Many researchers have elucidated large, well-established, and reliable gender
differences in sexuality, but relatively few have empirically examined
conditions under which these differences can be eliminated. This article
investigates some established sexuality gender differences in greater depth. We
demonstrate how creative theoretical and empirical approaches may shed light on
prevalent misconceptions concerning sex-related gender differences.
AlexanderM. G.FisherT. D. (2003). Truth and consequences:
Using the bogus pipeline to examine sex differences in self-reported
sexuality. Journal of Sex Research,
40, 27–36.
2.
ArmstrongE. A.EnglandP.FogartyA. C. K. (2009). Orgasm in college hookups
and relationships. In RismanB. J. (Ed.), Families as they really are (pp.
362–377). New York,
NY:
Norton.
3.
BaumeisterR. F.CataneseK. R.VohsK. D. (2001). Is there a gender difference
in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a
review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 5,
242–273.
4.
BussD. M. (1989). Sex differences in human
mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37
cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
12, 1–14.
5.
BussD. M.SchmittD. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: A
contextual evolutionary analysis of human mating.
Psychological Review, 100,
204–232.
6.
ClarkR. D.HatfieldE. (1989). Gender differences in
receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology
& Human Sexuality, 2,
39–45.
7.
ConleyT. D. (2011). Perceived proposer
personality characteristics and gender differences in acceptance of casual
sex offers. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 100,
309–329.
8.
ConleyT. D.ZieglerA.MoorsA. C. (2011). Backlash in the bedroom: Stigma
mediates gender differences in acceptance of casual sex offers.
Manuscript submitted for publication.
9.
EaglyA. H.WoodW. (1999). The origins of sex
differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social
roles. American Psychologist,
54, 408–423.
10.
EastwickP. W.FinkelE. J. (2008). Sex differences in mate
preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a
romantic partner?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
94, 245–264.
11.
EastwickP. W.FinkelE. J.EaglyA. H. (in press). When and why do ideal
partner preferences affect the process of initiating and maintaining
romantic relationships?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
12.
FinkelE. J.EastwickP. W. (2009). Arbitrary social norms
influence sex differences in romantic selectivity.
Psychological Science, 20,
1290–1295.
13.
FisherT. D.MooreZ. T.PittengerM. J. (2011). Sex on the brain? An
examination of frequency of sexual cognitions as a function of gender,
erotophilia, and social desirability. Journal of Sex
ResearchAdvanced online publication. doi:
10.1080/00224499.2011.56542910.1080/00224499.2011.565429.
14.
FredricksonB. L.RobertsT. A. (1997). Objectification
theory. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
21, 173–206.
15.
HelgesonV. S.FritzH. L. (1999). Unmitigated agency and
unmitigated communion: Distinctions from agency and
communion. Journal of Research in
Personality, 33,
131–158.
16.
LanerM. R.VentroneN. A. (2000). Dating scripts
revisited. Journal of Family Issues,
21, 488–500.
17.
LaumannE. O.GagnonJ. H.MichaelR. T.MichaelsS. (2000). The social organization of
sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States.
Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
18.
PedersenW. C.MillerL. C.Putcha-BhagavatulaA.
D.YangY. (2002). Evolved sex differences in
the number of partners desired? The long and the short of
it. Psychological Science, 13,
157–161.
19.
PetersenJ. L.HydeJ. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of
research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993-2007.
Psychological Bulletin, 136,
21–38.
20.
PrenticeD. A.CarranzaE. (2002). What women and men should
be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of
prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 26,
269–281.
21.
RoseS.FriezeI. H. (1989). Young singles’ scripts for a
first date. Gender & Society,
3, 258–268.
22.
RyanC.JethåC. (2010). Sex at dawn: The prehistoric
origins of modern sexuality. New York,
NY:
HarperCollins.
23.
WilcoxR. R.CharlinV. L. (1986). Comparing medians: A Monte
Carlo study. Journal of Educational and Behavioral
Statistics, 11,
263–274.
