Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin   5. Interpersonal Heterosexual BehaviorsA. Childhood SexualityDAVID L. WEIS** With input from Paul Okami.Within American culture, childhood sexuality remains an areathat has been largely unexplored by researchers. Childhood is widely seen as aperiod of asexual innocence. Strong taboos continue concerning childhooderoticism, and childhood sexual expression and learning are still divisivesocial issues. This general ambience of anxiety associated with the sexuality ofchildren is probably understandable, given the general history of sexuality inthe U.S.A., with its focus on adult dyadic sex within committed intimaterelationships and its opposition to other sexual expressions. This ambienceremains, despite the fact that nearly a century has passed since Freudintroduced his theory of psychosexual stages with an emphasis placed on thesexual character of childhood development. This reluctance to accept childhoodsexuality is somewhat ironic, because Freudian theory, with its concepts ofpsychosexual stages (oral, anal, phallic, and latency), penis envy, theOedipus/Electra complexes, repression, and the unconscious, has been immenselypopular in the United States throughout much of the twentieth century. Yet, thegeneral American public has been able to ignore the prominence given tochildhood sexual development by Freudian theorists and to maintain its centralbelief that childhood is and ought to be devoid of sexuality.Perhaps no area reviewed in this section has been the subjectof less scientific research than this topic of childhood sexuality. To someextent, the paucity of research has been due to general social concerns aboutthe ethical implications of studying children or assumptions about the possibleharm to children that would result if they were to be included in sexualityresearch. Researchers have frequently had difficulty gaining the permission oflegal guardians to ask children questions about their knowledge of sexuality. Inthis atmosphere, it would be exceedingly difficult to get permission to askchildren about their sexual behavior. One consequence of this general socialconcern has been that most of the relevant research has been confined to askingadults or college students to report retrospectively about events that occurredin their childhood. There are rather clear and obvious limitations to thisapproach.On the other hand, we should recognize that many Americanscientists themselves have been unwilling to study the sexuality of children. Arecent review, Sexuality Research in the United Slates: An Assessment of theSocial and Behavioral Sciences (di Mauro 1995), is notable for the fact thatit never mentions childhood sexuality. It might be interesting to determine theextent to which American researchers accept the premise that scientificexplorations of sexuality might be harmful to children. For example, the fieldof child development, a sizable branch of American psychology, has largelyignored the issue of sexuality in their work (Maccoby and Martin 1983; Mussen1983). An examination of standard developmental texts or reviews of the childdevelopment research literature is striking for its omission of sexuality.Significant bodies of child-development research in such important areas aslanguage acquisition, cognition, communication, social behavior, parent-childinteraction, attachment (Allgeier and Allgeier 1988), parenting styles, andchild compliance have emerged with scant attention to the possible sexualelements of these areas, or to the ways in which these areas might be related tosexual development (Mussen 1983). As just one example, Piaget never investigatedthe issue of children's sexual cognition, and there has been little subsequentresearch exploring the application of his theoretical model to sexualdevelopment. Similarly, the emergence of family systems theory has also largelyignored the sexuality of children - except to explain the occurrence ofincest.At the same time, it is just as true that sexualityresearchers have largely ignored the work of child developmentalists and otherscientific disciplines in their own work. They have speculated about howtheories of psycho-analysis, social learning, cognition, attribution, socialexchange, and symbolic interactionism might be applied to the sexuality ofchildren or to the process of sexual development, but they have rarely testedsuch assertions empirically (see Allgeier and Allgeier 1988 and Martinson 1976for examples). Moreover, sex researchers have largely failed to examine how thevarious processes studied by developmentalists relate to sexuality.A third domain of this fractured American approach to childdevelopment is the fairly recent emergence of professional fields devoted solelyto the issue of child sexual abuse. We present a review of child sexual abuseitself later in this chapter (see Section 8A2). Here, we wish to make the pointthat professional groups - e.g., social workers and family therapists devoted tothe treatment of victims of child sexual abuse - have emerged, largely since the1970s, with a corresponding body of work devoted to that concern. After havingbeen largely neglected for much of the twentieth century, the treatment of childsexual abuse has become a sizable “industry” in recent years.Unfortunately, much of the work that has been done within this perspective hasfailed to consider existing data on normative childhood sexuality (Okami 1992,1995). For example, it is frequently asserted that child sexual abuse has thenegative consequence of “sexualizing” the child's world. We do notmean to claim that child sexual abuse is either harmless or nonexistent.However, the notion that a “sexualized” childhood is a tragic outcomeof sexual abuse rests on the American premise that childhood should be devoid ofsexuality. It assumes that childhood should not be sexual. From thisperspective, the concept of child sexual abuse has been extended to includefamily nudity - a point certain to shock naturists in many countries around theworld - parents bathing with their children, “excessive” displays ofphysical affection (such as kissing and hugging), and even children of the sameage engaging in sex play (Okami 1992, 1995). Thus, we seem to have come fullcircle. Many professionals have come to accept the premise that childhood oughtto be an innocent period, free of sexuality. The fact that this view ignoresmuch of the existing data seems to have had little impact on either the Americanpublic or many professionals working with children.Childhood Sexual Development and ExpressionIn reviewing the process of child sexual development and thephenomenon of child eroticism, it is crucial to consider the meanings thatchildren attach to their experience. There is a tendency to interpret childhoodexperiences in terms of the meanings that adults have learned to attach tosimilar events. This ignores the reality that young children almost certainly donot assign the same meanings to “sexual” events as adults. They haveyet to conceptualize a system of experiences, attitudes, and motives that adultslabel as “sexual” (Allgeier and Allgeier 1988; Gagnon and Simon 1973;Martinson 1976). A good example is provided by the case of childhood“masturbation.” Young children often discover that “playing”with their genitals is a pleasurable experience. However, this may well not bethe same as “masturbating.” Masturbation, as adults understand thatterm, is a set of behaviors defined as “sexual” because they arerecognized as producing “sexual arousal” and typically having orgasmor “sexual climax” as a goal. Young children have yet to constructthis complex set of meanings. They know little more than that the experience ispleasurable; it feels good. In fact, it would be useful to see research thatexamines the process by which children eventually learn to label suchself-pleasuring as a specifically sexual behavior called masturbation.From this perspective, sexual development is, to aconsiderable extent, a process characterized by the gradual construction of asystem of sexual meanings. Gagnon and Simon (1973) have provided a theoreticalmodel of sexual scripting that examines how these meanings are assembled in aseries of stages through social interaction with various socialization agents.In their discussion of the model, Gagnon and Simon stressed their intention thatit would serve as an organizing framework for future research on the process ofsexual development. Although we believe that the model does provide apotentially fruitful framework for thinking about the process of sexualdevelopment, and despite the fact that more than twenty years have passed sinceits original presentation, there is nearly as great a need for research of thistype today as when they formulated the model.One component of the model proposed by Gagnon and Simon (1973)was the concept of assemblies, by which they meant to convey their view thatsexual development is actively constructed by humans rather than merely being anorganic process. Among the major assemblies they identified were:1. the emergence of a specific genderidentity,2. the learning of a sense of modesty,3. the acquisition of a sexual vocabulary,4. the internalization of mass-media messages aboutsexuality,5. the learning of specific acts defined as sexual,6. the learning of gender, family, and sexual roles,7. the learning of the mechanisms and process of sexualarousal;8. the development of sexual fantasies and imagery,9. the development of a sexual value system,10. the emergence of a sexual orientation, and11. the adoption of an adult sexuallifestyle.Gagnon and Simon maintained that these assemblies wereconstructed through interactions with a variety of socialization agents, such asparents and family members, same-sex peers, cross-sex peers, and the mass media.To this list, we would suggest adding the church, the school, theneighborhood/community, and boyfriends/girlfriends as potentially importantsocialization agents. For Gagnon and Simon, the task for researchers was toexamine and identify the associations between the activities of varioussocialization agents and the corresponding construction of specific sexualassemblies. Although a fair amount of research has been conducted on suchassociations among adolescents (see the following section), sadly there remainsrelatively little research along these lines for younger children. As such, wewill not present a detailed discussion of the activities of each socializationagent here.Lacking space to review each of the assemblies, we have had tobe selective and have chosen to focus on the more explicitly erotic dimensions.However, we do wish to note that each is ultimately important to a fullunderstanding of sexual development, and it is likely that each of theseassemblies is related to the others. Although we do not have space to review theresearch on the development of gender roles and gender identity, it appears thatmost American children have formed a stable gender identity by the age of 2 or 3(Maccoby and Martin 1983; Money and Ehrhardt 1972). It also seems likely that,as children acquire sexual information and experience, they filter what theylearn in terms of what is appropriate for males and females. Since norms formale and female behavior, both sexual and nonsexual, tend to differ, thisfiltering process seems likely to lead to differences in the content of andprocesses of male and female sexual development.On the other hand, we would caution the reader to resist thetemptation to conclude that gender differences in sexuality are invariablylarge, or that they apply to all dimensions of sexuality. Recent reviews ofexisting research indicate that many aspects of sexuality are not characterizedby male-female differences and that many differences are small in magnitude(Oliver and Hyde 1993). Ultimately, the issue is a matter for empiricalinvestigation. Unfortunately, there has been relatively little empiricalresearch attempting to link gender-role development (of which there has been agreat deal of research in the last thirty years) with the processes of moreovertly sexual development.Childhood Sexual Eroticism and Expression. Martinson(1976) has drawn a distinction between what he calls reflexive and eroticizedsexual experiences. Reflexive experience is pleasurable and may be a result oflearning contingencies, but eroticized experience is characterized byself-conscious awareness and labeling of behavior as sexual. As a generalguideline, younger and less-experienced children would seem more likely to reactto sexual stimuli in a reflexive manner; older and more-experienced children aremore likely to have learned erotic meanings and to define similar behaviors as“sexual.” However, there has been virtually no research detailing theprocess in which this transition occurs or identifying the factors associatedwith it.Sexual Capacity and Autoerotic Play. It has been clearfor several decades that infants are capable of reflexive sexual responses frombirth. Male infants are capable of erections, and female infants are capable ofvaginal lubrication (Allgeier and Allgeier 1988; Halverson 1940). Lewis (1965)observed pelvic thrusting movements in infants as early as eight months of age.Generally, these events appear to be reactions to spontaneous stimuli, such astouching or brushing of the genitals. However, the Kinsey research group (1953)did report several cases of infants less than 1 year of age who had beenobserved purposely stimulating their own genitals. In their cross-culturalsurvey, Ford and Beach (1951) reported that, in cultures with a permissive norm,both boys and girls progress from absent-minded fingering of their genitals inthe first year of life to systematic masturbation by the age of 6 to8.With few exceptions, most research on childhood sexualexperiences has asked adolescents or adults to describe events in their past.Males participating in such studies commonly report memories of what they call“their first pleasurable erection” at such ages as 6 and 9 (Martinson1976), although, as we have just seen, studies of infants themselves documentthe occurrence of erections from birth. Kinsey and his associates (1953) didreport that almost all boys could have orgasms without ejaculation three to fiveyears before puberty, and more than one half could reach orgasm by age 3 or 4.Comparable data for females have not been presented. In addition, both boys andgirls between the ages of 6 and 10 have reported becoming sexually aroused bythinking about sexual events (Langfeldt 1979).Much has been made in the U.S.A. of the fact that sexualarousal in boys is readily visible (erections). A number of authors have arguedthat this increases the probability that young boys will “discover”their penis and are, thus, more likely to stimulate their own genitals than aregirls. This idea has become part of the folklore of American culture. We know ofno evidence that substantiates this idea. In fact, Galenson and Roiphe (1980)report that there are no gender differences in autoerotic play during the firstyear of life.American culture does not encourage such childhood sex playand actively seeks to restrict it. In a study in the 1950s, only 2 percent ofmothers reported that they were “permissive” about their ownchildren's sex play (Sears, Maccoby, and Levin 1957). It is also interesting tonote that the researchers in this study did not provide a response category thatallowed mothers to indicate they “supported” or“encouraged” sex play. Martinson (1973) found this patternextended well into the 1970s. In a later investigation of parental views towardmasturbation, Gagnon (1985) found that the majority (86 percent) of this samplebelieved that their preadolescent children had masturbated. However, only 60percent of the parents thought that this was acceptable, and only one thirdwanted their children to have a positive attitude about masturbation.Sex Play with Other Children. The capacity to interactwith another person in an eroticized manner and to experience sexual feelings,either homosexual or heterosexual, is clearly present by the age of 5 to 6.Langfeldt (1979) did observe both mounting and presenting behaviors in boys andgirls at 2 years of age. He also observed that prepubertal boys who engaged insex play with other children typically displayed penile erections during sexplay. Ford and Beach (1951) found that children in cultures, unlike the U.S.A.,who are able to observe adult sexual relations will engage in copulatorybehaviors as early as 6 or 7 years of age. Moreover, in some cultures, adultsactively instruct children in the techniques or practice of sexual relations(Ford and Beach 1951; Reiss 1986). This cross-cultural evidence appears to havehad little impact on the way in which most Americans, including many sexualityprofessionals, think about childhood sociosexual interactions.Again, most of the research in the U.S.A. has been based onrecall data from adolescents or adults. Our impressions of childhood sexualinteractions are biased toward periods that such older respondents can remember.A number of studies have examined the frequency of childhood sexual behaviors(Broderick 1965, 1966; Broderick and Fowler 1961; Goldman and Goldman 1982;Kinsey et al. 1948, 1953; Martinson 1973, 1976; Ramsey 1943). Taken together,these studies demonstrate that many American children develop and maintain anerotic interest in the other or same sex, and begin experiencing a wide range ofsexual behaviors as early as age 5 to 6. It is not uncommon for Americans toreport that they remember “playing doctor” or similar games thatprovide opportunities for observing and touching the genitals of other children,undressing other children, or displaying their own genitals to others. ManyAmerican children also acquire experience with kissing and deep kissing (whatAmericans call French kissing). In fact, generations of American children haveplayed institutionalized kissing games, such as “spin the bottle” and“post office.” These studies also provide evidence that at least someAmerican children experience sexual fondling, oral sex, anal sex, andintercourse prior to puberty. Many of these behaviors are experienced in eitherheterosexual or homosexual combinations or both.We have purposely avoided reporting the specific frequenciesof the childhood sociosexual experiences in these studies because each possessessevere limitations with respect to generalizability. Most have had small samplesdrawn from a narrow segment of the total population in a specific geographicregion. As early as the 1960s, researchers found evidence of racial andcommunity differences in the rate of such behaviors (Broderick 1965, 1966;Broderick and Fowler 1961). In addition, most have used volunteer samples, withrespondents who were trying to recall events that had occurred ten or more yearsearlier. Moreover, these studies were conducted over a period of five decades,during which there would seem to be great potential for changes. Comparisonsamong these studies are virtually impossible. As a result, we would have littleconfidence in the specific accuracy of frequency estimates.A review of a few of these studies illustrates this point.Interviewing a group of boys in a midwestern city in the early 1940s, Ramsey(1943) found that 85 percent had masturbated prior to age 13, one third hadengaged in homosexual play, two thirds had engaged in heterosexual play, and onethird had attempted or completed intercourse. The Kinsey group (1948), using abroader sample of adults, reported that 45 percent had masturbated by age 13, 30percent had engaged in homosexual play, 40 percent had engaged in heterosexualplay, and 20 percent had attempted intercourse. For girls, the Kinsey group(1953) reported that roughly 20 percent had masturbated prior to age 13, roughlyone third had engaged in both heterosexual and homosexual play, and 17 percenthad attempted intercourse. They also reported an actual decline in sexualbehaviors after age 10 (Kinsey et al. 1948). The large differences between theRamsey and Kinsey findings could be due to sample size, differences ingeographic region or size of the city, differences in the time period of datacollection, or differences in the age range 'of the samples. Here, it isinteresting to note that the Kinsey group (1948) also interviewed a small sampleof boys. Roughly 70 percent reported some form of child sex play, a figure thatis much closer to Ramsey's findings. In the larger Kinsey sample, only 57percent of adult males and 48 percent of adult females reported memories ofchildhood sex play, usually between the ages of 8 to 13 (Kinsey et al. 1948,1953). It would seem possible, then, that studies with adult samples recallingtheir childhood experiences might well yield lower estimates than studies ofchildren themselves.John Money (1976) and Money and Ehrhardt (1972) argue thatchildhood sex play with other children is a necessary and valuable form ofrehearsal and preparation for later adult sexual behavior. He has also suggestedthat such sex play may occur as part of a developmental stage in childhood.Certainly, this phenomenon has been observed in other primate species, such asthe chimpanzee (DeWaal 1982). However, Kilpatrick (1986, 1987) found nodifferences in various ages of adult sexual functioning between persons who hadchildhood sexual experiences with other children and those who did not. Giventhe complexity of the model of sexual assemblies we have presented here, it isnot surprising that the effects are not that simple.Sibling Incest. We discuss incest and child sexualabuse more fully later in Section 8A on coercive sex. Here, we merely wish tonote that, in one of the few studies of sibling incest with a nonclinicalsample, Finkelhor (1980) found that 15 percent of female and 10 percent of malecollege students reported having a sexual experience with a brother or sister.Approximately 40 percent of these students had been under the age of 8 at thetime of the sexual activity, and roughly 50 percent had been between the ages of8 and 12. Three quarters of the experiences had been heterosexual. Some type offorce had been used in one quarter of the experiences. The most common sexualactivities were touching and fondling of the genitals. Only 12 percent of thestudents had ever told anyone about these sexual activities with a brother or asister. Interestingly, most of the students reported that they did not haveeither strong positive or negative feelings about these experiences. Positivereactions were reported by 30 percent, and another 30 percent reported negativereactions. Positive reactions were associated with consensual activities (noforce had been used) and an age difference of four or fewer years. For males,there were no correlations between prior sibling experiences and current sexualactivity. Among females, those who had had sibling sexual experiences were morelikely to be currently sexually active. Those women who had positive siblingexperiences after age 9 had significantly higher sexual self-esteem, whereasthose who had sexual experiences before age 9 with a sibling more than fouryears older had lower self-esteem.Sexual Contacts with Adults. A recent national survey(Laumann et al. 1994) found that 12 percent of men and 17 percent of womenreported they had been sexually touched by an older person while they werechildren. The offender was typically not a stranger, but a family friend or arelative, a finding that is comparable to more-limited samples. We present amore complete review of sexual contacts with adults later in Section 8A2 onchild sexual abuse and incest. Relatively few studies of adult-child sexualcontacts have been conducted with nonclinical samples. In general, they indicatethat children experience a wide range of reactions, from highly negative ortraumatic to highly positive, to such contacts in both the short term and longterm (Kilpatrick 1986, 1987; Nelson 1986; Farrell 1990). Moreover, there do notappear to be any simple or direct correlations between such childhoodexperiences and later measures of adult sexual functioning. In her study ofincest, Nelson (1986) found no correlation between affective outcomes and typeof erotic activity, sexual orientation, or consanguinity. Kilpatrick (1986) didfind that the use of force or abuse was significantly related to impaired adultsexual functioning in several areas.Same-Sex Childhood Experiences. Our discussion to thispoint has not focused exclusively on heterosexual experience, but it iscertainly fair to say that investigations of heterosexual child sex play havedominated existing research. One study of 4- to 14-year-old children found thatmore than one half of boys and one third of girls reported at least onehomosexual experience (Elias and Gebhard 1969). Masturbation, touching of thegenitals, and exhibition were the most common activities, although there werealso some reports of oral and anal contacts. The fact that children have hadsuch a homosexual experience does not appear to be related to adult sexualorientation (Bell, Weinberg, and Hammersmith 1981; Van Wyk and Geist1984).Storms (1981) has hypothesized that such experiences may berelated to adult sexual orientation as a function of sexual maturation. Hesuggests that persons who become sexually mature during the period of homosocialnetworks (discussed below) may be more likely to romanticize and eroticize thesechildhood homosexual experiences and, thus, develop a later preference forsexual partners of the same gender. In effect, when sexual maturation,goal-directed masturbation, homosexual explorations, and eroticized fantasiesare paired before heterosexual socialization occurs (typically at about age 13),they are more likely to lead to a homosexual orientation later. As far as weknow, Storms's ideas have never been directly tested through research.Childhood Social Networks. During middle childhood(roughly ages 6 to 12), both boys and girls in the U.S.A. tend to form networksof same-sex friends. A pattern of gender segregation, where boys and girls haveseparate friends and play groups, is central to the daily life of middlechildhood. This pattern of homosocial networks is readily observable atelementary schools across the U.S.A. Girls and boys tend to cluster at schoolinto separated, same-sex groups. At lunchtime, they frequently sit at separate“girl's tables” and “boy's tables.” On the playground, spaceand activities tend to be gendered. After school, children tend to associate andplay in gender-segregated groupings. In fact, this pattern of gender separationmay be more pronounced in middle childhood in the U.S.A. than themore-publicized racial segregation.It should be acknowledged that these homosocial networks arenot characterized by a total separation of the genders. There are someopportunities for heterosocial interactions and play, and children do vary withrespect to the extent in which they associate with the other sex. As just oneobvious example, some girls, who are known as “tomboys,” spendconsiderable time associating with boys. Still, to a large extent, the worlds ofboys and girls in middle childhood in the U.S.A. are separated.Maltz and Borker (1983) have suggested that these homosocialnetworks can be viewed as distinct male and female cultures. As cultures, eachhas its own set of patterns, norms, and rules of discourse. Boys tend to play ingroups that are arranged in a hierarchy. They stress a norm of achievement(“doing”) and emphasize competitive, physical activities. Conflict isovert and is often resolved directly through physical Fighting. Differentiationbetween boys is made directly in terms of power and status within the group.Since boys belong to more than one such group, and because group memberships dochange over time, each boy has an opportunity to occupy a range of positionswithin these hierarchies. Boys' groups also tend to be inclusive. New membersare easily accommodated, even if they must begin their membership in alower-status position. Courage and testing limits are prime values of boys'groups, and breaking rules is a valued form of bonding. In examining how thesepatterns influence male communication, Maltz and Borker (1983) report that malesare more likely to interrupt others, they are more likely to ignore the previousstatement made by another speaker, they are more likely to resist aninterruption, and they are more likely to directly challenge statements byothers.Girls tend to associate in smaller groups or friendship pairs.Girls, for example, tend to be highly invested in establishing and maintaining a“best friend” relationship. They stress a norm of cooperation(“sharing”) and pursue activities that emphasize “workingtogether” and “being nice.” They frequently play games thatinvolve “taking turns.” Friendship is seen as requiring intimacy,equality, mutual commitment, and cooperation. However, girls' groups also tendto be exclusive. Membership is carefully reserved for those who havedemonstrated they are good friends. Conflict tends to be covert, and it ishighly disruptive, leading to a pattern of shifting alliances among associates.Differentiation between girls is not made in terms of power, but rather inrelative closeness. Girls are more likely to affirm the value of rules,especially if they are seen as serving group cohesion or making things fair.Girls may break rules, but their gender group does not provide the intenseencouragement and support for this behavior seen among boys. Maltz and Borker(1983) note that girls are more likely to ask questions to facilitateconversation, they are more likely to take turns talking, they are more likelyto encourage others to speak, and they are more likely to feel quietlyvictimized when they have been interrupted.These largely segregated gender networks in middle childhoodserve as the contexts for learning about adolescent and adult sexual patterns,as well as for other areas of social life. There is, of course, a certain ironyto the fact that homosocial networks serve as a principal learning context forheterosexuality in a culture with such strong taboos against homosexuality asthe U.S.A. In fact, Martinson (1973) has argued that these gender networks andthis period serve as the settings for a fair amount of homosexual explorationand activity. In one sense, it is almost certainly true that some homosexualactivity results from these patterns of social organization. However, thisassertion is largely undocumented, and we are not aware of any studies thatcompare the level of homosexual activity in cultures with homosocial networkswith cultures having some other form of childhood networks.Thorne and Luria (1986) have used this concept of genderedcultures to examine the process of sexual learning in middle childhood. Theyfound that “talking dirty” is a common format for the rule-breakingthat characterizes boys' groups. They noted that talking dirty serves to defineboys as apart from adults, and that boys get visibly excited while engaging insuch talk. Boys also often share pornography with each other and take great careto avoid detection and confiscation by adults. These processes provide knowledgeabout what is sexually arousing, and they also create a hidden, forbidden, andarousing world shared with other boys, apart from adults and girls. Miller andSimon (1981) have argued that the importance attached to rule violations createsa sense of excitement and fervor about sexual activity andaccomplishment.One other feature of boys' groups is that they serve as asetting for learning both homoeroticism and homophobia. Boys learn to engage inwhat Thorne and Luria call “fag talk.” That is, they learn to insultother boys by calling them names, like “faggot” and “queer.”Eventually, they learn that homosexuality is disapproved by the male peer group.Boys at age 5 to 6 can be observed touching each other frequently. By age 11 to12, touching is less frequent and reduced to ritual gestures like poking eachother. On the other hand, much of the time spent with other boys is spenttalking about sex. This serves to maintain a high level of arousal within thegroup. Moreover, the sanctioning of rule-breaking leads to some homosexualexperimentation that is kept hidden from the group. Homosexual experiences maybecome one more form of breaking the rules and one more feature of the secret,forbidden world of sexuality.In contrast, girls are more likely to focus on their own andtheir friends' physical appearance. They monitor one another's emotions. Theyshare secrets and become mutually vulnerable through self-disclosure. They havegiggling sessions with their friends, with sex often being the source ofamusement. Their talks with other girls tend to focus less on physicalactivities and more on relationships and romance. They also plot together how toget particular boys and girls together in a relationship.These sexual patterns are largely consistent with the norms ofthe respective gender cultures. Males tend to focus on physical activities;females on cooperation and sharing. They are also quite consistent with patternsthat will become firmly established in adolescent sociosexual patterns. Thus,male and female peer groups become the launching pads for heterosexual couplingas boys and girls begin to “go together.” Finally, they serve toheighten the romantic/erotic component of interactions with the othergender.Professional and Social Issues of ChildhoodSexualityAs we stated at the beginning of this section and as should beapparent from the review of sex education in the U.S.A., there are a number ofissues concerning childhood sexuality that have been controversial for decades.Moreover, several new issues have become points of social conflict in recentyears. We can only briefly mention four here.The Oedipus and Electra Complexes. The Goldmans' (1982)multinational study of children and sexual learning, including a sizableAmerican sample, raises questions about these complexes. Freud's thesis aboutcastration anxiety and its resolution (typically by the age of 5) wouldpresumably require some awareness of genital differences between males andfemales, unless one wishes to interpret Freud's terminology strictly asmetaphorical. In the Goldman study, the majority of English-speaking childrendid not understand these differences until they were 7 to 9 years old.Interestingly, a majority of the Swedish children could accurately describethese differences by the age of 5.Is There a Latency Period? The notion of a latencyperiod, roughly from ages 6 to 11, has had great appeal in American culture.This may be due to the impression that the homosocial networks of middlechildhood reflect a lack of sexual interest, and to the fact that many Americansprefer to believe that childhood is a period of sexual innocence. Freud (1938)originally proposed in 1905 that middle childhood is characterized by relativesexual disinterest and inactivity, something like a dormant period. Freud alsomaintained that latency was more pronounced among boys than girls. The reviewabove should certainly dispel the notion that childhood, at any point, isessentially characterized by sexual disinterest.In addition, Broderick (1965, 1966) not only provided evidenceof active sex play during middle childhood, but also demonstrated that mostchildren indicate they wish to marry as an adult, and that most of thesechildren are actively involved in a process of increasing heterosocialinteraction and love involvements during childhood, A majority said they had hada boyfriend or girlfriend and had been in love, and 32 percent had dated by age13. If anything, we would expect that the age norms for many of these behaviorshave actually decreased since that time. Interestingly, those children whoindicated that they did not wish to marry eventually were substantially lesslikely to report any of these activities.Parental Nudity. Experts have disagreed over the yearsas to the impact of parental nudity on children (Okami 1995). Some have arguedthat childhood exposure to parental/adult nudity is potentially traumatic -largely because of the large size of adult organs. Others have insisted thatstrong taboos on family nudity may lead to a view that the body is unacceptableor shameful. This group has argued that a relaxed attitude toward nudity canhelp children develop positive feelings about sexuality. Similar concerns havebeen expressed about the primal scene and sleeping in the parental bed. In asurvey of 500 psychiatrists, 48 percent indicated that they believe thatchildren who witness their parents engaging in intercourse do sufferpsychological effects (Pankhurst 1979). American experts appear to overlook thefact that most families throughout the world sleep in one-room dwellings. In onestudy of these issues, Lewis and Janda (1988) asked 200 college students toreport their childhood experiences. Exposure to parental nudity for ages zero to5 and 6 to 11 was generally unrelated to a series of measures of adult sexualadjustment. Sleeping in the parental bed yielded several small, but significantcorrelations. Persons who had slept in their parents' bed as children had higherself-esteem, greater comfort about sexuality, reduced sexual guilt and anxiety,greater frequency of sex, greater comfort with affection, and a higheracceptance of casual sex as college students.Okami (1995) reviewed the literature in these same threeareas. His review provides a thorough summary of clinical opinions in each area,as well as an assessment of the empirical evidence. Despite the growing numberof clinical professionals who label such acts as sexual abuse, there isvirtually no empirical evidence of harm. In fact, the only variable found to beassociated with harm is cosleeping, which has been found to be associated withsleep disturbances. However, Okami notes that these sleep disturbances may wellhave preceded and precipitated the cosleeping, rather than vice versa.Female Genital Cutting. In December 1996, the Centerfor Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that more than 150,000 womenand girls of African origin or ancestry in the United States were at risk in1995 of being subjected to genital cutting or had already been cut. Thisestimate was based on 1990 Census Bureau data gathered before the recentincrease in refugees and immigrants from the 28 countries that span Africa'smid-section where female genital cutting varies widely in prevalence andseverity (Dugger 1996ab). A second source cites a different estimate from theCDC using data on how much circumcision is practiced in immigrants' homelandsand, making assumptions about sex and age, that about 270,00 African females inthe United States were circumcised in their home country or are at risk here(Hamm 1996)In 1996, Congress adopted a dual strategy to combat thepractice here. In April 1996, Congress passed a bill requiring the Immigrationand Naturalization Service to inform new arrivals of U.S. laws against genitalcutting. It also mandated the Department of Health and Human Services to educateimmigrants about the harm of genital cutting and to educate medicalprofessionals about treating circumcised women. A law, which went into effectMarch 29, 1997, also criminalizes the practice, making it punishable by up tofive years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 for individuals and $500,000for organizations such as hospitals. Enforcement of the law, however, isproblematic for several reasons. First, no one is sure how the law will apply tothose immigrants who take their daughters out of the country for the rite.Second, doctors who spot cases of genital mutilation are reluctant to report itfor fear of breaking up tight-knit families. Also, when the wounds are healed,it is impossible to ascertain whether the rite was performed here or beforearrival in the United States. Finally, there is the secretiveness surroundingthis rite of passage, which many African cultures consider essential, and alsothe hidden nature of the wounds and scars. Sierra Leoneans, for instance, whoconsider genital cutting part of an elaborate, highly secret initiation rite,view questions about it as a profound invasion of their privacy (Dugger1996ab).A government's prevention program focuses on educating bothold and recent immigrants in how to survive and assimilate in American societywhile maintaining their own culture and religion. To this purpose, the U.S.Department of Health and Human Services has organized meetings with advocatesfor refugees and nonprofit groups that work closely with Africans to developstrategies for combating this practice. Muslim religious leaders, for instance,are invited to explain that the Koran does not require this practice. However,lack of a specific budget hampers this effort.In one attempt to ameliorate this clash of cultural values,doctors at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle, Washington, persuaded Somalimothers to be satisfied with nicking the clitoral hood without removing anytissue. The ritual usually involves removing the clitoris and sewing the labiaclosed. The compromise was abandoned in December of 1996 when the hospital wasinundated with hundreds of complaints protesting even this compromise, eventhough the nicking of the clitoral hood has no short-or long-term negativeconsequences. The massive objection to this compromise raises serious questionsof ethnocentrism on the part of the Americans who protested it. It seemssomewhat ironic that such complaints would be made in a culture where weroutinely circumcise penises. Although some maintained that the compromise ofnicking may violate the letter of the law, it remains to be seen what kind ofsolution will be achieved in this matter (Dugger 1996b).Child Pornography. It is widely believed, and theFederal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) perpetuates the notion, that childpornography is pervasive and increasing. Several state and federal laws havebeen enacted in the last twenty years to combat this perceived social problem.The mere possession of a photograph of a naked child has been criminalized insome states. Yet, it is virtually impossible to find any commercial childpornography in the U.S.A. In fact, most of the materials seized by the FBI areprivate photographs of naked children - with no adults appearing in the photosand no sexual behaviors depicted (Klein 1994; Stanley 1989). Efforts to raidchild-pornography businesses have routinely failed to seize any childpornography. FBI sting operations may well have arisen from the correspondingfrustrations of government agencies to find any child pornography. One recentlegend now circulating is the claim that the U.S. government is now the largestproducer of child pornography in the world. This claim is unsubstantiated as faras we know, but, again, it reflects the anxiety of American culture over thesexuality of its children.B. Adolescent SexualityDAVID L. WEISCourtship, Dating, and Premarital SexIn stark contrast to the relative inattention given tochildhood sexuality in the U.S.A., Americans have been fascinated by the sexualbehavior of adolescents throughout the twentieth