Literature DB >> 33564979

What Is Rough Sex, Who Does It, and Who Likes It? Findings from a Probability Sample of U.S. Undergraduate Students.

Debby Herbenick1,2, Tsung-Chieh Fu3,4, Dubravka Svetina Valdivia5, Callie Patterson3,4, Yael Rosenstock Gonzalez3,4, Lucia Guerra-Reyes3,4, Heather Eastman-Mueller3,4, Jonathon Beckmeyer3,4, Molly Rosenberg4,6.   

Abstract

Using data from an undergraduate probability sample, we aimed to: (1) describe the prevalence and demographic characteristics of students who reported having engaged in rough sex with their current partner; (2) assess which sexual behaviors students consider to be rough sex; (3) describe the frequency with which participants report engaging in rough sex as well as their reports of initiating and liking rough sex, in relation to gender and sexual identity; and (4) examine predictors of rough sex frequency. Participants were 4998 students randomly sampled from a large Midwestern university who completed a confidential Internet-based survey (2453 women, 2445 men, 41 gender non-binary, 36 transgender or other gender non-conforming identities). Within these, 1795 individuals who reported a romantic/sexual partner of at least 3 months responded to questions about engaging, liking, and initiating rough sex. The most common behaviors participants considered to be rough sex were choking, hair pulling, and spanking. Transgender and gender non-binary students more often endorsed behaviors as rough sex. Also, rough sex was conceptualized as multidimensional, with one cluster being more consistent with earlier conceptualizations of rough sex (e.g., hair pulling, spanking) and the second cluster including behaviors such as choking, slapping, punching, and making someone have sex. About 80% of those with a current sexual or romantic partner engaged in rough sex with them and most who engaged it liked it. Bisexual women reported greater rough sex frequency and enjoyment (54.1% indicated enjoying it "very much"). Implications for sexuality research and education are discussed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BDSM; College sexuality; Rough sex; Sexual choking; Spanking

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33564979     DOI: 10.1007/s10508-021-01917-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Sex Behav        ISSN: 0004-0002


  6 in total

1.  Changes in sexual behaviours: from secular trends to public health policies.

Authors:  Nathalie Bajos; Michel Bozon; Nathalie Beltzer; Caroline Laborde; Armelle Andro; Michele Ferrand; Veronique Goulet; Anne Laporte; Charlotte Le Van; Henri Leridon; Sharman Levinson; Nicolas Razafindratsima; Laurent Toulemon; Josiane Warszawski; Kaye Wellings
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2010-05-15       Impact factor: 4.177

2.  Masturbation, paying for sex, and other sexual activities: the Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships.

Authors:  Juliet Richters; Richard O de Visser; Paul B Badcock; Anthony M A Smith; Chris Rissel; Judy M Simpson; Andrew E Grulich
Journal:  Sex Health       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.706

3.  Prevalence of masturbation and associated factors in a British national probability survey.

Authors:  Makeda Gerressu; Catherine H Mercer; Cynthia A Graham; Kaye Wellings; Anne M Johnson
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2008-04

4.  Masturbation in urban China.

Authors:  Aniruddha Das; William L Parish; Edward O Laumann
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2007-08-21

5.  Sex in Australia: autoerotic, esoteric and other sexual practices engaged in by a representative sample of adults.

Authors:  Juliet Richters; Andrew E Grulich; Richard O de Visser; Anthony M A Smith; Chris E Rissel
Journal:  Aust N Z J Public Health       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.939

6.  The Relationship Among Online Sexually Explicit Material Exposure to, Desire for, and Participation in Rough Sex.

Authors:  Emily A Vogels; Lucia F O'Sullivan
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2018-09-18
  6 in total
  5 in total

1.  Frequent and Recent Non-fatal Strangulation/Choking During Sex and Its Association With fMRI Activation During Working Memory Tasks.

Authors:  Megan E Huibregtse; Isabella L Alexander; Lillian M Klemsz; Tsung-Chieh Fu; J Dennis Fortenberry; Debby Herbenick; Keisuke Kawata
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 3.617

2.  Changes in Penile-Vaginal Intercourse Frequency and Sexual Repertoire from 2009 to 2018: Findings from the National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior.

Authors:  Debby Herbenick; Molly Rosenberg; Lilian Golzarri-Arroyo; J Dennis Fortenberry; Tsung-Chieh Fu
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2021-11-19

3.  The Heteronormativity Theory of Low Sexual Desire in Women Partnered with Men.

Authors:  Sari M van Anders; Debby Herbenick; Lori A Brotto; Emily A Harris; Sara B Chadwick
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2021-08-23

4.  "It Was Scary, But Then It Was Kind of Exciting": Young Women's Experiences with Choking During Sex.

Authors:  Debby Herbenick; Lucia Guerra-Reyes; Callie Patterson; Yael R Rosenstock Gonzalez; Caroline Wagner; Nelson Zounlome
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2021-11-10

5.  Frequency, Method, Intensity, and Health Sequelae of Sexual Choking Among U.S. Undergraduate and Graduate Students.

Authors:  Debby Herbenick; Tsung-Chieh Fu; Heather Eastman-Mueller; Sally Thomas; Dubravka Svetina Valdivia; Molly Rosenberg; Lucia Guerra-Reyes; Paul J Wright; Keisuke Kawata; John R Feiner
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2022-07-28
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.