Chapter 9 : Sexuality (Unit 10) Flashcards
Why do we have sex?
REASONS FOR HAVING SEX
Meston & Buss, 2007:
“Please list all the reasons you can think of why you, or someone you have
known, has engaged in sexual intercourse in the past”
* 443 Ps : generated 237 distinct reasons
* Identified 4 broad themes with 13 subfactors
Physical:
Pleasure: e.g., “It feels good”
Physical desirability: e.g., “The person’s physical
appearance turned me on”
Stress reduction: e.g., “I wanted to release tension”
Experience seeking: e.g., “I was curious about
what the person was like in bed”
Emotional
Love & commitment: e.g., “I wanted
to intensify my relationship”
Expression: e.g., “I wanted to say
thank you”
Goal attainment:
Resources: e.g., “I wanted to get a
promotion”
Social status: e.g., “I wanted to impress
friends”
Revenge: “I was mad at my partner so I
had sex with someone else”
Utilitarian: “I thought it would help me
fall asleep”
Insecurity
Self-esteem boost: e.g., “I wanted to feel
attractive”
Duty or pressure: e.g., “I wanted him/her to
stop bugging me about sex”
Mate guarding: e.g., “I didn’t want to ‘lose’ the
person”
MOST & LEAST FREQUENT REASONS
* #1 reason?
– “I was attracted to the person” (both men & women)
* Most frequently endorsed reasons: attraction, pleasure, affection, love,
adventure, desire to please, opportunity, celebration
* Least frequently endorsed reasons: retaliation, manipulation, desire to
enhance one’s social status, desire to inflict harm
– Less frequent, but potentially extremely damaging
GENDER SIMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES
* Men & women remarkably similar in most frequently endorsed reasons
* Men report higher frequencies for majority of individual items & subfactors
– Including utilitarian reasons
– Endorse more reasons centering on physical appearance of partner,
experience seeking, opportunity, enhancement of social status
* Not a lot of evidence that women more likely to endorse emotional reasons
* Evidence that men have stronger sex drives (strength of sexual motivation)
– Gap gets bigger after having children & menopause
* More spontaneous thoughts about sex, greater frequency & variety of sexual
fantasies, greater desired frequency of intercourse & desired number of
partners
* More likely to succumb to sexual temptation (infidelity, mate poaching)
* More willing to incur costs to have sex
* Engage in more masturbation, casual sex, & pornography use
* Hold more permissive sex attitudes (except same-sex behaviour)
* Evidence that women exhibit greater relational focus when it comes to sex
* Women prefer sex within context of ongoing, committed relationships
* Men express more desire for extradyadic sex
* Women’s fantasies more likely to include familiar partner, affection &
commitment; men’s fantasies more likely to include strangers & anonymous
partners
* But, as we saw, men are no less likely to engage in sex for emotional/affectional
reasons—and they feel happier with their sexual experiences when they’re happy
with their relationship and when their partner is enjoying themselves
SOCIOSEXUAL ORIENTATION
- Sociosexual orientation = measure of individual differences in sexual strategies; extent to
which individuals are restrictive or permissive in their attitudes towards casual sex - Low SO (restricted): tend toward long-term mating strategies
– Insist on commitment and closeness in a relationship prior to engaging in sex with a
romantic partner
– Fewer sexual partners & one-night stands - High SOI (unrestricted): tend toward short-term mating strategies
– Feel comfortable with sex without commitment or closeness
– More sexual partners & one-night stands
– Endorse more reasons for having sex (with the exception of love & commitment)
GENDER & SOI
* On average, men are higher on SOI
* But much more variability within each gender than between the genders
* Gender diffs account for only 9% of variance in number of desired sex
partners, 20% of variance in consenting to sex with attractive acquaintance,
25% of variance in casual sex
* Approximately 30% of US men have less favourable attitudes towards casual
sex than the median US woman
EVOLUTIONARY EXPLANATIONS
* Recall that there is an asymmetry in
minimal parental investment
* Women may increase reproductive
success by being choosier, selecting
mates that will provide resources,
care, & protection
* Men may increase reproductive
success by pursuing multiple mating
opportunities
SOCIAL ROLE THEORY
* Traditional view of men as ”initiators” and women as “gate-keepers”
– Changing, but stigma against sexually permissive women still exists
* Sexual double standard = harsher judgment of women (relative to men) for
engaging in similar sexual activity
– Women socialized to restrict feelings of sexual desire to the context of
committed intimate relationships
ORIGINAL STUDY
Clark & Hatfield, 1989:
* Male & female confederates approached students on
campus
* “Would you go to bed with me?”