century. One is tempted todescribe the interest as an obsession. Perhaps no area of sexuality has receivedas much scrutiny, by both the general public and professionals, as the sexualpractices of American teenagers. There have been literally hundreds ofscientific studies attempting to determine the rate of adolescent premaritalcoitus, as well as other aspects of adolescent sexuality. The easy availabilityof populations to study is only one of the more-obvious reasons for thisextensive research.Since more than 90 percent of Americans ultimately do marry,investigations of adolescent sexual development and premarital sexual practiceslargely overlap. General trends have been well documented, compared to otherareas of sexuality. Given the vast scope of this research, we can review onlythe highlights here. (For more extensive reviews of research on adolescent andpremarital sexuality, see Cannon and Long 1971; Clayton and Bokemeier 1980; andMiller and Moore 1990.)The issue of premarital sexuality (hereafter PS) and virginityhas been a focus of considerable social conflict and concern throughout thiscentury, and remains so to this day. Beginning in the early years of thiscentury, a large literature documents the continuing concern of American adultsabout the increasing number of teenagers who have experienced sexual intercourseprior to marriage. Interestingly, each successive birth cohort of Americanadults in this century has been concerned about the tendency of their offspringto exceed their own rate of premarital coitus.Much of the professional literature has reflected these sameconcerns. Through much of the twentieth century, the tone of most professionalwritings has been moralistic. Adults in the U.S.A., including most sexualityresearchers, have tended to view adolescent premarital sexual intercourse, PS,as a deviant behavior, as a violation of existing social norms, and as a growingsocial problem (Spanier 1975). Research has tended to parallel this perspectiveby emphasizing the costs or negative consequences of adolescent sexuality, suchas sexually transmitted disease (venereal disease), “illegitimate”pregnancy, and loss of reputation (Reiss 1960). This tone may have shifted to aless-judgmental, more-analytic perspective in the 1960s and 1970s (Clayton andBokemeier 1980). However, with the emergence of AIDS and the rise ofout-of-wedlock pregnancies in the early 1980s, the general tone has reverted inrecent years, with studies of “risk-taking” behavior,“at-risk” youth, and portrayals of adolescent sexuality as a form ofdelinquency (Miller and Moore 1990).Trends in Adolescent SexualityDespite these adult concerns, it would be fair to suggest thatpremarital virginity has largely disappeared in the U.S.A., both as a realityand as a social ideal. As we approach the end of the century, the overwhelmingmajority of Americans now have sexual intercourse prior to marriage, and theybegin at younger ages than in the past. “Love” has largely replacedmarital status as the most valued criteria for evaluating sexual experience(Reiss 1960, 1967, 1980). Virtually all Americans believe that intimaterelationships (like marriage) should be based on love, that love justifiessexual activity, and that sex with love is a more-fulfilling human experience.This view has not only been used to justify PS activity between loving partners,but has also become a criteria for evaluating marital sexuality itself andjustifying a pattern of divorce and remarriage.Premarital Sexual Behavior. These trends may not bequite as dramatic as most Americans imagine. A study of marriages in Groton,Massachusetts, from 1761 to 1775 found that one third of the women were pregnantat the time of their weddings (cited in Reiss 1980), demonstrating that PS wasalready fairly common in the colonial period (see discussion of bundling inSection 1A). Several early sexuality surveys also document that PS occurredamong some groups prior to the twentieth century. Terman (1938) compared groupswho were born in different cohorts around the beginning of the century. Of thoseborn before 1890, 50 percent of the men and only 13 percent of the women hadpremarital coitus. Two thirds of the men who had PS did so with someone otherthan their future spouse, whereas two thirds of the women who had PS did so onlywith their future spouse. For those born after 1900, two thirds of the men andnearly half of the women had PS. The relative percentage having PS with theirfiance also increased. Fully half of the men and 47 percent of the women hadsexual relations with their fiance prior to marriage.The Kinsey team (1953) found that one quarter of the womenborn before 1900 reported they had PS, whereas one half of those born after 1900said they had PS. Like the Terman study, the major change was an increase in thepercentage of women born after 1900 who had PS with their fiance. The Kinseystudy also indicated that the period of most-rapid change was from 1918 to 1930- the “Roaring Twenties.” Burgess and Wallin (1953) reported similarfindings for a birth cohort born between 1910 and 1919. These studies indicatedthat roughly two thirds of the men born after 1900 had PS. The Kinsey studiesalso found that there had been comparable increases in female masturbation andpetting behavior as well.It is important to note that the growth of PS in the firsthalf of the century occurred primarily within the context of ongoing, intimaterelationships. It appears that the percentage of males and females having PSremained fairly stable through the 1950s and early 1960s. In a study of collegestudents during the 1950s, Ehrmann (1959) found rates similar to the Kinseyfigures cited above. Ehrmann found that males tended to have greater sexualexperience with females from a social class lower than their own, but theytended to marry women from their own social class. Males who were “goingsteady” were the least likely to be having intercourse. In contrast,females who were “going steady” were the most likely to be havingintercourse. In a study comparing college students in Scandinavia, Indiana, andUtah (predominantly Mormon), Christensen (1962) and Christensen and Carpenter(1962) found that rates of PS vary by the norms of the culture and that guilt ismost likely to occur when PS is discrepant with those norms.A second wave of increases in PS seems to have occurred in theperiod from 1965 to 1980. A number of studies of college students through thisperiod indicated increasing percentages of males and females having premaritalcoitus (Bauman and Wilson 1974; Bell and Chaskes 1968; Christensen and Gregg1970; Robinson, King, and Balswick 1972; Simon, Berger, and Gagnon 1972; Venerand Stewart 1974). For example, Bauman and Wilson (1974) found that, for men,the rate having PS increased from 56 percent in 1968 to 73 percent in 1972. Forwomen, the increase was from 46 percent to 73 percent. There was no significantchange in the number of sexual partners for either gender. Several of thesestudies indicate that the increases were still moderate by 1970 (Bell andChaskes 1968; Simon et al. 1972). In an unusual study of male college studentsattending an eastern university in the 1940s, 1960s, and 1970s, Finger (1975)found that 45 percent had PS in 1943-44, 62 percent in 1967-68, and 75 percentin 1969-73.Subsequent studies have indicated that this pattern ofincreasing PS characterized American youth in general. In a study of urbansamples in the mid-1970s, Udry, Bauman, and Morris (1975) found that 45 percentof white teenage women had intercourse by age 20, and 80 percent of black womendid. Roughly 10 percent of whites had PS by age 15 and 20 percent of blacks didZelnik and Kantner found similar percentages in their studies in 1971 and 1976(Udry, Bauman, and Morris 1975; Zelnik, Kantner, and Ford 1981).Reports of increasing sexual activity among adolescents havenot been limited to coitus. A number of researchers have reported similarincreases in the rate of heavy petting (manual caressing of the genitals)through the late 1960s and 1970s (Clayton and Bokemeier 1980; Vener and Stewart1974). There have also been reports of increasing levels of oral sex amongadolescents (Haas 1979; Newcomer and Udry 1985). In some studies, teenage girlshave been more likely to have participated in oral sex than intercourse, andbetween 16 percent to 25 percent of teens who have never had intercourse havehad oral sex (Newcomer and Udry 1985). Weis (1983) has noted that this group maybe involved in a transition from virginity to nonvirginity, at least amongwhites.Perhaps the single best indicator of the trends occurring from1965 to 1980 is the series of studies by Zelnik and Kantner in 1971, 1976, and1979 (Zelnik et al. 1981). These studies, known as the National Surveys ofYoung Women, investigated the sexual histories of 15- to 19-year-old women.The 1971 and 1976 studies were full national probability studies while the 1979study focused on women living in metropolitan areas. The Zelnik and Kantnerresearch shows a dramatic rise in sexual activity for both black and white womenfrom 1971 to 1976. The pattern of increases continued for white women through1979, but PS rates for black women remained stable from 1976 to 1979. Amongmetropolitan women, PS rose from 30.4 percent in 1971 to 49.8 percent in 1979.For blacks, the rate moved from 53.7 percent in 1971 to 66.3 percent in 1976,and was 66.2 percent in 1979. The 1979 study also showed that 70 percent ofmales had PS intercourse; the figure for black men was 75 percent (Zelnik andShah 1983; Zelnik et al. 1983).In a review of these trends, Hofferth, Kahn, and Baldwin(1987) noted that females in the 1980s became sexually active at younger agesand that fewer teenagers married. As a result, the rate of PS increased. Theproportion of women at risk of premarital pregnancy increased dramatically from1965 to the 1980s. The out-of-wedlock pregnancy rate among teenagers increasedfor both blacks and whites from 1971 to 1976. This trend continued for whitesthrough 1982, but remained level for blacks after 1976. Finally, they notedthat, for women born between 1938 and 1940, 33.3 percent had PS by age 20. Forwomen born between 1953 and 1955, the figure was 65.5 percent.Despite recent claims in some quarters of a return to chastityand abstinence in the late 1980s and 1990s (McCleary 1992), there is no evidenceof a decline in PS behavior. National data from 1988 indicate that one quarterof females have PS intercourse by age 15; 60 percent do so by age 19. About onethird of United States males have PS intercourse by age 15, and 86 percent byage 19 (Miller and Moore 1990). In fact, a random telephone survey of 100students attending a midwestern state university in 1994 found that 92 percenthad had sexual intercourse; only 8 percent said they were still virgins. Nearlytwo thirds (63 percent) said that they had participated in what the surveydescribed as a “one-night stand.” With respect to their most recentsexual intercourse, 42 percent reported using something to “protect”themselves. Of these, 84 percent reported using condoms; 16 percent said theyused the pill (Turco 1994). If anything, the trends that have been wellestablished throughout this century appear to be continuing. Given thecontinuation of patterns that have been frequently cited as leading toincreasing rates of PS, such as industrialization, rapid transportation, dating,and “going steady,” we would not expect a reversal in what is now acentury-long trend.Premarital Sexual Attitudes (Permissiveness). There hasalso been a substantial number of studies examining the attitudes of Americanstoward PS, although systematic research in this area began later than researchon PS behavior. Reiss (1960) used the term “permissiveness” todescribe the extent to which the attitudes of an individual or a social groupapproved PS in various circumstances. In general, research has found that PSattitudes have become progressively more permissive throughout this century,roughly parallel to the increases in PS behavior (Bell and Chaskes 1970; Cannonand Long 1971; Christensen and Gregg 1970; Clayton and Bokemeier 1980; Glenn andWeaver 1979; Vener and Stewart 1974). Reiss (1967) developed what has come to becalled Autonomy Theory to explain this process. According to Reiss, PSpermissiveness will increase in cultures where the adolescent system ofcourtship becomes autonomous with respect to adult institutions of socialcontrol, such as the church, parents, and the school. This appears to havehappened in the U.S.A. and most other industrialized nations in the twentiethcentury.By far, the biggest change has been the growth of a standardthat Reiss (1960, 1967, 1980) called “permissiveness with affection,”in which PS is seen as acceptable for couples who have mutually affectionaterelationships. This standard has grown in popularity in the U.S.A. as the doublestandard - the view that PS is acceptable for males but not females - hasdeclined (Clayton and Bokemeier 1980; Reiss 1967, 1980). By 1980, a majority ofadults as well as young people in the U.S.A. believed that PS is appropriate forcouples involved together in a serious relationship (Glenn and Weaver 1979).Moreover, although there has been a historical tendency for males to be morepermissive about PS than females, these gender differences have been diminishingin recent decades (Clayton and Bokemeier 1980).Circumstances of Adolescent SexualExperiencesMost research on adolescent sexuality has tended to focus onwhether or not teenagers or college students have had PS intercourse. Althoughthis allows us to provide reasonable estimates of the percentages of Americanswho have had PS in various time periods and to track trends in the rate ofvirginity and nonvirginity, this same focus has frequently led researchers toignore the circumstances in which adolescent sexuality occurs (Miller and Moore1990). As a consequence, we cannot be as confident about the trends in severalrelated areas, and many questions about the specific nature of adolescent sexualexperiences and relationships remain to be explored.First Intercourse. A good example of this lack ofperspective is provided by the evidence concerning age at first intercourse. Theavailable research indicates that the average age of first intercourse has beendeclining since 1970. It seems likely that this trend extends back prior to1970, but the paucity