culture An Interdisciplinary Quarterly, 17, 686–704. doi:10.1007/s12119-012-9163-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, C., & Bolzendahl, C. (2004). The transformation of US gender role attitudes: Cohort replacement, social-structural change, and ideological learning. Social Science Research, 33, 106–133. doi:10.1016/S0049-089X(03)00041-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. D., Steele, J. R., & Walsh-Childers, K. (Eds.). (2002). Sexual teens, sexual media: Investigating media’s influence on adolescent sexuality. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burleson, B. R., Holmstrom, A. J., & Gilstrap, C. M. (2005). “Guys can’t say that to guys”: Four experiments assessing the normative motivation account for deficiencies in the emotional support provided by men. Communication Monographs, 72, 468–501. doi:10.1080/03637750500322636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burn, D. M., & Busso, J. (2005). Ambivalent sexism, scriptural literalism, and religiosity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 412–418. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00241.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casad, B. J., Salazar, M. M., & Macina, V. (2015). The real versus the ideal: Predicting relationship satisfaction and well-being from endorsement of marriage myths and benevolent sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 39, 119–129. doi:10.1177/0361684314528304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, A. N., & Mull, M. S. (2006). Conservative ideology and ambivalent sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 223–230. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00284.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, R. L. (2011). Content analysis of gender roles in media: Where are we now and where should we go? Sex Roles, 64, 290–298. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9929-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S. N., & Greenstein, T. N. (2009). Gender ideology: Components, predictors, and consequences. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 87–105. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol 2 (pp. 458–476). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Diekman, A. B., Johannesen-Schmidt, M., & Koenig, A. M. (2004). Gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes: A social psychological analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 796–816. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.796.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, A. A., & Matamala, A. (2014). The relationship between heteronormative beliefs and verbal sexual coercion in college students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(7), 1443–1457. doi:10.1007/s10508-014-0284-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, A. A., & Rose, S. (2011). Has dating become more egalitarian? A 35 year review using sex roles. Sex Roles, 64, 843–862. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9957-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eggermont, S. (2006). Television viewing and adolescents’ judgment of sexual request scripts: A latent growth curve analysis in early and middle adolescence. Sex Roles, 55, 457–468. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9099-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farkas, T., & Leaper, C. (2016). Chivalry’s double-edged sword: How girls’ and boys’ paternalistic attitudes relate to their possible family and work selves. Sex Roles, 74, 220–230. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0556-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, A. R. (2006). Women’s benevolent sexism as reaction to hostility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 410–416. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00316.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forste, R., & Fox, K. (2012). Household labor, gender roles, and family satisfaction: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 43, 613–631. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23267837.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 21–42. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fugère, M. A., Escot, C., Cousins, A. J., Riggs, M. L., & Haerich, P. (2008). Sexual attitudes and double standards: A literature review focusing on participant gender and ethnic background. Sexuality and Culture, 2008(12), 169–182. doi:10.1007/s12119-008-9029-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaunt, R. (2013). Breadwinning moms, care giving dads: Double standard in social judgments of gender norm violators. Journal of Family Issues, 34, 3–24. doi:10.1177/0192513X12438686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan, M., Signorielli, N., & Shanahan, J. (2002). Growing up with television: Cultivation processes. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 43–67). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. In J. Dixon & M. Levine (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of conflict, inequality and social change (pp. 70–88). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackel, L. S., & Ruble, D. N. (1992). Changes in the marital relationship after the first baby is born: Predicting the impact of expectancy disconfirmation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 944–957. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.62.6.944.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. A., & Canterberry, M. (2011). Sexism and assertive courtship strategies. Sex Roles, 65, 840–853. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0045-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, M. D., Sibley, C. G., & Overall, N. C. (2014). The allure of sexism: Psychological entitlement fosters women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism over time. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 422–429. doi:10.1177/1948550613506124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, S. M., Beckman, L. J., Browner, C. H., & Sherman, C. A. (2002). Relationship power, decision making, and sexual relations: An exploratory study with couples of Mexican origin. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 284–291. doi:10.1080/00224490209552152.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hatoum, I. J., & Belle, D. (2004). Mags and abs: Media consumption and bodily concerns in men. Sex Roles, 51, 397–407. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000049229.93256.48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henley, N. M., Spalding, L. R., & Kosta, A. (2000). Development of the short form of the Feminist Perspectives Scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 254–256. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb00207.x.

