Changes in the nature of marriage have spurred a debate about the consequences of shifts to more egalitarian relationships, and media interest in the debate has crystallized around claims that men who participate in housework get more sex. However, little systematic or representative research supports the claim that women, in essence, exchange sex for men’s participation in housework. Although research and theory support the expectation that egalitarian marriages are higher quality, other studies underscore the ongoing importance of traditional gender behavior and gender display in marriage. Using data from Wave II of the National Survey of Families and Households, this study investigates the links between men’s participation in core (traditionally female) and non-core (traditionally male) household tasks and sexual frequency. Results show that both husbands and wives in couples with more traditional housework arrangements report higher sexual frequency, suggesting the importance of gender display rather than marital exchange for sex between heterosexual married partners.
AmatoPaul R.BoothAlanJohnsonDavid R.RogersStacy J.2007. Alone Together: How Marriage in America is Changing. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
2.
AmatoPaul R.JohnsonDavid R.BoothAlanRogersStacy J.2003. “Continuity and Change in Marital Quality between 1980 and 2000.” Journal of Marriage and the Family65:1–22.
3.
AmatoPaul R.RiveraFernando. 1999. “Paternal Involvement and Children’s Behavior Problems.” Journal of Marriage and the Family61:375–84.
4.
BaumeisterRoy F.CataneseKathleen R.VohsKathleen D.2001. “Is There a Gender Difference in Strength of Sex Drive? Theoretical Views, Conceptual Distinctions, and a Review of Relevant Evidence.” Personality and Psychology Review5:242–73.
5.
BaumeisterRoy F.VohsKathleen D.2004. “Sexual Economics: Sex as Female Resource for Social Exchange in Heterosexual Interactions.” Personality and Social Psychology Review8:339–63.
6.
BeckerGary S.1981. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
BerkSarah F.1985. The Gender Factory: The Apportionment of Work in American Households. New York: Plenum Press.
8.
BianchiSuzanne M.MilkieMelissa A.SayerLiana C.RobinsonJohn P.2000. “Is Anyone Doing the Housework? Trends in the Gender Division of Household Labor.” Social Forces79:191–228.
9.
BittmanMichaelEnglandPaulaFolbreNancySayerLianaMathesonGeorge. 2003. “When Does Gender Trump Money? Bargaining and Time in Household Work.” American Journal of Sociology109:186–214.
10.
BlumerHerbert. 1948. “A Sociologist Looks at the ‘Kinsey Report.’” Ecology29:522–24.
11.
BlumsteinPhilipSchwartzPepper. 1983. American Couples: Money, Work, Sex. New York: William Morrow Publishers.
12.
BrewisAlexandraMeyerMary. 2005. “Marital Coitus across the Life Course.” Journal of Biosocial Science37:499–518.
13.
BrinesJulie. 1994. “Economic Dependency, Gender, and the Division of Labor at Home.” American Journal of Sociology100:652–88.
14.
BrinesJulieJoynerKara. 1999. “The Ties that Bind: Principles of Cohesion in Cohabitation and Marriage.” American Sociological Review64:333–65.
15.
ByersE. SandraHeinleinLarry. 1989. “Predicting Initiations and Refusals of Sexual Activities in Married and Cohabiting Heterosexual Couples.” Journal of Sex Research26:210–31.
16.
CallVaughnSprecherSusanSchwartzPepper. 1995. “The Incidence and Frequency of Marital Sex in a National Sample.” Journal of Marriage and the Family57:639–52.
17.
CarringtonChristopher. 1999. No Place Like Home: Relationships and Family Life among Lesbians and Gay Men. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
ChethikNeil. 2006. VoiceMale: What Husbands Really Think about Their Marriages, Their Wives, Sex, Housework, and Commitment. New York: Simon and Schuster.
19.
ChristopherF. ScottSprecherSusan. 2000. “Sexuality in Marriage, Dating, and Other Relationships: A Decade Review.” Journal of Marriage and the Family62:999–1017.
20.
ClarkAlexander L.WallinPaul. 1964. “The Accuracy of Husbands’ and Wives’ Reports on the Frequency of Marital Coitus.” Population Studies18:165–73.
21.
CollinsLinda M.SchaferJoseph L.KamChi-Ming. 2001. “A Comparison of Inclusive and Restrictive Strategies in Modern Missing Data Procedures.” Psychological Methods6:330–51.
22.
ColtraneScott. 1998. Gender and Families. Newbury Park, CA: Pine Forge Press.
23.
ColtraneScott. 2000. “Research on Household Labor: Modeling and Measuring the Social Embeddedness of Routine Family Work.” Journal of Marriage and Family62:1208–1233.
24.
CookeLynn Prince. 2006. “‘Doing Gender’ in Context: Household Bargaining and the Risk of Divorce in Germany and the United States.” American Journal of Sociology112:442–72.
25.
CoontzStephanie. 2005. Marriage, A History: How Love Conquered Marriage. New York: Viking Penguin.
26.
CornwellBenjaminLaumannEdward O.2011. “Network Position and Sexual Dysfunction: Implications of Partner Betweenness for Men.” American Journal of Sociology117:172–208.
27.
Crompton Rosemary, ed. 1999. Restructuring Gender Relations and Employment: The Decline of the Male Breadwinner. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
28.
DeVaultMarjorie L.1991. Feeding the Family: The Social Organization of Caring as Gendered Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
ElliottSinikkaUmbersonDebra. 2008. “The Performance of Desire: Gender and Sexual Negotiation in Long-Term Marriages.” Journal of Marriage and Family70:391–406.
30.
EllisonChristopher G.BurdetteAmy M.WilcoxW. Bradford. 2010. “The Couple That Prays Together: Race and Ethnicity, Religion, and Relationship Quality among Working-Age Adults.” Journal of Marriage and Family72:963–75.
31.
EnglandPaula. 2010. “The Gender Revolution: Uneven and Stalled.” Gender & Society24:149–66.
32.
EnglandPaula. 2011. “Missing the Big Picture and Making Much Ado about Almost Nothing: Recent Scholarship on Gender and Household Work.” Journal of Family Theory and Review3:23–26.
33.
EnglandPaulaShaferEmily FitzgibbonsFogartyAlison C. K.2008. “Hooking Up and Forming Romantic Relationships on Today’s College Campuses.” Pp. 531–46 in The Gendered Society Reader, 3rd ed., edited by M. Kimmel and A. Aronson. New York: Oxford University Press.
34.
FisherKimberlyEgertonMurielGershunyJonathan I.RobinsonJohn P.2006. “Gender Convergence in the American Heritage Time Use Study (AHTUS).” Social Indicators Research82:1–33.
35.
GagerConstance T.YabikuScott T.2010. “Who Has the Time? The Relationship between Household Labor Time and Sexual Frequency.” Journal of Family Issues31:135–63.
36.
GagnonJohn H.SimonWilliam. 1973. Sexual Conduct: The Social Sources of Human Sexuality. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
37.
GoffmanErving. 1977. “The Arrangement between the Sexes.” Theory and Society4:301–331.
38.
GornickJanet C.2002. “Is the Marriage Debate Over? James Q. Wilson and Janet C. Gornick Discuss Whether Liberal and Conservative Takes on Matrimony Can Get Hitched.” The American Prospect Online. Retrieved November 29, 2012 (http://prospect.org/article/marriage-debate-over).
39.
GrahamJohn W.OlchowskiAllison E.GilreathTamika D.2007. “How Many Imputations Are Really Needed? Some Practical Clarifications of Multiple Imputation Theory.” Prevention Science8:206–213.
40.
GreeleyAndrew M.1991. Faithful Attraction: Discovering Intimacy, Love and Fidelity in American Marriage. New York: Doherty.
41.
GreenblatCathy S.1983. “The Salience of Sexuality in the Early Years of Marriage.” Journal of Marriage and the Family45:289–99.
42.
GreensteinTheodore N.2000. “Economic Dependence, Gender, and the Division of Labor in the Home: A Replication and Extension.” Journal of Marriage and the Family62:322–35.
43.
GuptaSanjiv. 2007. “Autonomy, Dependence, or Display? The Relationship between Married Women’s Earnings and Housework.” Journal of Marriage and Family69:399–417.
44.
HamiltonLauraArmstrongElizabeth A.2009. “Gendered Sexuality in Young Adulthood: Double Binds and Flawed Options.” Gender & Society23:589–616.
45.
HochschildArlieMachungAnne. 1989. The Second Shift: Working Parents and the Revolution at Home. New York: Viking.
46.
HomansGeorge C.1961. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcout, Brace, and World.
47.
HookJennifer. 2006. “Care in Context: Men’s Unpaid Work in 20 Countries, 1965–2003.” American Sociological Review71:639–60.
48.
HortonNicholas J.LipsitzStuart R.ParzenMichael. 2003. “A Potential for Bias When Rounding in Multiple Imputation.” American Statistician57:229–32.
49.
HydeJanet ShibleyDeLamaterJohn D.HewittErri C.1998. “Sexuality and the Dual-Earner Couple: Multiple Roles and Sexual Functioning.” Journal of Family Psychology12:354–68.
50.
JamesWilliam H.1981. “The Honeymoon Effect on Marital Coitus.” Journal of Sex Research17:114–23.
51.
JassoGuillermina. 1987. “Choosing a Good: Models Based on the Theory of the Distributive-Justice Force.” Advances in Group Processes: Theory and Research4:67–108.
52.
KillewaldAlexandraGoughMargaret. 2010. “Money Isn’t Everything: Wives’ Earnings and Housework Time.” Social Science Research39:987–1003.
53.
KinseyAlfred C.PomeroyWardell B.MartinClyde E.1948. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: Saunders.
54.
