On a post in the psych methods fb group about a critique of Amy Cuddy’s power pose:
There have been other published critiques along similar lines, for example: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2016/11/power_posing_s_real_problem_is_with_hormones_not_data.html. And there was also a critique published early on in an endocrinology journal.
The slate article tagline is that the issue is thinking testosterone is the way to power.
Do we know for sure what testosterone is linked to? Is the only definite thing sex drive? If so, that seems like an important part of the sex as conquest narrative… something about the most base-line thing a man conquers is a woman in sex, somehow that is the seed that spurs all the societal level conquering/dominating/colonizing? Idk… Testosterone Rex will be so helpful for this part though
Is the fact that women need to have kids by like, 40 a major thing? Is that why women want to find relationships earlier than men, so they can have a few years together before starting their families? Is this real, even today with adoption, later birth abilities, freezing eggs, etc? What will it take for women and men to have true freedom of opportunity?
What does it mean that our society, the public sphere (workplace, public institutions) is built around men’s anatomical abilities? I feel like men would say it’s cause they’re the ones that built it. Did they build it only because they were the only ones capable? Or because they controlled the means of production… why HAVEN’T women “taken control”? Different values, not being selfish, being more about the greater good/good for all rather than self-serving? Physical capabilities and differences are not the end all-be all… And the conquest mentality also means that you’re starting from the assumption that domination and control are inherently good. They might be, currently in this society, and throughout patriarchal history, valuable but that’s not a universal.
I was also thinking about abortion after the Nib comic about the woman who had 2 abortions, the 1st because she was unfit the 2nd because she doesn’t want to be a mother. I am ALL FOR women being able to abort because they don’t want to be a mother, or they don’t want to be pregnant. What about men… should they be able to opt out of being a father? I used to think it’s all about the anatomical differences- women gestate, men do not. That abortion is about not wanting to be PREGNANT. But what if you want to not be a parent? Idk, there’s something here to think about…
- Wolfe, Tom. 2000. Hooking Up. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux.
- To Bogle, hooking up has replaced dating as a means to starting a relationship because the age of marriage is increasing.
- Looks at hooking up through a sociological lens, designs a qualitative study
- C. Wright Mills The Sociological Imagination. (1959) – about seeing personal troubles as public issues
- Lambert, Kahn, Apple. 2003. Pluralistic Ignorance and Hooking Up. Journal of Sex Research, 40: 129-133.
- “quantitative research – identifying rates and trends – do not reveal the meanings people give to a sex act, nor the context within which sexual activity takes place (e.g. why they are doing it).”
- She based this on Glaser & Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
- She uncovered hookup scripts in her work
- Goffman, E. 1977. The Arrangement between the sexes. Theory and Society, 4: 301-331.
- The cultural norms we live by dictate how we behave in certain situations.
- Gagon & Simon, 1973. Sexual Conduct: The Social Sources of Human Sexuality:
- sexual behavior is socially learned
- a given culture defines what is sexual and how sexual behavior should commence
- the differing sexual scripts for men and women determine the roles they play during sexual interaction
- men take on role of aggressor, women of gatekeeper
- So she basically is using “scripting theory” (her words, pg 8)
- Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels. 1994. The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the U.S.
- “sexual scripts specify with whom people have sex, when and where they should have sex, what they should do sexually, and why they should do sexual things” (pg 6)
- Simon & Gagnon 1984. Sexual Scripts. Society, 22; 53-60
- ” ” 1986. Sexual Scripts: Permanence and Change. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 15; 97-20
- ” ” 1987. A Sexual Scripts Approach. In J. Geer and W. O’Donahue, eds, Theories of Human Sexuality. 363-383.
- Kass & Kass, 2000. Wing to Wing, Oar to Oar: Readings on Courting and Marrying. Notre Dame, IN: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- there are culturally prescribed roles for men and women about seeking potential sexual partnerships
Okay, Bogle is saying herself that society provides scripts for young adults to follow. Why does she conclude at the end that women inherently want relationships? I guess she’s more focused on scripts for literal behavior, instead of how scripts can also influence our attitudes and desires.
- How “in-network” strangers affect socializing on a college campus
- Armstrong, Hamilton, & Sweeney, 2005. Hooking Up and Party Rape: The Social Organization of Gender and Sexuality at a Large Research University. Paper given at American Sociological Association, Philly, PA.
- Men who were less inclined to have a conquest mentality towards sex didn’t end up pledging fraternities
- Martin & Hummer. 1989. Fraternities and Rape on Campus. Gender and Society 3(4): 457-473.
- College women are valued solely for their appearances, college men for variety of features and attributes
- Holland and Eisenhart. 1990. Educated in Romance: Women, Achievement, and College Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Gender differences in interpreting non-verbal communication (girls see things as friendly, boys see them as flirty)
- Koeppel, Montagne-Miller, O’Hair, & Cody. 1993. Friendly? Flirting? Wrong? In Kalbfleisch ed, Interpersonal Communication: Evolving Interpersonal Relationships. Hinsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Flawed study of hooking up in college women, national sample:
- Glenn & Marquardt, 2001. Hooking Up, Hanging Out, and Hoping for Mr. Right: College Women on Dating and Mating Today. An Institute for American Values Report to the Independent Women’s Forum
I’m not down with how she’s like it’s usually women that want something “more” than a hook-up. It sort of goes against what Armstrong and company have found, no? She embraces the economic lenses, like principle of least interest, and that college women are competing for a scare resource (men, since there is less men on campus than women– the pool for men is larger so they dont feel the need to hold onto the one they got, etc)
- She’s finding that college students PERCEIVE stereotypes, not sure if that’s actually true or not. (women are perceived to want relationships, guys are perceived to not)
- Surveys on sexual behavior help SHAPE subsequent sexual behavior by telling the public/ppts what is normal. Perceptions of what is normal help create and shape norms. Perception is affected by cultural messages (from academics, journalists, activists, etc)
- Erikson, Julia 1999. Kiss and Tell: Surveying Sex in the 20th Century. Cambridge: MA. Harvard University Press.
Are women actually looking for Mr. Right in college?
- Okay so she’s not actually saying it’s psychological, why more women want relationships. She’s saying it’s cause they have an earlier deadline for marriage. So if we do away with that necessary life-milestone/ major event in the script of life… if women didn’t feel they need to have the lifelong partner by 25 or whatever… GOD is it just biological clock related? You want to have kids around 30 and you want to have a few years with your partner before that? UGH.
- She is also saying women want relationships in order to protect their reputations. The double standard CONFINES women’s desires. A “slut” is a woman who acts “too much like a guy” she’s TRANSGRESSING gender/sex roles!!