of relevant data from earlier time periods makes such aconclusion highly tentative. As late as that year, only about one quarter of themales and 7 percent of the females who attended college had intercourse prior toage 18 (Simon et al. 1972). In the Zelnik and Kantner studies, the average agefor females dropped from 16.5 in 1971 to 16.2 in 1976 (Zelnik et al. 1981). By1979, the average age of first intercourse for women was 16.2; for males, it was15.7. Blacks of both genders tended to experience sexarche at slightly youngerages than whites. Females had first partners who were nearly three years older;whereas males had first partners who were about one year older than they (Zelnikand Shah 1983).In a study of college females in the 1980s, Weis (1983) foundthe average age of sexarche to be 16.2. A later study of college students foundthat the average age was 16.5 (Sprecher, Barbee, and Schwartz 1995). It shouldbe noted, however, that persons who attend college may well be more likely topostpone sexual activity. It is conceivable that a trend of declining age atfirst intercourse is still occurring among populations that do not attendcollege, and it is possible that teenagers in the 1990s (who have yet to reachthe age of college) may also be having intercourse at younger ages.Intercourse appears to be, at least among whites, theculmination of a sequence of increasing and expanding experiences with kissing,petting, and possibly oral sex (Spanier 1975; Weis 1983). There is some evidencethat women who have rehearsed these noncoital activities extensively, and thusgradually learned the processes of sexual interaction, are more likely to reportpositive reactions to their first intercourse (Weis 1983). Weis (1983) foundthat there is great variation as to when people go through these stages and howquickly.Most authors have stressed the negative aspects of firstintercourse for females by citing the finding that females are significantlymore likely to report negative affective reactions to their first intercoursethan males (Koch 1988; Sprecher et al. 1995). However, the available datastrongly suggest that the differences between males and females may not be largein magnitude. It is clear that females report a wide range of affect, fromstrongly positive to strongly negative (Koch 1988; Schwartz 1993; Weis 1983),but it is also clear that many males report experiencing negative reactions aswell. In a study of college students, the males were more likely to reportexperiencing high levels of anxiety, the females were less likely to reportexperiencing high levels of subjective pleasure, while sizable numbers of bothgenders reported experiencing guilt (Sprecher et al. 1995). Positive reactionsto first intercourse have been found to be related to prior experience withnoncoital sexual activities, having an orgasm in that first intercourseencounter, descriptions of the partner as gentle and caring (for females),involvement with the first partner for more than one month prior to firstintercourse, continued involvement with the partner following the firstintercourse, and situational factors, such as the consumption of alcohol(Schwartz 1993; Sprecher et al. 1995; Weis 1983). Several researchers havereported that age is associated with affective reactions, but Weis (1983) foundthat age was not as strongly or directly related as the level of prior noncoitalexperience. Schwartz (1993) also reported that Scandinavian teenagers were morelikely to report positive reactions than a group of Americanadolescents.Over the past three decades, a convergence of male and femalePS behavior has been identified, with females reporting less emotionalattachment to their first coital partners than in the past (Hopkins 1977; Kallenand Stephenson 1982; Koch 1988). Yet, there is still a significant differencebetween the genders, with males reporting more casual relationships and femalesmore intimate relationships with their first partners (Koch 1988).In the only national study of first intercourse, Zelnik andShah (1983) found that more than 60 percent of the females were “goingwith” or engaged to their first partner. Another third described theirfirst partner as a friend. Roughly a third of the males described their firstpartner as a friend, and 40 percent were “going with” or engaged totheir first partner. The males were twice as likely to have their firstintercourse with someone they had just met, although few males or females didthis (Zelnik and Shah 1983).Relationship factors have been reported to be associated withaffective reactions to the first intercourse. However, the precise nature ofthis association remains unclear. There is some evidence that involvement with apartner for longer than one month, and continuing involvement following thefirst intercourse, are associated with positive affective reactions (Sprecher etal. 1995). There is some evidence that females who are “going with” orengaged to their first partner are more likely to experience positive affect(Weis 1983). However, Weis (1983) also found that attributions that the firstpartner was caring, considerate, and gentle were more strongly related toaffective reactions. Moreover, many women who were “going with” orengaged to their first partner, nonetheless, described their partners asuncaring and inconsiderate. It should be noted that each of these studies foundso few participants who were married at the time of their first intercourse thatno analyses could be done for that relationship category. For example, not onewoman in the Weis (1983) study was married at the time of her firstintercourse.Adolescents appear to have many reasons for becoming involvedin PS behavior. Motivations most frequently mentioned by a group of collegewomen for becoming involved in their First intercourse experience included(rank-ordered by declining frequency): love-caring, partner pressure, curiosity,both wanted to, alcohol or other drugs, and sexual arousal (Koch 1988). Thecomparable rank-ordering of motivations by a group of college men included: bothwanted to, curiosity, love-caring, sexual arousal, to “get laid,” andalcohol/drug use. Women were four times more likely to report partner pressurethan men, whereas men were seven times as likely to say they were looking to“get laid” and twice as likely to report sexual arousal as amotivation for sexarche (Koch 1988).Most American teenagers describe their first intercourse as an“un-planned, spontaneous” event. Only 17 percent of the females andone quarter of the males in a national study said they had planned their firstintercourse (Zelnik and Shah 1983). In the same study, less than one half of themales and females used a contraceptive. Those who had their first intercourse atage 18 or older were more likely to use a contraceptive. White women were morelikely to have used some form of contraception, but black women were more likelyto use a medically prescribed method. Women who described their firstintercourse as planned were more likely to have used a contraceptive - fullythree quarters of these women did. However, more than two thirds of these womenrelied on their partners to use a condom or withdrawal. Black women were morelikely to use a contraceptive themselves, rather than rely on theirpartner.Finally, various aspects of sexarche have been found to besignificantly related to later sexual functioning among college students (Koch1988). Women who had experienced first coitus at an earlier age had lessdifficulty reaching orgasm during later sexual interactions than did women whohad sexarche at a later age. Men with earlier sexarche had less difficulty inkeeping an erection during later sexual interactions than men who had been olderat sexarche. Also, women who had reported negative reactions to their firstintercourse were subsequently more likely than those who felt more positively toexperience: lack of sexual interest, sexual repulsion, inability to reachorgasm, or genital discomfort, pain, or vaginal spasms. Men who reactednegatively to their first intercourse were more likely to ejaculate too quicklyduring later sexual experiences than men who had positive reactions. Both menand women were more likely to experience subsequent sexual functioning concernswhen they were pressured by a close partner to engage in intercourse for thefirst time.Number of Premarital Sexual Partners. It is difficultto provide good estimates on the number of PS partners prior to 1950, simplybecause researchers failed to ask such a question. On the other hand, it doesseem clear that the increase in the percentage of American women who reportedthey had ever had PS after 1900 was due primarily to an increase in thepercentage of women who reported they had PS only with their fiance (Kinsey etal. 1953; Terman 1938). In contrast, there is abundant evidence of a significantincrease in the number of PS coital partners for females from the late 1960sthrough the late 1980s (Cannon and Long 1971; Clayton and Bokemeier 1980; Millerand Moore 1990; Vener and Stewart 1974; Zelnik et al. 1983). This finding is,however, potentially misleading. A close inspection of the results of pertinentstudies reveals that most of the increase is explained by a shift from zero toone partner and from one to two partners. There were no increases in thepercentage with seven or more partners.Among males, there is some evidence that adolescent boys ofrecent decades are less likely to use the services of a prostitute than in thepast (Cannon and Long 1971). In a unique study of males attending the sameeastern university from the 1940s through the 1970s, Finger (1975) actuallyreported a decline in the number of PS partners with a corresponding increase inthe frequency of sexual relations. This was primarily due to an increase in thepercentage of men who had PS only with their girlfriends. Finger also reported adecline in the percentage of males reporting they ever had a homosexualexperience. However, among those who had a homosexual experience, the frequencyof such encounters had increased.Although there appears to be consistent evidence that therehave been significant increases in the number of PS partners throughout thiscentury, at least for females, it should be stressed that, as late as 1990, themajority of American teens had had zero or one PS partner. Only 4 percent ofwhite females, 6 percent of black females, 11 percent of white males, and 23percent of black males reported six or more partners (Miller and Moore 1990).Thus, the widely held idea that large percentages of American adolescents arenow “promiscuous” is greatly exaggerated.Rates of Teen Pregnancy and Birth. In an examination ofhow the trends we have been reviewing are related to trends in adolescentpregnancy and birth, it is important to bear in mind that, as late as 1965,several states in the U.S.A. prohibited the sale of contraceptives to marriedcouples. Such laws banning the sale of contraceptives to teenagers and/or singlepersons were common until 1977 (see Section 9A). Details on out-of-wedlockbirths, contraception, and abortion are presented later. Here, we want to notethat the birthrate among unmarried women has been increasing since 1965, with anotable surge in the rate during the 1980s (Baldwin 1980; Forrest and Fordyce1988; Miller and Moore 1990). Throughout this period, the percentage ofunmarried, adolescent women exposed to the risk of pregnancy has beenincreasing. One principal reason for this is, of course, the increasingpercentage of unmarried persons having PS in the U.S.A. (Forrest and Fordyce1988).However, there are several interesting twists among thesetrends, many of which do not fit with the conventional wisdom in the U.S.A.First, much of the increase since 1980 is attributable to women 20 years of ageor older. In fact, the adolescent birthrate has actually been declining sincethe early 1970s (Baldwin 1980; Forrest and Fordyce 1988). Second, the overallbirthrate for adolescent women increased through the late 1940s and 1950s,remained stable in the 1960s, increased in the early 1970s, and has beendeclining since (Baldwin 1980). The misperception, widespread through theU.S.A., that teen-pregnancy rates have been rising is largely due to twofactors: (1) the increasing number of such pregnancies, but not the rate, whenthe children of the baby-boomer generation began having children, and (2) thefact that, as the average age at first marriage has been increasing, adolescentpregnancies are more likely to occur with unmarried women (Baldwin 1980; Millerand Moore 1990). Finally, the perception that adolescent pregnancy has become arecent social problem has emerged as the out-of-wedlock birthrate has increasedmore dramatically among white women in the last two decades (Baldwin 1980;Miller and Moore 1990).Contraceptive Use. To most Americans, an increase inthe rate of adolescent pregnancy (widely assumed, though not true) would seem tobe an inevitable result of increases in PS activity. However, research in manyEuropean countries demonstrates that high rates of adolescent sexual activitycan be associated with low rates of adolescent pregnancy, when contraceptivesare used widely, consistently, and effectively (Jones et al. 1985). There seemslittle doubt that the U.S.A. has one of the highest adolescent-pregnancy ratesamong developed nations, largely because of inconsistent contraceptive use(Forrest and Fordyce 1988; Miller and Moore 1990).It appears that roughly one half of adolescent women use nocontraceptive during their first intercourse (Miller and Moore 1990), and mostof the women reporting the use of some contraceptive during their firstintercourse note that their partner used a condom (Weis 1983). Moreover, mostadolescent girls who seek contraceptive services have been having sexualintercourse for some time, many for more than a year before they seek services(Miller and Moore 1990; Settlage, Baroff, and Cooper 1973). After this delay, itappears that roughly two thirds of American teenagers now use some form ofcontraceptive (Miller and Moore 1990).Although these figures certainly indicate that large numbersof American youths continue to experience sexual intercourse with nocontraceptive protection, they nonetheless represent an increase incontraceptive use over the last several decades. Research in the early 1970sindicated that two thirds to three quarters of American teens rarely