LamDavid. 1988. “Marriage Markets and Assortative Mating with Household Public Goods.” Journal of Human Resources22:462–87.
55.
LaumannEdward O.GagnonJohn H.MichaelRobert T.MichaelsStuart. 1994. The Social Organization of Sexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
56.
LundbergShellyPollakRobert A.1993. “Separate Spheres Bargaining and the Marriage Market.” Journal of Political Economy101:988–1010.
57.
LundbergShellyPollakRobert A.1996. “Bargaining and Distribution in Marriage.” Journal of Economic Perspectives10:139–58.
58.
MarshallWillSawhillIsabel V.2004. “Progressive Family Policy in the 21st Century.” Pp. 198–230 in The Future of the Family, edited by MoynihanD. P.SmeedingT. M.RainwaterL.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
59.
NorthScott. 2007. “Book Review: Chethik, Neil. (2006). VoiceMale: What Husbands Really Think about Their Marriages, Their Wives, Sex, Housework, and Commitment. New York: Simon and Schuster.” Men and Masculinities10:121–23.
60.
PadavicIreneReskinBarbara. 2002. Women and Men at Work, 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
61.
ParsonsTalcottBalesRobert F.1955. Family Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
62.
RaoK. V.DemarisAlfred. 1995. “Coital Frequency among Married and Cohabiting Couples in the United States.” Journal of Biosocial Science27:135–50.
63.
RichAdrienne. 1980. “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence.” Signs5:631–60.
64.
RismanBarbara. 2011. “Gender as Structure or Trump Card?” Journal of Family Theory and Review3:18–22.
65.
RobinsonJohnGodbeyGeoffrey. 1997. Time for Life: The Surprising Ways Americans Use Their Time. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
66.
SchneiderDaniel. 2012. “Gender Deviance and Household Work: The Role of Occupation.” American Journal of Sociology117:1029–1072.
67.
SchwartzPepper. 1995. Love Between Equals: How Peer Marriage Really Works. New York: The Free Press.
SimonWilliamGagnonJohn H.1986. “Sexual Scripts: Permanence and Change.” Archives of Sexual Behavior15:97–120.
70.
SouthScott J.SpitzeGlenna. 1994. “Housework in Marital and Nonmarital Households.” American Sociological Review59:327–47.
71.
SprecherSusan. 1998. “Social Exchange Theories and Sexuality.” Journal of Sex Research35:32–43.
72.
SteenslandBrianParkJerry Z.RegnerusMark D.RobinsonLynn D.WilcoxW. BradfordWoodberryRobert D.2000. “The Measure of American Religion: Toward Improving the State of the Art.” Social Forces79:291–318.
73.
StevensDaphne PedersenKigerGaryMannonSusan E.2005. “Domestic Labor and Marital Satisfaction: How Much or How Satisfied?” Marriage and Family Review37:49–67.
74.
StormsMichael D.StiversMargaret L.LambersScott W.HillCraig A.1981. “Sexual Scripts for Women.” Sex Roles7:699–707.
75.
SullivanOriel. 2006. Changing Gender Relations, Changing Families: Tracing the Pace of Change over Time. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
76.
SullivanOriel. 2011. “An End to Gender Display through the Performance of Housework? A Review and Reassessment of the Quantitative Literature Using Insights from the Qualitative Literature.” Journal of Family Theory and Review3:1–13.
SweetJames A.BumpassLarry L.1996. The National Survey of Families and Households - Waves 1 and 2: Data Description and Documentation. Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI (http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/nsfh/home.htm).
79.
UdryJ. RichardChantalaKim. 2004. “Masculinity-Femininity Guides Sexual Union Formation in Adolescents.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin30:44–55.
80.
WaiteLinda J.JoynerKara. 2001. “Emotional Satisfaction and Physical Pleasure in Sexual Unions: Time Horizon, Sexual Behavior, and Sexual Exclusivity.” Journal of Marriage and Family63:247–64.
81.
WestCandaceZimmermanDon. 1987. “Doing Gender.” Gender and Society1:125–51.
82.
WhiteLynnKeithBruce. 1990. “The Effect of Shift Work on the Quality and Stability of Marital Relations.” Journal of Marriage and the Family52:453–62.
83.
WilcoxW. Bradford. 2004. Soft Patriarchs, New Men: How Christianity Shapes Fathers and Husbands. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
84.
WilcoxW. BradfordNockSteven L.2006. “What’s Love Got to Do with It? Equality, Commitment and Women’s Marital Quality.” Social Forces84:1321–45.
85.
YabikuScottGagerConstance T.2009. “Sexual Frequency and the Stability of Marital and Cohabiting Unions.” Journal of Marriage and Family7:983–1000.
86.
YehHsiu-ChenLorenzFrederick O.WickramaK. A. S.CongerRand D.ElderGlen H.2006. “Relationships among Sexual Satisfaction, Marital Quality, and Marital Instability at Midlife.” Journal of Family Psychology20:339–43.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