* 75% of men and 0% of women accepted offer
A CLOSER LOOK
* Ps asked to imagine that they were approached with an offer for casual sex
* Women less likely to accept offer
* Women also anticipated that would be seen as more promiscuous, socially
inappropriate, desperate, & less intelligent if they accepted the offer
* This perceived negative stigma inhibited their receptiveness (mediation)
* Were the women wrong to expect negative judgment?
– In separate study, Ps rated a woman accepting offer of casual sex more
negatively than a man accepting the same offer (e.g., as more promiscuous,
less mentally healthy, less intelligent)
* What about the men?
– Concerned about what would happen if they rejected the offer
* E.g., viewed as less intelligent, less mentally healthy
* Safety
– Women believe male proposer is more dangerous compared to how men
view female proposer
– Bisexual women more likely to accept offer from a woman
* Gender gap disappears when proposed casual sex partner is very attractive or
believed to be sexually skillful
– Suggests that key consideration is expectation of pleasure
* Concern not unwarranted—women orgasm 35% as often as men in in
first-time casual sex encounters
TAKEAWAY MESSAGE
* When it comes to sexual behaviour & motivation, men & women differ in
meaningful, substantial ways
* But our reasons for having sex are complex & multifaceted, likely reflect both
biological/evolutionary and social influences
* Driven by seeking of pleasure, insecurities, desire to connect
* For men and women, sex & intimate romantic relationships often go hand in
hand
– This too can be explained from an evolutionary perspective
WHAT IS THE
RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THE
SEXUAL AND
ATTACHMENT
BEHAVIOURAL
SYSTEMS?
SEXUAL BEHAVIOURAL SYSTEM
* Innate—basic operation does not rely on socialization
* Individual differences in sexual motives, emotions, behaviours reflect
variations in functioning of the system
* Function (evolutionary purpose)—passing on off genes to next generation
– But proximal cause not necessarily the same as evolutionary function
SEX & ATTACHMENT
Sexual system is separate from the attachment system
* Can ‘mate without bonding’ and ‘bond without mating’
* Sexual orientation toward same-sex or other-sex partners does not need to
correspond with romantic attachment to same-sex or other-sex partners
(Diamond, 2013)
* Asexual individuals can still develop attachment toward romantic partner
* But sexual desire can motivate & promote attachment bonding process
– Most sex occurs in context of ongoing romantic relationships (Willetts et al,.
2004)
* Evolutionary view:
– Big brains + bipedalism = serious adaptive problem
– Solution: softheaded, helpless babies
– New problem: how to keep softheaded, helpless babies alive?
– Solution: biparental caregiving & bonding between sexual partners
* Can help understand the somewhat unique sexual tendencies of humans
– ”Missionary position” à promotes intimate face-to-face contact
– Sleeping together after sex
– Sex throughout the menstrual cycle
* Experimental evidence—does activation of the sexual system promote
relationship initiation and maintenance?