or neverused contraceptives (Sorensen 1973; Zelnik et al. 1981). Forrest and Fordyce(1988) report that overall use of medically sound contraceptives remained stablethrough the 1980s. Of those women age 20 or less who sought family-planningservices in 1980, nearly three quarters used the pill. By 1990, this had droppedto 52 percent. In 1980, 14 percent had used no contraceptive at all (Eckard1982).By 1990, Peterson (1995) reported that 31.5 percent of 15- to19-year-old women consistently used some form of contraceptive; 24.3 percent of15-to 17-year-olds did so, as did 41.2 percent of 18- and 19-year-olds. Thisbehavior appears to be unrelated to social class (Settlage et al. 1973). Amongwomen of childbearing age (15 to 44), Peterson (1995) found that 52.2 percent ofHispanic, 60.5 percent of white non-Hispanic, and 58.7 percent of blacknon-Hispanic women reported using some form of contraceptive (see Table 6 inSection 9A under current contraceptive behavior).Despite the popularity of the idea that adolescent pregnancyis a result of poor sexual knowledge, knowledge of one's sexuality or birthcontrol has not been shown to be a strong predictor of contraceptive behavioramong teenagers (Byrne and Fisher 1983). No relationship was found betweencontraceptive use and early sex education by family, or a congruence betweenattitudes and behavior. Reiss, Banwart, and Foreman (1975), however, reportedthat contraceptive use among teenagers is correlated with endorsement of sexualchoice (permissiveness), self-confidence about desirability, and involvement inan intimate relationship.Explanations of Adolescent SexualityOf course, researchers are not content to provide descriptionsof social trends. Instead, they seek to provide theoretically usefulexplanations of the factors underlying those trends. The essence of scientificanalysis is the identification and testing of potential correlates of thosetrends. There have been thousands of studies of adolescent sexuality testingpossible correlates. We cannot review them all here. We will, however, brieflyidentify several different approaches that have been used to explain the trendswe have described above. We have tried to select perspectives that have enjoyedsome popularity among sexuality professionals at some point. We have also triedto include explanatory models that represent the diversity of professionalopinions about adolescent sexuality.Changes in Social Institutions. By far, the most commonapproach to explaining the growing acceptance of PS within American culture andthe increasing tendency of adolescents to have PS has been a sociologicalperspective that locates these trends as part of a series of social changesoccurring in response to industrialization and urbanization. (Much of thisexplanation was presented in Section 1, where we reviewed the sexual history ofthe U.S.A.) As patterns of residence and community relations changed in the latenineteenth and early twentieth centuries, changes began to occur in most socialinstitutions. These included changes in male-female roles, a lengthening of theperiod of formal education, and the emergence of new forms of heterosexualcourtship (Ehrmann 1964; Reiss 1967, 1976). One example of the complex web ofsocial changes that have occurred in the last century is the increasing averageage of first marriage (Surra 1990). In one century, the average age at firstmarriage has shifted from the late teens to the mid-20s. Combined with theearlier age at which American adolescents reach puberty, this has led to a muchlonger period between physical maturation and marriage, thus, greatly expandingthe probability that sexual activity will occur prior to marriage.As social institutions changed in response to the growingindustrial character of American society and the increasingly urban pattern ofresidence, new forms of adolescent courtship emerged. The custom of datingappeared in the 1920s following World War I, and the practice of “goingsteady” emerged in the 1940s following World War II (Reiss 1980). By the1990s, the practice of “going together” has become so universallycommon that few American young people can conceive of other courtship forms.Dating provided a forum for adolescents to pursue male-female relationshipsindependent of adult supervision and control. The appearance of moderntransportation, such as the automobile, and the development of urbanrecreational businesses allowed adolescents to interact with each other awayfrom home. Increasingly, decisions about appropriate sexual behavior were madeby adolescents themselves. The practice of “going steady” placedadolescents into a relationship with many of the features of marriage. Steadyrelationships were defined as monogamous and exclusive with respect to sexualityand intimacy. As such, they carried high potential for intimacy, commitment, andfeelings of love. Together, the increased independence and greater potential forintimacy led to increased rates of PS behavior (D'Emilio and Freedman 1988;Kinsey et al. 1948, 1953; Seidman 1991). There is evidence that this generalpattern has occurred in other countries as a consequence of industrialization aswell (Jones et al. 1985).Reiss (1960, 1967) developed the Autonomy Theory of PremaritalPermissiveness, mentioned earlier, to explain the association between socialinstitutions and premarital sexual permissiveness. Essentially, Reiss maintainedthat, as adolescent courtship institutions (dating and going steady) becomeindependent of adult institutions of social control (parental supervision, theschools, and the church), the level of premarital permissiveness in a cultureincreases. There has been considerable research testing the specificpropositions of the theory since Reiss proposed it (Cannon and Long 1971;Clayton and Bokemeier 1980; Miller and Moore 1990). Generally, research fromthis perspective has tended to presume that PS has become normative withinAmerican culture.Sources of Sexual Information and Sexual Knowledge.Several other explanations of PS behavior have been more likely to view it as asocial problem and more likely to focus on the individual character of PSattitudes and behavior. One of the more popular and enduring ideas withinAmerican culture about adolescent sexual activity is the belief that sexualbehavior and pregnancy risk are influenced by knowledge about sexuality and itsconsequences. In fact, advocates of sex education in the schools have argued formore than a century that American teens typically possess inadequate andinaccurate sexual knowledge. Some have maintained that sex education could solvesuch social problems as out-of-wedlock pregnancy and sexually transmitteddisease by providing thorough and accurate information about sexuality. Embeddedin these assertions is an underlying presumption that sexual decision making andbehavior are primarily cognitive processes. Operating from this perspective,there have been dozens of studies of the sources of sexual information forchildren and adolescents in the U.S.A. Generally, these studies have found thatyoung people in the U.S.A. are more likely to receive sexual information fromtheir peers or the mass media than from adult sources, such as parents or theschool (Spanier 1975; Wilson 1994). These studies have been used to concludethat peers are a poor source of sexual information, and that such inaccurateinformation leads directly to unwanted pregnancies and disease. We should notehere that few studies of sexual information have sought to demonstrate acorrelation between source of information and sexual decisions or outcomes. Thatconnection has typically been assumed. (See also Section 3, which deals withformal and informal sources of sexual knowledge and education.)However, in a national probability study of American collegestudents, Spanier (1975; 1978) found no differences in premarital sexualbehavior between those students who had ever had a sex-education course andthose who had not - regardless of who taught the course, when it was offered, orwhat material was included. Moreover, a number of studies have found a weakcorrelation between sexual knowledge and sexual behavior or contraceptive use(Byrne and Fisher 1983). More generally, researchers have consistently found alow correlation between knowledge level and a variety of health-relatedbehaviors, such as smoking, drug use, and eating patterns (Kirby1985).Cognitive Development. A somewhat similar focus oncognitive processes has been the basis for an argument that adolescentstypically lack a sufficient level of cognitive development required foreffective sexual decisions. A number of authors have argued that adolescence ischaracterized by a cognitive level that is inconsistent with sound sexualdecision-making and contraceptive use (Cobliner 1974; Cvetkovich, Grote,Bjorseth, and Sarkissian 1975). Within this perspective, it has become common todescribe adolescents as having an unreal sense of infallibility that leads themto underestimate the actual risks of sexual experience (Miller and Moore1990).Although references to the works of Jean Piaget have beencommon in this realm, actual empirical tests of a correlation between Piaget'sstages of cognitive development and sexual decisions remain to be conducted.Moreover, this explanation has failed to incorporate the cross-cultural evidencethat adolescents in many other nations establish high rates of sexual frequency,maintain consistent contraceptive use, and experience low rates of adolescentpregnancy (Jones et al. 1985).Interaction of Hormonal and Social Determinants. Udry(1990) has attempted to examine how pubertal development, hormones, and socialprocesses may interact to affect the sexual behavior of adolescents. Hormonalstudies seem to indicate that androgenic hormones at puberty directly contributeto explaining sexual motivation and noncoital sexual behaviors in Caucasian maleand female adolescents (Udry and Billy 1987; Udry et al. 1985, 1986). Because ofthe differing social encouragement versus constraints for young white males andfemales, initiation of coitus seems to be strongly hormone dependent for males,whereas for females it seems to be strongly influenced by a wide variety ofsocial sources with no identifiable hormone predictors. The interaction ofhormonal and social determinants is unclear for African-American youth and doesnot fit the models for white youth that emphasize the importance ofsociocultural context on sexual behavior.Delinquency Models. Perhaps the zenith of models whichregard adolescent sexuality as a social problem is the emergence of frameworksthat explicitly define adolescent sexual behavior as a form of juveniledelinquency (Jessor and Jessor 1977; Miller and Moore 1990). Vener and Stewart(1974) reported that sexual behavior by 15- and 16-year-olds was correlated withthe use of cigarettes, alcohol, and illicit drugs, and with less approval fortraditional institutions like the police, the school, and religion.In a subsequent study using this perspective, Jessor andJessor (1977) conceptualized sexual behavior as a “problem behavior”if it occurred prior to age-appropriate norms. In other words, intercourse wascharacterized as deviant and delinquent if it occurred prior to the mean age(roughly 17 years of age at the time of the study). Jessor and Jessor found thatsuch early sexual behavior was correlated with other “problembehaviors” such as alcohol use, illicit-drug consumption, and politicalprotest. They concluded that these associations demonstrated that adolescentstend to exhibit multiple forms of delinquency.By the 1990s, Miller and Moore (1990) reported that a numberof studies have found that “early” sexual behavior is associated witha variety of “criminal” behaviors such as those described above. Someauthors have overlooked the fact that these studies have found this associationwith delinquent behaviors only for early sexual behavior and have tended tocharacterize all adolescent sexual behavior as delinquent. These studies dosuggest the possibility that developmental issues may be relevant to thesefindings.Sexual Affect. A different approach has been taken by agroup of researchers interested in examining the role of affective reactions tosexual stimulation, both as a factor that may influence sexual decisions andbehavior and as an outcome of sexual experience. Sorensen (1973) reported that71 percent of teenagers agreed with the view that using the birth-control pillindicates that a girl is planning to have sex. This has been offered as evidencethat adolescents are unwilling or unable to accept responsibility forcontraceptive use, and thus lack cognitive development. However, affectivetheorists would argue that it is just as likely that sexual guilt, fear, orembarrassment prevent such a decision.In the early 1960s, Christensen (1962) conceptualized sexualguilt as a variable response to sexual experience. He found that adolescents aremore likely to report experiencing guilt in cultures with restrictive PS norms.He called this a value-behavior discrepancy. Schwartz (1973) found that personswith high sex guilt retain less information in a birth-control lecture,especially when aroused by a sexually stimulating condition. In the Schwartzstudy, females retained more information than males across allconditions.Donn Byrne and his associates have maintained that individualscan be placed on a continuum ranging from erotophilic, reacting to sexualstimuli with strongly positive emotions, to erotophobic, reacting to sexualstimuli with strongly negative emotions. Erotophobic persons have been shown tobe less likely to seek contraceptive information, to have lower levels ofcontraceptive knowledge, and to be less likely to purchase contraceptives or usethose contraceptive methods that require them to touch themselves (Byrne andFisher 1983; Goldfarb, Gerrard, Gibbons, and Plante 1988). However, they are noless likely to retain information about contraceptives, even though they becomemore sexually aroused by a lecture (Goldfarb et al. 1988).There is a need for much future research on the associationbetween adolescent sexuality and affective variables. However, the studies justmentioned suggest that affective variables may prove to be a fruitful way ofexplaining adolescent sexual behavior and its consequences. This approach seemsparticularly suited to examining the variety of ways that adolescents behave