  • Jaramillo-Sierra, A., & Allen, K. R. (2013). Who pays after the first date? Young men’s discourses of the male-provider role. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14, 389–399. doi:10.1037/a0030603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. R., & Abes, E. S. (2013). Identity development of college students: Advancing frameworks for multiple dimensions of identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz-Wise, S., Priess, H. A., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). Gender-role attitudes and behavior across the transition to parenthood. Developmental Psychology, 46, 18–28. doi:10.1037/a0017820.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman, G., & Taniguchi, H. (2006). Gender and marital happiness in later life. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 735–757. doi:10.1177/0192513X05285293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1993). Fundamentalism, Christian orthodoxy, and intrinsic religious orientation as predictors of discriminatory attitudes. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 256–268. doi:10.2307/1386664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M. (2006). America’s war on sex: The attack on law, lust and liberty. Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurdek, L. A. (1998). Relationship outcomes and their predictors: Longitudinal evidence from heterosexual married, gay cohabiting, and lesbian cohabiting couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 553–568. doi:10.2307/353528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, Y., & Hynie, M. (2011). A tale of two standards: An examination of young adults’ endorsement of gendered and ageist sexual double standards. Sex Roles, 64, 360–371. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9896-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laner, M. R., & Ventrone, N. A. (2000). Dating scripts revisited. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 488–500. doi:10.1177/019251300021004004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leaper, C., & Arias, D. M. (2011). College women’s feminist identity: A multidimensional analysis with implications for coping with sexism. Sex Roles, 64, 475–490. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9936-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Levant, R. F., & Philpot, C. L. (2002). Conceptualizing gender in marital and family therapy research: The gender role strain paradigm. In H. A. Liddle, D. A. Santsteban, R. F. Levant, & J. H. Bray (Eds.), First national conference on marital and family therapy process and outcome research (pp. 301–329). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10438-015.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, M. K., & Kelly, J. R. (2015). Perceptions of dating behavior: The role of ambivalent sexism. Sex Roles, 72, 237–251. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0460-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, J. R., & Grossman, K. (1991). Initiation of dates and anxiety among college men and women. Psychological Reports, 69, 252–254. doi:10.1080/03630242.2014.996723.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Muehlenhard, C. L., & McCoy, M. L. (1991). Double standard/double bind: The sexual double standard and women’s communication about sex. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 447–461. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00420.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orenstein, P. (2001). Sluts and studs. In A. Banaman (Ed.), Self and society (pp. 36–37). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richmond, K., Levant, R., Smalley, B., & Cook, S. (2015). The Femininity Ideology Scale (FIS): Dimensions and its relationship to anxiety and feminine gender role stress. Women & Health, 55, 263–279. doi:10.1080/03630242.2014.996723.

  • Rivadeneyra, R., & Lebo, M. J. (2008). The association between television-viewing behaviors and adolescent dating role attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 291–305. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.06.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robnett, R. D., & Leaper, C. (2013). “Girls don’t propose! Ew”.: A mixed-methods examination of marriage tradition preferences and benevolent sexism in emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 28, 96–121. doi:10.1177/0743558412447871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, S., & Frieze, I. H. (1993). Young singles’ contemporary dating scripts. Sex Roles, 28, 499–509. doi:10.1007/BF00289677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2008). The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., Fetterolf, J. C., & Sanchez, D. T. (2013). What motivates the sexual double standard? More support for male versus female control theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 250–263. doi:10.1177/0146167212472375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sarlet, M., Dumont, M., Delacollette, N., & Dardenne, B. (2012). Prescription of protective paternalism for men in romantic and work contexts. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 444–457. doi:10.1177/0361684312454842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweingruber, D., Cast, A. D., & Anahita, S. (2008). “A story and a ring”: Audience judgments about engagement proposals. Sex Roles, 58, 165–178. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9330-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheeran, P., Spears, R., Abraham, S. C., & Abrams, D. (1996). Religiosity, gender, and the double standard. Journal of Psychology Interdisciplinary and Applied, 130, 23–33. doi:10.1080/00223980.1996.9914985.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Signorielli, N. (2012). Television’s gender-role images and contribution to stereotyping: Past, present, future. In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (2nd ed., pp. 321–339). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. F. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stankiewicz, J. M., & Rosselli, F. (2008). Women as sex objects and victims in print advertisements. Sex Roles, 58, 579–589. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9359-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191–193.