GROWING INTIMACY
Watched a video of cats vs. an erotic video
* More intimate self-disclosure to potential
partner after watching erotic video
* Subsequent study: also more responsive
towards a partner discussing an interpersonal
dilemma
* Takeaway: activation of sexual system promotes
self-disclosure & responsiveness, which play key
role in development of intimacy
STRENGTHENING PAIRBONDS
* When subliminally primed with erotic cues
– More willingness to sacrifice for one’s partner
– More preference for using positive conflict resolution strategies
– More desire to do something to make partner happy
* After reliving positive sexual encounter with partner, more enacted
responsiveness during interaction with partner
* After fantasizing about partner, more relationship-promoting behaviour (e.g.,
expressions of caring)
RELATIONSHIP STAGE MODEL OF
SEXUAL DESIRE (BIRNBAUM, 2014)
* Across different relationship stages (initial awareness to early contact to
growing interdependence to established relationships), sexual desire
motivates expenditure of effort towards deepening & maintaining the
relationship
* May be particularly potent in early stages, but serve a protective role
whenever there is adversity or vulnerability
* Sexual desire also makes it difficult to “detach” if the relationship is
terminated
COMPENSATING FOR RELATIONSHIP
VULNERABILITIES
* Relationship stage model predicts that sexual desire may be especially
important to relationship persistence for couples facing different types of
vulnerability in relationship
* Neuroticism = tendency to experience negative affect
– Generally linked to more negative interpersonal perceptions & experiences,
lower relationship satisfaction, greater likelihood of divorce
– While related to lower marital satisfaction on average, unrelated when
couples engage in frequent sex
– Similarly buffering effects for attachment insecurity
MAKE-UP SEX
- Why does romantic conflict sometimes
increase sexual desire? - Relationship threat leads to attachment system
activation, seeking of reassurance &
closeness - Relationship threat prime (e.g., thinking of
partner falling in love with someone else)
increases interest in sex with partner
CAVEATS
* Individual differences
* More effective when conflict is successfully
resolved
* Consistent conflict and feelings of
threat/insecurity can damage relationship over
time
HOW ARE SEXUAL
SATISFACTION &
RELATIONSHIP
SATISFACTION
RELATED?
SEXUAL SATISFACTION
* Sexual satisfaction = evaluation of the quality of the sexual aspect of an
intimate relationship—e.g.,:
– My sex is fulfilling
– My partner really pleases me sexually
– I am satisfied with our sexual relationship
* Consistently associated with overall relationship satisfaction in both dating &
married couples, same-sex & different-sex couples, young & old couples
– Does relationship go the other way as well?
LONGITUDINAL RESEARCH IN
NEWLYWEDS
* McNulty et al., 2016
– Bidirectional association during the first few years of marriage
– Relationship satisfaction leads to less decline in sexual satisfaction
– Sexual satisfaction leads to less decline in relationship satisfaction
– True for men and women
But
In longer term couples, sexual satisfaction is associated with
changes in relationship satisfaction, but not the reverse (relationship satisfaction does not influence sexual satisfaction)
WHAT MAKES FOR A
SATISFYING SEX LIFE? MORE SEX = MORE HAPPINESS?
MORE SEX = MORE HAPPINESS?
* Couples who have sex more frequently are more satisfied with their
relationships (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2003) and are happier with their lives
overall (Laumann et al., 1994)
* Sex rated as the daily activity associated with the most positive affect (e.g.,
Kahneman & Krueger, 2006)
* So can we maximize our happiness by having as much sex as possible?
Loewenstein et al., 2015:
* Correlational research cannot establish directionality or rule out third factors
* Experimental manipulation: asked half of Ps to double their sexual intercourse
frequency
* Increasing sexual frequency did not increase happiness
* Instead, led to less desire for, and enjoyment of, sex
- Perhaps there’s a point beyond which more sex does not lead to more
satisfaction - Muise et al. (2016)
– 30,645 participants
– Sexual frequency only matters for well-being for people in relationships
– Found a curvilinear effect of sexual frequency on life satisfaction: life satisfaction goes up from if you have sex from less than once a month to once a week, goes up a little bit if you have it 2-3 times a week, goes down a tiny bit if you have sex once a day
The financial value of the happiness boost resulting from increasing frequency
of sexual intercourse from once a month to once a week? (according to the
world’s most romantic people, economists)
$50,000 USD in 2004
~100,000 in CAD today - For people in romantic relationships, sexual frequency no longer associated
with well-being at a frequency greater than once a week
– In Loewenstein et al. (2015) study, couples were already having sex about
once a week at baseline - Muise et al. (2016): effect of sexual frequency on well-being mediated by
