Premarital Sexual Standards and Sociosexuality: Gender, Ethnicity, and Cohort Differences
In this article, we present results from a “cohort-longitudinal” analysis of sexual attitudes and behaviors based on a large sample of young adults (N = 7,777) obtained from a university setting over a 23-year period. We investigated gender, ethnicity, and cohort differences in sexual permissiveness, endorsement of the double standard, and sociosexuality. Compared to women, men had more permissive attitudes, particularly about sex in casual relationships, endorsed the double standard to a greater degree, and had a more unrestricted sociosexuality. Black men were generally more permissive than White, Hispanic, and Asian men, whereas ethnic differences were not found among women. Participants from the 1995–1999 cohort were slightly less permissive than those from the 1990–1994 and 2005–2012 cohorts. Although prior meta-analytic studies (e.g., Petersen & Hyde, 2010) found reduced gender differences in sexuality over time, our cohort analyses suggest that gender differences in sexual permissiveness have not changed over the past two decades among college students.
KeywordsSexual attitudes Sexual standards Sociosexuality Gender differences Ethnic differences
- Das, A., & Nairn, S. (2013). Race differentials in partnering patterns among older U.S. men: Influence of androgens or religious participation? Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0096-y.
- DeLamater, J. (1989). The social control of human sexuality. In K. McKinney & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Human sexuality: The societal and interpersonal context (pp. 30–62). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
- Fugère, M. A., Escoto, C., Cousins, A. J., Riggs, M. L., & Haerich, P. (2008b, February). Sexual attitudes and double standards in two ethnically and religiously diverse samples. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Albuqurque, NM.Google Scholar
- Greeley, A. M. (1991). Faithful attraction: Discovering intimacy, love, and fidelity in American marriage. New York: Doherty.Google Scholar
- Jonason, P. K., Teicher, E. A., & Schmitt, D. P. (2011). The TIPI’s validity confirmed: Associations with sociosexuality and self-esteem. Individual Differences Research, 9, 52–60.Google Scholar
- Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Mahoney, E. R. (1978). Gender and social class differences in changes in attitudes toward premarital coitus. Sociology and Social Research, 62, 279–288.Google Scholar
- Paul, E. L., Wenzel, A., & Harvey, J. (2008). Hookups: A facilitator or a barrier to relationship initiation and intimacy development? In S. Sprecher, A. Wenzel, & J. Harvey (Eds.), Handbook of relationship initiation (pp. 375–390). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Press.Google Scholar
- Reiss, I. L. (1960). Premarital sexual standards in America. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
- Reiss, I. L. (1967). The social context of premarital sexual permissiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
- Walsh, R. (1989). Premarital sex among teenagers and young adults. In K. McKinney & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Human sexuality: The societal and interpersonal context (pp. 162–186). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar