Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers

According to cultural stereotypes, men are more eager for sex than are women; women are more likely to set limits on such activity. In this paper, we review the work fo theorists who have argued in favor of this proposition and review the interview and correlational data which support this contention. Finally, we report two experimental tests of this hypothesis. In these experiments, conducted in 1978 and 1982, male and female confederates of average attractiveness approached potential partners with one of three requests: "Would you go out tonight?" "Will you come over to my apartment?" or "Would you go to bed with me?" The great majority of men were willing to have a sexual liaison with the women who approached them. Women were not. Not one woman agreed to a sexual liaison. Many possible reasons for this marked gender difference were discussed. These studies were run in 1978 and 1982. It has since become important to track how the threat of AIDS is affecting men and women's willingness to date, come to an apartment, or to engage in casucal sexual relations.
Author: 
Clark III,Russell,D.
Hatfield,Elaine
Reprint Status: 
IN FILE
Start Page: 
39
End Page: 
55
Journal/Periodical Name: 
Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality
Volume: 
2
Issue: 
1
Abstract: 
Cultural stereotypes suggest that men are eager for sexual intercourse and women set limits. This article reviews various theories of the sexual interests of men and women as well as data that supports these theories. Two experimental tests of this hypothesis are reported here. In these experiments men and women were asked very direct questions about engaging in sexual activity with the person of the opposite sex who asked the question. The results show that men and women responded as traditionalists would expect them to. There are significant gender differences in the attitudes toward sex. Further study of the impact of AIDS on sexual roles is suggested.
Topic Areas: 
Male-female relations; myths/stereotypes
Reference Type: 
JOUR
Reference ID: 
766
Publication Date: 
1989