Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 16, Issue 5, pp 425–444 | Cite as

Sex differences in sexuality among medical students: Effects of increasing socioeconomic status

  • John Marshall Townsend
Article

Abstract

Research has consistently shown that, compared to men, women are more cautious and selective and maintain greater marital aspirations in entering and maintaining sexual relationships. One explanation of this sex difference is that women have traditionally had inferior access to earning power and social status and consequently were forced to acquire socioeconomic status (SES) through their choice of marriage partners. A contrasting view is that this difference is a component of the basic sex difference identified in the Kinsey studies: Men are more likely than women to dissociate coitus from emotional attachment and to desire and seek coitus with a variety of partners. These two explanations were explored in open-ended interviews with matched samples of 20 male and 20 female medical students. The results were more consistent with the perspective of basic sex differences than with the differential resources explanation. Increasing female SES does not appear to eliminate or even substantially reduce this sex difference. Increasing SES tends to enlarge the pool of acceptable, available sexual and marital partners for men while it tends to reduce the pool for women. Increasing SES thus tends to have different effects on men and women and may cause sex differences in the tendency to associate coitus with emotional attachments and marital aspirations to be more, rather than less, apparent. Extensive case data with verbatim quotations are presented to reveal the emotions and desires underlying subjects' overt behavior.

Key words

sex differences sexual behavior socioeconomic status nonmarital coitus 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alzate, H. (1984). Sexual behavior of unmarried Columbian University Students: A five-year follow-up.Arch. Sex. Behav. 13: 121–132.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, A. P., and Weinberg, M. S. (1978).Homosexualities Simon and Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Blumstein, P., and Schwartz, P. (1983).American Couples Morrow, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Chase, I. D. (1975). A comparison of men's and women's intergenerational mobility in the United States.Amer, Sociol. Rev. 40: 483–505.Google Scholar
  5. Clement, U., Schmidt, G., and Kruse, M. (1984). Changes in sex differences in sexual behavior.Arch. Sex. Behav. 13: 99–120.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Denny, N. W., Field, J. K., and Quadagno, D. (1984). Sex differences in sexual needs and desires.Arch. Sex. Behav. 13: 233–245.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dion, K. L., and Dion, K. K. (1973). Correlates of romantic love.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 4: 41–56.Google Scholar
  8. Dion, K. L., and Dion, K. K. (1976). Love, liking, and trust in heterosexual relationships.Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2: 191–206.Google Scholar
  9. Edwards, J. N., and Booth, A. (1976). Sexual behavior in and out of marriage.J. Marr. Fam. 38: 73–81.Google Scholar
  10. Ehrhardt, A. (1985). The psychobiology of gender. In Rossi, A. (ed.),Gender and the Life Course Aldine, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Elder, G. H. (1969). Appearance and education in marriage mobility.Amer. Sociol. Rev. 34: 519–532.Google Scholar
  12. Goldman, N., Westoff, C., and Hammerslough, C. (1984). Demography of the marriage market in the United States.Population Index 50: 5–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Goode, W. J. (1959). The theoretical importance of love.Amer. Sociol. Rev. 24: 38–47.Google Scholar
  14. Hill, C. T., Rubin, Z., and Peplau, L. A. (1979). Breakups before marriage: The end of 103 affairs. In Levinger, G., and Moles, O. C. (eds.),Divorce and Separation Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Hite, S. (1976).The Hite Report: A Nationwide Study of Female Sexuality Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Houseknecht, S. K., and Spanier, G. B. (1980). Marital disruption and higher education among women in the United States.Sociol. Quart. 21: 375–389.Google Scholar
  17. Kanin, E. J., Davidson, K. R., and Scheck, S. R. (1970). A research note on male-female differentials in the experience of heterosexual love.J. Sex Res. 6: 64–72.Google Scholar
  18. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., and Martin, C. E. (1948).Sexual Behavior in the Human Male W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  19. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., and Gebhard, P. H. (1953).Sexual Behavior in the Human Female W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  20. Knoth, R., Boyd, K., and Singer, B. (in press). Empirical tests of sexual selection theory.J. Sex. Res. Google Scholar
  21. Lewin, B. (1982). The adolescent boy and girl: First and other early experiences with intercourse from a representative sample of Swedish school adolescents.Arch. Sex. Behav. 11: 417–428.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Money, J. (1961). Sex hormones and other variables in human eroticism. In Young, W. C., and Corner, G. W. (eds.),Sex and Internal Secretions, Vol. 2, Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  23. Money, J. (1965). Influence of hormones on sexual behavior.Ann. Rev. Med. 16: 67–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Mueller, C. W., and Pope, H. (1980). Divorce and female remarriage mobility.Soc. Forces 58: 726–738.Google Scholar
  25. Murstein, B. I. (1980). Mate selection in the 1970's.J. Marr. Fam. 42: 777–792.Google Scholar
  26. Persky, H., Lief, H. I., Strauss, D., Miller, W. R., and O'Brien, C. P. (1978). Plasma testosterone level and sexual behavior of couples.Arch. Sex. Behav. 7: 157–168.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Pomeroy, W. B. (1972).Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Rubin, L. (1983).Intimate Strangers Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  29. Schoof-Tams, K., Schlaegel, J., and Malczak, L. (1976). Differentiation of sexual morality between 11 and 16 years.Arch. Sex. Behav. 5: 353–370.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Singer, B. (1985a). A comparison of evolutionary and environmental theories of erotic response, Part I.J. Sex Res. 21: 229–257.Google Scholar
  31. Singer, B. (1985b). A comparison of evolutionary and environmental theories of erotic response, Part II.J. Sex Res. 21: 345–374.Google Scholar
  32. Spanier, G. B. (1976). Formal and informal sex education as determinants of premarital sexual behavior.Arch. Sex. Behav. 5: 39–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Symons, D. (1979).Evolution of Human Sexuality Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Tripp, C. A. (1975).The Homosexual Matrix Signet, New York.Google Scholar
  35. Udry, J. R. (1977). The importance of being beautiful.Amer. J. Sociol. 83: 154–160.Google Scholar
  36. Udry, R., Deven, F. R., and Coleman, S. J. (1982). Cross-national comparison of the relative influence of male and female age on the frequency of marital intercourse.J. Biosoc. Sci. 14: 1–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Waller, W. (1938).The Family Dryden, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Marshall Townsend
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologySyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations