Search

In the study reported here, data from implicit and behavioral choice measures did not support sexual economics theory's (SET's) central tenet that women view female sexuality as a commodity. Instead, men endorsed sexual exchange more than women did, which supports the idea that SET is a vestige of patriarchy. Further, men's sexual advice, more than women's, enforced the sexual double standard (i.e., men encouraged men more than women to have casual sex)-a gender difference that was mediated by hostile sexism, but also by men's greater implicit investment in sexual economics. That is, men were more likely to suppress female sexuality because they resisted female empowerment and automatically associated sex with money more than women did. It appears that women are not invested in sexual economics, but rather, men are invested in patriarchy, even when it means raising the price of sexual relations., (© The Author(s) 2014.)

The present research uniquely compared male control theory (MCT) versus female control theory (FCT) to illuminate motives for the sexual double standard (SDS), whereby men gain status from engaging in casual sex or having many sexual partners, but women are stigmatized for it. Consistent with MCT, men were more likely than women to endorse the SDS and to give sexual advice in ways that reinforce it-gender differences that were mediated by hostile sexism (HS) and endorsing the SDS, respectively. The data did not support FCT's argument that women are motivated by sexual economics to restrict female sexuality (Baumeister & Twenge, 2002). Both genders discouraged women from having casual sex to protect women from social stigma and rape myths that justify violence against sexual women. In concert, the findings support MCT more than FCT and suggest that sexism, stigma, and rape myths are primary obstacles to sexual equality.

Proponents of sexual economics theory argue that women exchange sex for men’s resources. This idea is likely to promote a competitive view of gender relationships that undermines gender equality by characterizing women as manipulative and financially dependent on men. Heterosexual college students (N = 474) who were randomly exposed to a popular YouTube video describing sexual economics theory increased their (1) behavioral support for sexual exchange concepts, (2) endorsement of the theory, and (3) adversarial views of heterosexual relationships, compared with a control group of students. Sexual exchange theory endorsement and adversarial heterosexual beliefs positively covaried, and both attitudes were related to participants’ sexism. Reading a critique of sexual exchange theory, that emphasized mutual respect and affection as precursors to heterosexual intimacy, counteracted the consequences of exposure to the theory. The findings provide evidence that disseminating sexual exchange theory via video on the Internet negatively affects young adults’ views of gender relationships. Educators, and others who wish to explore sexual economics theory through the use of this video, should also include a discussion of the countervailing evidence available. Online slides for instructors who want to use this article for teaching are available on PWQ's website at http://journals.sagepub.com/page/pwq/suppl/index . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the first examination of the accuracy of metaperceptions of sexism among White, Asian, and Black women and men (N = 308), results showed that regardless of ethnicity, both genders were similarly inaccurate, but in opposing ways. Women overestimated men’s hostile sexism (HS) and underestimated men’s benevolent sexism (BS), whereas men overestimated women’s BS and underestimated women’s HS. Further, metaperceptions of HS were negatively related to metaperceptions of BS, for both genders. Individual differences in sexism informed metaperceptions only for men (not women). In concert, the findings support an illusion of antagonism between HS and BS. Viewing HS and BS as oppositional is an illusion because, cross-culturally, they are positively correlated in men and women alike (e.g., Glick et al., 2000), and both forms of sexism reinforce the gender hierarchy (Rudman & Glick, 2008). Therefore, disarming the illusion of antagonism is an overlooked key to advancing gender equality. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]