relationship satisfaction
– Part of the pleasure of sex derives from strengthening the intimate bond,
and that does not rely on daily sexual activity - Daily diary study with 4-6 month follow-up. Following sex, couples experience
lingering boost in sexual satisfaction that lasts ~48 hours (“sexual afterglow”)
– Higher levels of sexual afterglow predicts relationship satisfaction over time - From an evolutionary perspective, too-frequent sex may be sub-optimal
– Depletes resources required for other life-sustaining activities
– Sperm concentration decreases with successive ejaculations
– Risk of displacing own sperm - Possible that “feel good” neurochemicals released during sexual activity to
keep us bonded to our partners take a while to dissipate
REASONS FOR HAVING SEX
- Reasons why we have sex also impact our satisfaction & well-being
- Self-Determination Theory: we are happiest when engaging in activities that
meet the following needs (Knee et al., 2016)
– Relatedness = feel close to others
– Competence = feel confident & capable
– Autonomy = feel that we can choose & control our own actions - Fulfillment of all three needs uniquely predicts sexual & relationship
satisfaction - SDT makes distinction between autonomous and controlled motivation
– When behaving autonomously, we are doing something we genuinely want
to do, not something we are pressured to do - Sex is more enjoyable when pursued for autonomous reasons
– Because it feels good and enjoy the intimacy it brings
– Because you see it as valuable part of the relationship - In contrast to controlled reasons
– E.g., felt pressured to, felt it would be embarrassing to refuse
CHARLA & BRAD
(her bday gift to him was sex every night for a year)
* Enjoy sex more when engaging in it because we want to, not because we have to
* Charla—felt like could not decline after
arrangement was made, sense of relief when it was over
- Recall distinction between approach and avoidance motives
– Approach: motivation to approach rewarding outcomes - E.g., experiencing pleasure, fostering intimacy, pleasing partner
– Avoidance: motivation to avoid negative outcomes - E.g., escaping conflict, preventing partner from losing interest
- Having sex for approach reasons linked with more positive emotional and
relationship outcomes for both self and partner - Having sex for avoidance reasons linked with more negative emotional &
relationship outcomes for both self and partner - Can encourage people to foster sexual approach motivations
- Half of Ps received information about benefits of approach goals, instructed to
focus on approach goals over the next week - One week later, reported having more satisfying sexual experiences and
greater relationship satisfaction
“SEXPECTATIONS”
- Recall earlier discussion of growth vs. destiny beliefs
Destiny beliefs: People
are either compatible or
they are not
Growth beliefs:
Relationship challenges
can be overcome - Extends to lay beliefs about how sexual satisfaction can be attained &
maintained over time
Sexual growth beliefs - Sexual satisfaction requires effort & work
Sexual destiny beliefs - Natural compatibility between partners is key to sexual satisfaction
- Struggles in a sexual relationship are a sure sign the relationship will fail
- A couple is destined to have a satisfying sex life or they are not
- Sexual growth beliefs associated with higher levels of sexual & relationship
satisfaction for both self and partner
– True even when undergoing major transition like parenthood - Impact of sexual destiny beliefs on relationship quality depends on degree of
sexual disagreements in relationship
– Lower relationship quality when experiencing disagreements about sexual
relationship (Which are very common! Recall, for example, gender
differences in sex drive ) - Good news? Sexual beliefs are malleable
COMMUNICATION & SEXUAL INTEREST
- Recall that interpersonal gap = gap between sender’s intentions and effect
on receiver - Can we correctly pick up on a partner’s sexual intentions?
- Most research has focused on initial encounters
- Men exhibit sexual overperception bias
– Perceive greater sexual intent in women’s behaviour compared to women’s
self-reported intent & outsider observer woman ratings
– Ascribe more sexual motives to flirting behaviour - Men rate women’s flirtatious behaviour as signalling more positivity than
women
– Skirt hike, lip lick, lean forward, nod, hair flip/toss, gaze fixate, object caress,
short darting glance, primp - Men & women give similar ratings to laugh, smile, touch, & coy smile
- Men rate women’s rejection behaviours as signalling less negativity
– Look at ceiling, yawn, look away, turn away - No difference for negative head shake & frown
- Evolutionary explanation: more costly for men to miss a mating opportunity
- May project desires onto prospective partners
– “See what we want to see” - Following exposure to sexual prime, Ps perceived potential partners as more
attractive and more interested in oneself
– Heightened romantic interest mediates relationship between sexual
activation and perceiving partner as interested in oneself - What about long-term, established couples?
- Men exhibit opposite bias—underperceive partner’s sexual desire
- Underperception associated with relationship benefits (especially for men)
– Partners felt more satisfied & committed to relationship
– Might work a little harder to spark partner’s interest - Might be biased in direction of underperception to avoid rejection
– Stronger underperception bias on days when more motivated to avoid
sexual rejection (both men and women)
SEXUAL COMMUNICATION
* Sexual communication = combination of:
– Degree of sexual self-disclosure (discussion of sexual preferences, desire to
engage in certain activities, sexual attitudes & values)
– Quality of sexual communication (satisfaction with communication, feeling
that can talk to partner about positive & negative aspects of sexual
relationship)
– Frequency of sexual communication
* Sexual communication associated with all domains of sexual function (desire,
arousal, erection, lubrication, orgasm, less pain) (Mallory et al., 2019), greater
sexual satisfaction (Frederick et al., 2017), & greater relationship satisfaction
(Blumenstock et al., 2020)
* Sexual communication uniquely predicts sexual & relationship satisfaction
over and above general communication
NAVIGATING DISAGREEMENTS
- > 1/3 of couples in long-term relationships report experiencing sexual issues
(e.g., disagreements about preferred sexual frequency) - In majority of long-term, heterosexual relationships, chronic mismatch in
sexual desire between partners - Sexual conflicts have stronger impact on relationship quality than non-sexual
conflicts - Effective communication is crucial for navigating these disagreements—but
it’s not easy
SEXUAL COMMUNICATION
* Despite benefits of sexual communication, sexual
topics avoided more than nonsexual topics
* Relationship partners often have poor understanding
of each other’s likes & dislikes
– Rely on generalizations & stereotypes instead
* What are the barriers to sexual communication?
BARRIERS TO COMMUNICATION
* Desire to avoid negative emotion is a powerful motivator
* Fear that sexual communication will threaten relationship
– May discover incompatible preferences
– Talking about problems may make things worse
– Disclosing past sexual experiences may cause conflict
* Fear of experiencing shame & embarrassment (threat to self)
– Might reveal personal inadequacies
* Fear that might hurt or shame partner
- Similar barriers for both sexual and non-sexual conflict discussions (i.e., threat
to relationship, threat to self, threat to partner) - But sexual discussions especially threatening to the self
- Cognitive reappraisal = emotion regulation strategy involving re-evaluating
and reframing the meaning or significance of a situation
– E.g., instead of “I’m going to embarrass myself”
– “This is an opportunity to get closer to my partner”
– By construing the situation as less aversive, will be less likely to avoid it
RESPONSIVENESS
- Since disclosures related to sexual
conflicts particularly likely to increase
sense of personal vulnerability,
responsiveness becomes even more
important - Recall that perceived responsiveness =
degree to which one feels understood,
validated, and cared for - What contributes to responsiveness?
SEXUAL COMMUNAL STRENGTH
Recall that:
* In interdependent relationships, inevitably encounter conflicts of interest
(interdependence dilemmas)
* Interdependence dilemmas involve deciding whether to act communally,
(prioritizing the partner’s needs over one’s own) or individualistically (focusing
on one’s own needs)
* With increasing interdependence & commitment, transformation of
motivation from individualistic to communal
- Individuals high in communal strength motivated to respond to partner in
ways that will enhance partner’s well-being without expectation of tit-for-tat
reciprocation
– Focus on compassion rather than fairness—trust that it will balance out in
the long run - E.g., experience more positive emotions and feel more relationship
satisfaction on days when they sacrifice for the good of the partner or the
relationship
– Mediated by feelings of authenticity - Sexual communal strength—same concept applied to navigating sexual
interdependence dilemmas - Willingness to meet partner’s sexual needs, even when different from one’s
own preferences - Keeping an open mind and trying to understand partner’s desires
- Or, if turning down partner, doing it sensitively—reassuring partner of love &
continuing attraction - Also means understanding & accepting partner’s need not to engage in sex—
responding with understanding instead of hostility or insecurity - Individuals higher on sexual communal strength focus less on negatives of
having sex (e.g., feeling tired the next day) and more on benefits to the
partner … as a result, more likely to engage in sex, even on days when feel less
sexual desire than partner (desire mismatch) - Both partners consequently experience more sexual & relationship
satisfaction - Whereas individuals low in sexual communal strength felt lower sexual
satisfaction on days they engaged in sex while not really in the mood, people
high in sexual communal strength felt equally satisfied on matched &
mismatched desire days
IMPORTANT CAVEATS
* Only beneficial when motivation to meet partner’s needs comes from a place
of agency—feels authentic & autonomously chosen
– Not the same as pressure or coercion (think back to our discussion of SDT Self-Determination Theory)
* Individuals high in unmitigated communion—those who focus exclusively on
partner’s needs to the exclusion of one’s own—experience less sexual &
relationship satisfaction
– Whereas sexual communal strength is associated with approach goals,
unmitigated sexual communion may be driven by feelings of insecurity or
obligation
“FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS”
- Report fairly high levels of sexual satisfaction, but not as
high as people in committed relationships - Lower levels of sexual communication (e.g., discussion
of sexual needs & desires) - Presumably, less interdependence leads to fewer
interdependence dilemmas, but also lower motivation
to meet partner’s needs
AFFECTION
- Duration of post-sex affection
associated with greater sexual &
relationship satisfaction
– More important than duration of sex &
foreplay - Both men and women
- Especially important for couples with
kids - Affectionate touch (e.g., cuddling, kissing,
caressing) mediates relationship
between sexual frequency and greater
life satisfaction - Experience sampling study: having sex
predicts more affectionate experiences
later that day à subsequent positive
affect
HOW DO INDIVIDUAL
DIFFERENCES IN
ATTACHMENT INFLUENCE
SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS?
ANXIOUS ATTACHMENT
* Worry about their sexual attractiveness & desirability, mate poaching
* Tend to use sex to meet needs for emotional intimacy & reassurance
– E.g., as a way to be closer to partner, extract greater commitment, decrease
feelings of anxiety & distress
* May contribute to intrusive or coercive behaviour
* Focus on pleasing partner but seem to be driven more by avoidance
motivations
– However, partners do not necessarily report lower satisfaction
* Experience less sexual satisfaction
– Less motivated by focus on own physical pleasure & less likely to
communicate sexual needs & preferences to partner
* Also places them at greater risk of engaging in unsafe sexual practices
* Stronger link between sexual satisfaction & relationship satisfaction
– May use sex as “barometer” of what is going on in the relationship
AVOIDANT ATTACHMENT
* Discomfort with closeness may interfere with psychological intimacy in sexual
situations
* Avoidant adolescents less likely to engage in sexual activity
– Engage in sex to “lose their virginity”, experience less positive affect
– More likely to drink or use drugs prior to having sex
* As adults, higher on SOI, more promiscuous, have more one-night stands,
poach mates for one-night stands
– Higher promiscuity not explained by sexual desire
* Dislike intimate & affectionate aspects of sex
* May have sex for self-enhancement and self-presentation motives (e.g., to
boost social status)
* In relationships, to avoid negative partner affect
* Weaker link between sexual satisfaction & relationship satisfaction
SECURE ATTACHMENT
* Comfortable with closeness & interdependence
– May be inclined toward long-term sexual relationship because have learned
that relationships are satisfying
* Positive models of other—see others as caring & well-intentioned
– May facilitate effective communication
* Positive models of self—feel more desired, valued
– Can relax defenses and “let go”
INSECURE ATTACHMENT
* Sexual interactions may buffer against negative effect of attachment
insecurity on relationship satisfaction
* Attachment avoidance unrelated to marital satisfaction among spouses who
had sex more frequently
* Anxious attachment unrelated to marital satisfaction on days spouses report
having more satisfying sex