andthe diverse consequences of such behavior.Reference Group. Yet another approach to explainingadolescent sexuality has been the attempt to identify persons or groups who haveinfluenced teenagers. Perhaps the most developed theoretical perspective of thistype is known as Reference Group Theory. There is some evidence that, asadolescents progress from age 12 to 16, they shift their primary reference-groupidentification from their parents to their peers. Peer orientation has beenshown to be related to sexual intercourse. Moreover, association with peers whoare seen as approving PS is correlated with PS permissiveness and PS behavior(Cannon and Long 1971; Clayton and Bokemeier 1980; Floyd and South 1972; Reiss1967; Teevan 1972). Similarly, Fisher (1986) found that the correlation betweenthe attitudes of teenagers and their parents decreased as adolescenceprogressed. However, females who cited their mothers as their major source ofsexual information were less likely to engage in intercourse and more likely touse contraceptives when they did.These results should not be interpreted to mean that parentsor families do not or cannot exert influence on the sexuality of adolescents.There have been relatively few scientific studies of the influence of differingparental styles and the PS behavior of children. One study (Miller, McCoy,Olson, and Wallace 1986) found that adolescents were least likely to have PS orto approve of PS when their parents were moderately strict. Teenagers whodescribed their parents as very strict or not at all strict were more likely tohave had PS. This correlation also held when parents were asked to describe therules they set for their children. There is some evidence that the age of amother's first intercourse is related to the age of her daughter's firstintercourse (Miller and Moore 1990). Miller and Moore (1990) also showed thatgirls from single-parent families tend to have sex at younger ages.Thus, there appears to be two conflicting sets of empiricalfindings. One set of studies finds evidence that adolescent sexuality is moststrongly related to peer influences, especially as age increases. Another set ofstudies provides evidence that families and parents can exert influence invarious ways. Obviously, important questions remain to be resolved.Rehearsal. A more direct perspective views adolescentsexuality as a developmental process, in which intercourse is seen as theculmination of a sequence of progressively sexual behaviors (Miller and Moore1990; Simon et al. 1972; Weis 1983). Adolescents appear to move through a seriesof stages, from kissing to petting of the female's breasts to genital petting tointercourse. There is evidence that, among white adolescents, this pattern isstrongly consistent. White adolescents appear to take an average of two years tomove through this sequence (Miller and Moore 1990; Weis 1983). In contrast,blacks appear to move through the stages more quickly, and there is greatervariability in the actual sequence of behaviors (Miller and Moore 1990). Withinthis perspective, each subsequent sexual behavior can be viewed as a rehearsalfor the next behavior in the sequence.Not only is there evidence that adolescent sexual experienceis acquired in a process that produces an escalating and expanding repertoire ofsexual behaviors, but dating and “going steady” appear to serve as thekey social contexts in which this process occurs (Clayton and Bokemeier 1980;Reiss 1967; Spanier 1975). The age of onset of dating and the frequency ofdating appear to be major factors in the emergence of sexual behavior (Spanier1975). In fact, adolescent experiences with intimate relationships (dating and“going steady”) and the sequencing of sexual behaviors have been shownto be more influential in predicting PS intercourse than general socialbackground variables, parental conservatism or liberalism, or religiosity(Herold and Goodwin 1981; Spanier 1975).As dating frequency and noncoital experiences increase,exposure to eroticism, sexual knowledge, and interest in sex are all likely toincrease concomitantly. Male behavior appears to be more strongly related to thesequencing of behaviors. In contrast, female behavior seems to be more a resultof involvement in affectionate relationships. Increased dating interaction andfrequency increase sexual intimacy, since opportunities and desire increase.This process is likely to overshadow the influence of prior religious, parental,or peer influences. Thus, adolescent courtship provides the context for thegeneral process of sexual interaction. As Reiss (1967, 1980) has noted, suchadolescent courtship also serves as a rehearsal experience for adult patterns ofintimate involvement. It is also possible that such adolescent rehearsalexperiences are a more powerful and direct explanation of adolescent sexualbehavior (Spanier 1975; Weis 1983).Multivariate Causal Models. An important trend inAmerican research on adolescent sexuality has been the growing recognition thatseveral of the factors reviewed here will eventually need to be included in asound theory of adolescent sexual development and expression. Reiss (1967) wasone of the first to test competing hypotheses in an attempt to identify thestrongest predictors of PS permissiveness. Since then, a number of researchershave used multivariate techniques to examine the relative strength of PScorrelates (Byrne and Fisher 1983; Christopher and Cate 1988; DeLamater andMacCorquodale 1979; Herold and Goodwin 1981; Reiss et al. 1975; Udry 1990; Udry,Tolbert, and Morris 1986; Weis 1983).A few examples should illustrate the potential usefulness ofthis multivariate approach. Herold and Goodwin (1981) found that the bestpredictors of the transition from virginity to nonvirginity for females wereperceived peer experience with PS, involvement in a steady,“committed” relationship, and religiosity. In contrast, parentaleducation, grade-point average, sex education, and dating frequency failed toenter the multivariate equation.Udry and his associates (1990; Udry et al. 1986) haveinvestigated the relative influence of hormonal and social variables inexplaining adolescent sexual behavior. Several studies demonstrate thatandrogenic hormones present at puberty directly contribute to the sexualmotivation and precoital sexual behavior of white males. For white males, theinitiation of coitus seems to be strongly related to androgen levels. Femaleinitiation of coitus seems, on the other hand, to be strongly related to aseries of social variables, but not to any hormonal predictors. Udry has arguedthat these results reflect the differing social encouragement versus constraintsplaced on males and females respectively. Interestingly, the behavior ofAfrican-American youth does not appear to fit with these same explanations, sothat the exact interaction between social factors and hormonal variables remainsunclear.Adolescent Sexual Relationships: The NeglectedResearchBefore moving to the issue of adult heterosexuality, we wishto make a few comments about the nature of intimacy in adolescent sexualrelationships and the process of relationship formation. Most of the research onadolescent sexuality reviewed here has tended to focus on the specifically andexplicitly sexual elements of such experiences and to ignore the broaderrelational aspects. In one sense, this is understandable, given the fact thatAmericans have generally viewed adolescent sexuality, especially its premaritalforms, as a social problem. Consistent with this perspective, Americans havetended to deny the possibility that any genuine intimacy occurs in sexualexperiences involving adolescents. This is unfortunate in at least two respects.First, it tends to ignore the fact that most adolescent sexual encounters in theU.S.A. occur within the context of what the participants define as a meaningful,intimate relationship. It also ignores the reality that sexual expression withinloving, intimate relationships (rather than marital status) has become thedominant attitudinal standard for Americans of all ages. Second, the tendency toignore the relational character of adolescent sexuality means that researchershave tended to overlook the reality that patterns of sexual and intimateinteractions are largely learned within the context of adolescent experiences,and these are likely to be extended well into adulthood. Thus, the failure toinvestigate these larger relational questions probably impairs our ability tofully understand adult intimate relationships as well. This is not meant todenigrate other forms of sexual expression or to deny that other forms ofexpression do occur, both in adolescence and later. Rather, it is to suggestthat one strong characteristic of American sexuality is the tendency toassociate love and sexuality. Any attempt to understand or explain Americansexual expression must acknowledge that it generally occurs within the contextof ongoing, intimate relationships. This is as true for adolescents as foradults.The separation of sexuality and relational concerns is wellreflected by the emergence of two independent bodies of research within theAmerican academy. On the one hand, there is a well-established field of researchon the formation of adolescent intimate relationships, dating and courtship, andmate selection. This tradition extends back to the 1920s and has largely beenexplored by family sociologists. Social exchange theory has become the dominantperspective in this tradition in recent decades. Surra (1990) provides anexcellent review of such research through the 1980s. However, this tradition haslargely failed to consider sexuality as an issue in courtship and mateselection, although it ought to be apparent that sexual dynamics and processesare key components of adolescent attraction, dating, courtship, and mateselection. Sexuality carries the potential both for increasing intimacy betweenteenagers or young adults and for creating intense relationship conflict and,possibly, termination. Yet, Surra's (1990) review is notable precisely for thefact that there is not one single citation of a study including sexualityvariables. This is not an indictment of Surra per se. Her goal was to review thefield of mate selection as it stood at the beginning of the 1990s. Herassessment serves to document that researchers in this area continue to ignorethe role of sexuality in adolescent relationship processes after seven decadesof empirical research.This tendency to ignore sexuality within the courtship processis unfortunate, because of the growing evidence that one of the major influenceson PS behavior is the intimate relationship in which most adolescent sexualactivity occurs. Being involved in a loving and caring relationship increasesthe probability of a decision to engage in intercourse (Christopher and Cate1985) and contributes to sustained activity once it begins (DeLamater andMacCorquodale 1979; Peplau, Rubin, and Hill 1977). In fact, most adolescentsexual experiences in the U.S.A., especially for females, occur within thecontext of an ongoing intimate relationship. It does appear, however, that asthe general rates of PS have increased and as the average age of firstintercourse have declined throughout this century, intercourse has tended tooccur at earlier stages in a relationship (Bell and Chaskes 1970; Christensenand Carpenter 1962; Christensen and Gregg 1970). With respect to attitudes,Americans are more likely to approve of PS in the context of a relationship.This permissiveness-with-affection-and/or-commitment standard has increasinglybecome the norm for both adults and young people (Christensen and Carpenter1962; Christensen and Gregg 1970; Reiss 1960, 1967).A second body of research examining the formation of sexualrelationships has begun to emerge in recent decades. Much of this work has beendone by biologists or evolutionary social psychologists and extends a model ofmammalian mating first presented by Beach (1976). We discuss it here because italso reflects the separation of the sexual and intimate domains ofrelationships, and because much of the pertinent human research has been donewith samples of college students. Essentially, this body of work forms thefoundation for what might be called female selection theory.The traditional view had always been that males are theaggressors and initiators of sexual involvement. From this perspective, femaleswere seen as sexual “gatekeepers.” Their role supposedly was toregulate male access by accepting or rejecting male advances (Perper 1985;Perper and Weis 1987). Beginning with Beach (1976), a growing number ofresearchers have provided evidence that this traditional view is highly flawed.Instead, females select desirable partners and initiate sexual interaction byproceptively signaling selected males (Fisher 1992; Givens 1978; Moore 1985;Moore and Butler 1989; Perper 1985; Perper and Weis 1987). Males, in turn,respond to these proceptive signals. Moore (1985; Moore and Butler 1989) hasdemonstrated that, not only do women use such signaling, but that men are morelikely to “approach” women who do. Perper (1985; Perper and Weis 1987)has provided evidence that American women employ a variety of complex strategiesto arouse male interest and response. Finally, Jesser (1978) has provided someevidence that males are just as likely to accept direct initiations from womenas they are to respond to more covert strategies, although females tend tobelieve that men are “turned off” by female sexualassertiveness.This new line of research raises fundamental questions aboutthe roles of males and females in the formation and maintenance of sexualrelationships - for both adolescents and adults. It indicates a need forresearch that is focused on the dynamics within and the processes of sexualrelationships themselves. As just one example, Christopher and Cate (1988) foundthat, early in a relationship, the level of conflict was positively related to agreater likelihood of intercourse. As the relationship progressed, love andrelationship satisfaction eventually became significant predictors of sexualinvolvement. In the case of adolescence, we need to move beyond “socialbookkeeping,” counting the number of American teenagers who have PS, toexamine what actually happens in their relationships with each other.C. Adult HeterosexualityDAVID L. WEISThe National Health and Social Life SurveyStrangely, there