  • Strauss, S. (2008). Aggressive men and witchy women: The double standard. In M. A. Paludi (Ed.), The psychology of women at work: Challenges and solutions for our female workforce (Vol. 3, pp. 1–20). Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199–214. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski, D. M. (2004). Relations among dimensions of feminism and internalized heterosexism in lesbians and bisexual women. Sex Roles, 51, 145–159. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000037759.33014.55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolman, D. L., Kim, J. L., Schooler, D., & Sorsoli, C. L. (2007). Rethinking the associations between television viewing and adolescent sexuality development: Bringing gender into focus. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, e9–e16. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.08.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Well, S., Kolk, A. M., & Arrindell, W. A. (2005). Cross-cultural validity of the masculine and feminine gender role stress scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 271–278. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8403_06.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wade, J. C., & Donis, E. (2007). Masculinity ideology, male identity, and romantic relationship quality among heterosexual and gay men. Sex Roles, 57, 775–786. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9303-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, L. M. (2002). Does television exposure affect emerging adults’ attitudes and assumptions about sexual relationships? Correlational and experimental confirmation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31, 1–15. doi:10.1023/A:1014068031532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, L. M., Reed, L., Trinh, S. L., & Foust, M. (2014). Sexuality and entertainment media. In D. L. Tolman, L. M. Diamond, J. A. Bauermeister, W. H. George, & J. G. Pfaus (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 373–423). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14194-012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2012). Biosocial construction of sex differences and similarities in behavior. In M. P. Zanna & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 46, pp. 55–123). San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodberry, R. D., & Smith, C. S. (1998). Fundamentalism et al.: Conservative Protestants in America. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 25–56. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoder, J. D., Hogue, M., Newman, R., Metz, L., & LaVigne, T. (2002). Exploring moderators of gender differences: Contextual differences in door-holding behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1682–1686. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02769.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoder, J. D., Perry, R. L., & Saal, E. I. (2007). What good is a feminist identity?: Women’s feminist identification and role expectations for intimate and sexual relationships. Sex Roles, 57, 365–372. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9269-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaikman, Y., & Marks, M. J. (2014). Ambivalent sexism and the sexual double standard. Sex Roles, 71(9–10), 333–344. doi:10.1007/s11199-014-0417-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, A. N. (2004). Disavowing social identities: What it means when women say, “I’m not a feminist, but…”. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 423–435. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00159.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zurbriggen, E. L., & Morgan, E. M. (2006). Who wants to marry a millionaire? Reality dating television programs, attitudes toward sex, and sexual behaviors. Sex Roles, 54, 1–17. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-8865-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research was supported by a grant from the Academic Senate Committee on Research of the University of California, Santa Cruz. The authors thank Timea Farkas, Rachael Robnett, Antoinette Wilson, Christy Starr, Veronica Hamilton, and Melissa Smith for their suggestions and comments. Preliminary findings from this study were presented at the 2014 Conference of the Association for Psychological Science in San Francisco.

Both authors collaborated in the design of the study and the writing of the article. AP was responsible for initially proposing a study on gender-based double standards. Also, AP identified relevant behaviors to include in the scale. CL was responsible for creating the difference-score format for the scale and conducting the statistical analyses. Also, CL was primarily responsible for revisions of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of California, Room 277 Social Sciences 2, 1156 High Street, Santa Cruz, CA, 95064, USA

    Alexa Paynter & Campbell Leaper

Authors
  1. Alexa Paynter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Campbell Leaper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Campbell Leaper.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Research Involving Human Participants

The Institutional Review Board at the authors’ university reviewed and approved the research protocol.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was secured from all participants.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Paynter, A., Leaper, C. Heterosexual Dating Double Standards in Undergraduate Women and Men. Sex Roles 75, 393–406 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0628-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0628-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation