• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

求爱中的性脚本:预测约会结果中的生殖器接触

Scripting Sex in Courtship: Predicting Genital Contact in Date Outcomes.

作者信息

Kendrick Sam, Kepple Nancy Jo

机构信息

Department of Sociology, University of Kansas, 1415 Jayhawk Blvd., 733 Fraser Hall, Lawrence, KS 66045 USA.

School of Social Welfare, University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA.

出版信息

Sex Cult. 2022;26(3):1190-1214. doi: 10.1007/s12119-021-09938-2. Epub 2022 Jan 5.

DOI:10.1007/s12119-021-09938-2
PMID:35013661
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8730304/
Abstract

Despite increasing egalitarian values expressed among college students, dating is still characterized by traditional gender roles. Because traditional dating scripts are predominantly recited and enacted to the extent that men initiate and pay, there are assumptions that the sexual processes have not changed. This study investigates the sexual processes of male-initiated and female-initiated dates among college students in the US. Using data from the Online College Social Life Survey, we ask whether traditional components of the dating script explain traditional sexual outcomes (non-genital contact), as well as whether alternative dating scripts explain nontraditional sexual outcomes (genital contact). Using multivariate logistic regression models, we found that violations of the traditional script are associated with higher odds of genital contact for male- and female-initiated dates; however, the predictors of genital contact for female-initiated dates are not the same as those for male-initiated dates. This study highlights the variability of sexual scripts in dating practices, suggesting that the sexual scripts associated with dates are not as homogenous as we have previously believed.

摘要

尽管大学生中表达出的平等主义价值观在不断增加,但约会仍然以传统的性别角色为特征。由于传统的约会模式主要是男性主动并支付费用,所以人们认为性过程并没有改变。本研究调查了美国大学生中男性主动和女性主动约会的性过程。利用在线大学社交生活调查的数据,我们探讨约会模式的传统组成部分是否能解释传统的性结果(非生殖器接触),以及替代性约会模式是否能解释非传统的性结果(生殖器接触)。通过多元逻辑回归模型,我们发现违反传统模式与男性和女性主动约会中发生生殖器接触的较高几率相关;然而,女性主动约会中生殖器接触的预测因素与男性主动约会的不同。这项研究突出了约会行为中性模式的变异性,表明与约会相关的性模式并不像我们之前认为的那样单一。

相似文献

1
Scripting Sex in Courtship: Predicting Genital Contact in Date Outcomes.求爱中的性脚本:预测约会结果中的生殖器接触
Sex Cult. 2022;26(3):1190-1214. doi: 10.1007/s12119-021-09938-2. Epub 2022 Jan 5.
2
Gender and Ethnicity in Dating, Hanging Out, and Hooking Up: Sexual Scripts Among Hispanic and White Young Adults.约会、社交与随意性行为中的性别和种族:西班牙裔和白人青年的性脚本
J Sex Res. 2016 Sep;53(7):788-804. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2015.1065954. Epub 2015 Oct 7.
3
Lesbian dating and courtship from young adulthood to midlife.从青年期到中年期的女同性恋约会与求爱。
J Lesbian Stud. 2002;6(1):85-109. doi: 10.1300/J155v06n01_09.
4
Dating and Hooking Up in College: Meeting Contexts, Sex, and Variation by Gender, Partner's Gender, and Class Standing.大学中的约会与随意性行为:相遇情境、性行为以及按性别、伴侣性别和班级排名的差异
J Sex Res. 2015;52(5):517-31. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2014.901284. Epub 2014 Apr 21.
5
Actual versus desired initiation patterns among a sample of college men: tapping disjunctures within traditional male sexual scripts.大学男性样本中实际与期望的性起始模式:挖掘传统男性性脚本中的脱节之处。
J Sex Res. 2005 May;42(2):150-8. doi: 10.1080/00224490509552268.
6
Gender Roles in the Millennium: Who Pays and Is Expected to Pay for Romantic Dates?千禧年的性别角色:谁来支付以及应该谁来支付浪漫约会的费用?
Psychol Rep. 2023 Apr;126(2):791-811. doi: 10.1177/00332941211057144. Epub 2021 Dec 7.
7
Dating and eating. How university students select eating settings.约会与用餐。大学生如何选择用餐场所。
Appetite. 2009 Feb;52(1):226-9. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2008.07.005. Epub 2008 Jul 18.
8
"Anything from making out to having sex": men's negotiations of hooking up and friends with benefits scripts.“从亲吻到做爱”:男性对 hookup 和 friends with benefits 脚本的协商。
J Sex Res. 2009 Sep-Oct;46(5):414-24. doi: 10.1080/00224490902775801.
9
Dating and eating. Beliefs about dating foods among university students.约会与饮食。大学生对约会食物的看法。
Appetite. 2009 Oct;53(2):226-32. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2009.06.012. Epub 2009 Jul 3.
10
Adolescents' sexual scripts: schematic representations of consensual and nonconsensual heterosexual interactions.青少年的性脚本:双方自愿及非双方自愿的异性互动的示意图。
J Sex Res. 2007 Nov;44(4):316-27. doi: 10.1080/00224490701580923.

本文引用的文献

1
An Investigation of the Implicit Endorsement of the Sexual Double Standard Among U.S. Young Adults.美国年轻人对性双重标准的隐性认可调查。
Front Psychol. 2020 Jun 30;11:1454. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01454. eCollection 2020.
2
Perceptions of Sexual Script Deviation in Women and Men.女性和男性对性脚本偏离的看法。
Arch Sex Behav. 2019 Feb;48(2):631-644. doi: 10.1007/s10508-018-1280-x. Epub 2018 Jul 30.
3
What's Gender Got to Do With It? Sexual Double Standards and Power in Heterosexual College Hookups.这与性别有何关系?异性恋大学生一夜情中的性双重标准与权力
J Sex Res. 2016 Sep;53(7):754-65. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1145181. Epub 2016 Apr 13.
4
Partner Meeting Contexts and Risky Behavior in College Students' Other-Sex and Same-Sex Hookups.大学生异性和同性随意性行为中的伴侣会面情境与危险行为
J Sex Res. 2017 Jan;54(1):55-72. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2015.1124378. Epub 2016 Jan 26.
5
Dating and Hooking Up in College: Meeting Contexts, Sex, and Variation by Gender, Partner's Gender, and Class Standing.大学中的约会与随意性行为:相遇情境、性行为以及按性别、伴侣性别和班级排名的差异
J Sex Res. 2015;52(5):517-31. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2014.901284. Epub 2014 Apr 21.
6
A new standard of sexual behavior? Are claims associated with the "hookup culture" supported by general social survey data?一种性行为的新标准?与“勾搭文化”相关的说法有一般社会调查数据支持吗?
J Sex Res. 2014;51(6):605-15. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2014.906031. Epub 2014 Apr 21.
7
A double standard for "Hooking Up": How far have we come toward gender equality?“ hookup ”的双重标准:我们在性别平等方面走了多远?
Soc Sci Res. 2013 Sep;42(5):1191-206. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.04.006. Epub 2013 May 3.
8
Sex, commitment, and casual sex relationships among college men: a mixed-methods analysis.大学生群体中的性别、承诺和随意性关系:混合方法分析。
Arch Sex Behav. 2013 May;42(4):561-71. doi: 10.1007/s10508-012-0047-z. Epub 2013 Jan 8.
9
Waiting to Be Asked: Gender, Power, and Relationship Progression Among Cohabiting Couples.等待被询问:同居伴侣中的性别、权力与关系进展
J Fam Issues. 2011 Apr 1;32(4):482-506. doi: 10.1177/0192513X10391045. Epub 2010 Dec 20.
10
Sexual scripts among young heterosexually active men and women: continuity and change.年轻异性性行为活跃的男性和女性的性脚本:连续性和变化。
J Sex Res. 2013;50(5):409-20. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2012.661102. Epub 2012 Apr 10.