has been considerably more research on thesexual conduct of American adolescents than of adults, and much of the existingresearch on adults has tended to focus on sexual “problems” such asextramarital sex (ES) and sexual dysfunction (see Section 12 on sex dysfunctionsand therapies). There has been little research on the patterns of sexualinteractions within nonclinical marital relationships. This is striking,precisely because of the fact that marriage is the most widely accepted settingfor sexual relations in the U.S.A. and because more than 90 percent of Americansdo marry. Taken together, the preponderance of research on adolescent sexuality,ES, and dysfunction indicates the tendency of American sexuality professionalsto focus on sexual behaviors that have been defined as social problems, ratherthan on “normal” sexuality.In October 1994, a national survey of adult sexual practiceswas released with great media fanfare (Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, and Michaels1994). The survey, titled the National Health and Social Life Survey(NHSLS), randomly sampled 3,432 persons, aged 18 to 50. It was touted as themost comprehensive American sex survey ever, and the first national study ofadult sexuality. However, Reiss (1995) has noted that this claim is misleading,as there have been more than a dozen national surveys of a more-limited scope.Given our interest in reviewing the nature of American sexuality research, it isinteresting to note that the survey was originally planned and approved as agovernment-sponsored project. Funding was denied for this project and a similarstudy of teens (the Udry study) when conservatives in the U.S. Congress objectedto the studies. Conservatives argued that the government should not use taxpayermoney to study private matters like oral sex - clearly rejecting thesignificance of the health concerns involved. The researchers found privatefunding instead. Also interesting is the fact that conservatives hailed thefindings when the study was released (Peterson 1994).There is little doubt that the NHSLS is the most comprehensivestudy of adult sexuality to date, with literally hundreds of variables assessed.Among the key findings are the following:· Most Americansreport that they are satisfied with their sex life - even those who rarely havesex. Among married persons, 87 percent reported they were satisfied with theirsex life.· For the entire sample, 30percent of men and 26 percent of women have sex two or three times a week; 36percent of men and 37 percent of women have sex a few times a month; and 27percent of men and 30 percent of women have sex a few times a year. Marriedpersons have sex more often than single people, and persons who are cohabitinghave sex more often than marrieds.· Approximately 80 percent ofmarried women and 65 percent of married men have never had ES. The majority ofthose who are cohabiting also have never “cheated.” The group mostlikely to have extradyadic sex is unmarried men, aged 42 to 51, who have livedwith a woman for three years or less (32 percent).· There has been a slightincrease in the number of lifetime sexual partners, largely because people nowhave intercourse earlier, marry later, and are more likely to getdivorced.· Among marrieds, 94 percent hadsex only with their spouse in the last year; 75 percent of cohabiting personshad sex only with their partner in the last year. About 80 percent of Americanadults have had either one or no sexual partners in the last year. Only 3percent have had five or more partners in the last year. About 50 percent of menand 30 percent of women have had 5 or more partners since age 18.· Most Americans have a fairlylimited sexual “menu” of activities. Roughly 80 percent of both menand women reported that sexual intercourse is very appealing; only 50 percent ofmen and 33 percent of women find receiving oral sex appealing; 37 percent of menand 19 percent of women describe giving oral sex as appealing. About 25 percentof both men and women have tried anal sex at least once.· People who already have anactive sex life with a current sexual partner are more likely to masturbate.Among married people, 57 percent of husbands and 37 percent of wives havemasturbated in the last year.· About 2.8 percent of men and1.4 percent of women identified themselves as homosexual or bisexual. Only 9percent of men and 4 percent of women reported ever having a homosexualexperience. These rates are considerably higher in the twelve largest U.S.cities.· Most heterosexuals are not atrisk of contracting AIDS, because they are not part of social networks with highrisk.The NHSLS has sparked considerable controversy among sexualityprofessionals. Questions have been raised, primarily about the legitimacy of theprevalence estimates for such behaviors as number of sexual partners, homosexualexperience, and ES. In general, the NHSLS estimates tend to be lower than thosefound in most prior sex research - including prior national studies (Billy,Tanfer, Grady, and Klepinger 1993). It should be noted that the NHSLS estimatesare remarkably similar to Findings in a series of studies conducted by theNational Opinion Research Center using similar national probability samples(Davis and Smith 1994; Greeley et al., 1990; Smith 1990, 1991). These nationalsamples have been carefully constructed to be representative of gender, age,race, education, marital status, size of city of residence, and religion in theU.S.A. The NHSLS did obtain a 79 percent response rate, probably becauseparticipants were financially reimbursed. Few prior studies have had comparableresponse rates, and few have reimbursed participants. Questions about how thisimpacted the results are a legitimate matter for future research.In a review of the NHSLS, Reiss (1995) credits the study forits comprehensiveness, the richness of the data generated, the theoreticalnature of the investigation, and the high quality of the sampling techniques.However, he also raises several questions that may influence the validity of thefindings. Here, we will focus on a few of the more serious. One concerns thefact that 21 percent of the respondents were interviewed with someone elsepresent during the interview. As Reiss notes, a person with an intimate partneror a family member present may well have answered questions differently forobvious reasons. For example, only 5 percent of persons interviewed with anotherperson present reported that they had two or more sexual partners in the lastyear. In contrast, 17 percent of those interviewed with no one else presentreported two or more partners in the last year. This is a sizable difference,and it raises questions about the validity of responses to many questions in thesurvey. Similarly, the NHSLS asked respondents to report the number of sexualpartners they have had since age 18. Most previous studies asked respondents toreport their lifetime number of sexual partners. Here, one half of the sampledid have sexual relations prior to age 18. This reduced estimates for lifetimenumber of partners. The NHSLS reported a median number of six sexual partnersfor men and two for women. Reiss notes that these estimates are lower thancomparable studies (Billy et al., 1993), and that this reported genderdifference cannot possibly be true in the real world.To this critique, we can add that it is possible thatprevalence estimates have been inflated by the volunteer bias of most sexresearch. There are unexamined questions about the effects of volunteer bias andresponse rates. Paul Gebhard (1993), a member of the original Kinsey researchteam, has argued that estimates of lifetime prevalence rates for homosexualbehavior have been remarkably similar when adjusted for sampling weaknesses.Gebhard also criticized the NORC and NHSLS studies for failing to use trainedsex researchers to conduct their interviews, and for their own sampling flawsthat overrepresented rural populations. In fairness, it is appropriate to notethat several of the volunteer samples overrepresent urban populations, and thereis evidence that urban-rural differences in sexual attitudes remain substantial(Weis and Jurich 1985). Finally, although there is a general consensus thatpersons who agree to participate in sex research are more permissive and moresexually experienced, two recent studies strongly suggest that persons whodecline to answer particular items in a sex survey are attempting to hidebehavior in which they have engaged (Wiederman 1993; Wiederman, Weis, andAllgeier 1994).Although these questions will require considerable futureresearch to resolve, it should be acknowledged that the NHSLS is a majorcontribution to the field of sex research in the U.S.A. It is a landmark studywith important new information about the sexual practices of the vast anddiverse American adult population, and it will set the parameters for questionsyet to be explored. Finally, it provides important data on each of the topics wewill explore further in this section.Sexuality and Single AdultsPractically every American spends at least a portion of his orher adult life unmarried. At any one point in time, more than 20 percent of theU.S. population is single, and this percentage has been increasing forseveral decades (Francoeur 1991; Shostak 1987). The chief reasons for this arethe greater tendency to postpone marriage (median age is now in the late 20s),the increasing divorce rate (5 per 1,000 by the 1980s and fairly stablethereafter), and the increasing rate of cohabitation (which tripled since 1960),both as an alternative to marriage and as a form of courtship prior to marriage(Glick 1984; Norton and Moorman 1987; Shostak 1987). Glick (1984) has speculatedthat the prolongation of formal education, the increasing acceptability ofpremarital sexuality, the growing independence of women, and the earliermortality of males may also be factors promoting the growth ofsinglehood.Actually, the single adult population contains three groupswho may share little in common: Those who have never married, those who havedivorced, and those who are widowed. Persons within each group may or may nothave chosen to be single, and they may or may not intend to remain single. Also,persons in each group may be living alone, may be living with roommates who arenot intimate or sexual partners, or may be cohabiting with an intimate partner.By 1980, it was estimated that close to 2 percent of the adult U.S. populationwas cohabiting (Glick and Norton 1977; Yllo 1978). Of course, some singlepersons are gay or lesbian, although they are not typically included inestimates of cohabitation, even when they live with their partners.It should be stressed that the population of single adults isa fluid one. The U.S.A. has high rates of marriage, divorce, and remarriage(Glick 1984; Norton and Moorman 1987). Most of those who are classified ashaving never married at any one point will eventually marry. This is especiallytrue for the growing group who have remained unmarried well past the age of 20.Approximately three quarters of women who get divorced, and more men, eventuallyremarry (Glick 1984; Norton and Moorman 1987). Thus, the composition of thesingle population is always shifting as some marry and others divorce or arewidowed. We are not aware of any research examining the impact of this shiftingcharacter on the sexual lifestyles of single persons. Some singles becomeinvolved in intimate relationships that lead to cohabitation or marriage,although we know little about whether these processes are similar to adolescentcourtship. For those singles who are not involved in an ongoing intimaterelationship, it is possible that finding sexual partners can beproblematic.It is popularly believed that being single in adulthood hasbecome more acceptable in the U.S.A. today. There is, however, some evidencethat married couples continue to associate primarily with other couples.Certainly, it is more acceptable to be sexually active while single today.Singles have greater social and sexual freedom than ever before to pursue avariety of lifestyles. In fact, the labeling of a category of “singleadults” may serve to obscure the fact that the range of sexual and intimatelifestyle options is just as wide as for married persons.Despite the large number of single adults in the U.S.A., therehas been virtually no research on the sexual practices or attitudes of thesegroups. The NHSLS (Laumann et al. 1994) did distinguish between“single” and cohabiting respondents, an important distinction. As wediscussed earlier, the NHSLS did find that “single” persons had sexless frequently than married persons, and that cohabiting persons had sex moreoften than married persons.The Never Married. We know of no research that hasfocused on the population of never-married adults who are not cohabiting. Ofcourse, this group does include persons in their early 20s who have yet tomarry. A portion of that group is included in many of the studies of premaritalsexuality, although that group is not isolated for separate analysis. There isvirtually no scientific information on how never-married persons find or meetsexual partners, establish sexual encounters, or maintain sexualrelationships.Divorced (Postmarital Sex). Divorce has increased inthe U.S.A. dramatically throughout the twentieth century (Berscheid 1983). Therate has leveled since 1980 (Current Population Reports 1985; Glick 1984;Norton and Moorman 1987; Shostak 1987). Of the roughly 40 percent of theAmerican population that gets divorced, about 70 percent eventually remarry,often within a few years (Glick 1984; Norton and Moorman 1987).Again, there has been little research on this group. Itappears that about 80 percent of women, and nearly all men, remain sexuallyactive following a divorce (Gebhard 1968; Hunt 1974). Most persons have sex witha new partner within the first year following a divorce (Hunt, 1974). In the1970s, Hunt (1974) reported that divorced women averaged four sexual partners ayear, and had a higher frequency of orgasm in their postmarital sex than theyhad had in their marriage. Men averaged nearly eight partners a year.Again, there has been little research on the process by whichdivorced persons form or maintain sexual relationships. However, it is fair tosuggest that, as the title of an American novel and corresponding movie implies,most divorced persons fin | |
