Literature DB >> 24203377

Double standards for sexual jealousy : Manipulative morality or a reflection of evolved sex differences?

L Paul1, M A Foss, M A Baenninger.   

Abstract

This work tests two conflicting views about double standards: whether they reflect evolved sex differences in behavior or a manipulative morality serving male interests. Two questionnaires on jealous reactions to mild (flirting) and serious (cheating) sexual transgressions were randomly assigned to 172 young women and men. One questionnaire assessed standards for appropriate behavior and perceptions of how young women and men usually react. The second asked people to report how they had reacted or, if naive, how they would react. The questions concerned anger at and blame of partner and rival and the self-oriented responses of loss of self-esteem, feelings of hurt, and fear of losing the partner. As predicted by the idea of manipulative morality, both sexes advanced sets of double standards that serve the interests of their own sex at the expense of the opposite sex. Much of the data contradict the idea of a match between double standards and evolved sex differences. First, subjects who set self-serving double standards did not perceive gender differences in jealous reactions. Second, there were few gender differences in judgments regarding jealous responses. Third, in contrast with the familiar double standard, women were more aggressively reactive to a flirting rival than men. Fourth, self-reports of the strength of aggressive jealous reactions suggest that women's behavior is stronger than the prescriptions for it. These data suggest that double standards represent a communication strategy which assists men's control of women. The data on jealous reactions were interpreted in terms of the degree of threat to fitness posed by infidelity in different situations.

Entities:  

Year:  1996        PMID: 24203377     DOI: 10.1007/BF02733399

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Nat        ISSN: 1045-6767


  9 in total

1.  Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila.

Authors:  A J BATEMAN
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  1948-12       Impact factor: 3.821

2.  The evolutionary origins of patriarchy.

Authors:  B Smuts
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1995-03

3.  Gender and aggressive behavior: a meta-analytic review of the social psychological literature.

Authors:  A H Eagly; V J Steffen
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1986-11       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  The opponent-process theory of acquired motivation: the costs of pleasure and the benefits of pain.

Authors:  R L Solomon
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  1980-08

5.  Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating.

Authors:  D M Buss; D P Schmitt
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  Jealousy: loss of relationship rewards, loss of self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and anger.

Authors:  E W Mathes; H E Adams; R M Davies
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1985-06

7.  Male aggression against women : An evolutionary perspective.

Authors:  B Smuts
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1992-03

8.  The evolution of female sexuality and mate selection in humans.

Authors:  M F Small
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1992-06

9.  Evolutionary biology and feminism.

Authors:  P A Gowaty
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1992-09
  9 in total
  1 in total

1.  Raising Darwin's consciousness : Female sexuality and the prehominid origins of patriarchy.

Authors:  S B Hrdy
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1997-03
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.