Human Sexuality
Love and Communication in Intimate Relationships
Love
Considerable attention across disciplines
What is the nature of love?
“Love has been highly conceptualized and made very abstract” (Gage, 1976)
What Love is NOT
NOT (Firestone, Firestone & Catlett, 2006):
SelfishPossessiveDemandingProprietary right over othersSubmissive/dominantCoercive or manipulative
Sexuality and Love
Not addressed in Kinsey’s research
Currently:
Numerous studies on love and sex
Love
A complex emotion
The “paradox” of love: encompasses opposites
Love and Sexuality
Often intertwined
For many, love legitimates sex outside of marriage
Sex as an expression of love; to deepen the relationship (Cupach, 1990; Henderson-King, 1994)
Gender Differences:Sex and Love
Men: sex and love can be separated (Carroll, Volk, & Hyde, 1985)
Women: less likely to engage in casual sex: love and sex are more closely linked
Sex and Love
Gay men:Especially likely to separate sex and love Intrinsic value to sex
Heterosexual men: similar?
Not as many willing partners (Blum, 1997)
Sex and Love
Lesbian relationships:
Sex is less frequent among lesbian couples, comparatively (Schureurs, 1993)
More likely to postpone sex until emotional intimacy is developed
Celibacy
Abstaining from sexual activity
Religious/spiritual dimensions, situational, personal, etc.
Enhanced appreciation of friendship functions of relationships
Asexuality
Absence of sexual attraction to others, or no desire to act on attractions
1% of the population
Underrepresented in research and movements
Capable of intimate relationships, free of sexuality; some prefer not to have relationships
Asexuality
An orientation
Research: asexuality exists in the animal kingdom; sheep studies
The question of pathology
Asexuality
Prause, 2003
Asexual people report:
Low sexual desireLow arousal/excitationMany engage in masturbation
Styles of Love
John Lee- sociologist
6 basic styles of love: reflect relationship styles
Assumption: It is best when we share a relationship style with our partner
Styles of Love
Mania: obsessive/possessive love; roller-coaster
Ludus: playful love: love is a game, not a deep emotion
Styles of Love
Storge: love between companions: from friendship to romance
Agape: chaste, patient, undemanding love; the love of saints/martyrs
Styles of Love
Pragma: practical/logical love; businesslike; looking for someone with specific characteristics
Hendrick & Hendrick: men are more ludic, women are more storgic/pragmatic
Triangular Theory of Love
Robert Sternberg: 3 elements of loveEach will increase/diminish over the course
of a relationship
Intimacy, Passion, and Commitment
Kinds of Love: Sternberg
Liking (intimacy only)
Infatuation (passion only)
Romantic love (intimacy and passion)
Kinds of Love
Companionate love (intimacy and commitment)
Empty love (commitment only)
Non love (absence of all three)
Attachment Theory (Pistole, Clark & Tubbs, 1995)
Adults with:
Secure attachments: trusting, accepting, supportive; 56% of adults
Attachment Theory
Anxious/Ambivalent attachments: afraid their partners would leave, want to commit prematurely; 19-20% of adults
Avoidant attachments: discomfort in close relationships; distrustful, fear dependence; 23-25% of adults
Jealousy
Often confused with love
Jealousy is associated with immaturity and insecurity (Pistole, 1995)
Is jealousy ever beneficial?
Jealousy
Often linked to relationship violence (Buss, 1999; Puente & Cohen, 2003)
Jealous aggression is often directed toward a partner (Paul & Galloway, 1994)
31% of women and 17% of men had intentionally elicited jealousy in a relationship (Buss, 2000)
Jealousy
Why do we become/want to make others jealous (Buss, 2000)?
Self esteemRevengeTo increase a partner’s commitmentTest the strength of the relationship
Jealousy
Generated by:
Personal insecurities/anxieties
Boundary violations in an relationship
Lasting love
Intimate love: lasting love; counting on the other partner; both partners have individual and relationship goals
Consists of:CommitmentCaring Self-disclosure
Communication
Active Listening:Open postures/leaning inEye contactNoddingReflection of contentReflection of feelings
Factors impacting communication
PersonalityRelationship contextCultureSubject matter
Non-verbal communication
Most communication of feeling is nonverbal (Guffey, 1999)
Body posture and movements
Nonverbal Communication
Eye contact and facial expressions
Interpersonal distance
Touching
Often overrides the verbal message
Gender and Communication
Women-
More sensitive/responsive during conversation and conflicts
Set the emotional tone- escalate or deescalate conflicts with verbal and nonverbal messages
Use of emotional appeals and threats
Use of qualifying statements
(Gottman & Carre, 2000; Klintetob & Smith, 1996, Noller & Fitzpatrick, 1991)
Gender and Communication
Men-
more likely to send negative messages, neutral messages, or to withdraw
Fewer words, more profanity
Deborah Tannen
Gendered Communication:
Deborah Tannen
Basic Premise:There are gender differences in
communication styles
These differences start in early childhood
Boys/Girls
Boys: play in groups; activity-driven
Girls: best friends; relationship-driven
Status and Connection
Men: power hierarchies: discourse is used to “one-up” or “one-down” each other
Women: collaborative: discourse to bring people closer or farther apart
Meta-message
Meta-message: what messages do we take away from what we hear?
Competitive/Cooperative
Both men/women are competitive and cooperative, but conversational rituals differ
“I’m Sorry”…
Women are more likely to use this phraseSorry it happened, not taking blame
Men- more likely to ascribe blame when “sorry” is uttered
Directness/Indirectness
Varies by gender based on context:
Women indirect when giving orders
Men indirect when describing emotional content
Public/Private Discourse
Women: likely to try to engage men in private discourses
Men: more likely to dominate conversation publicly
Qualifying Statements….
Based on CONTEXT
Gender is one of many factors;Ethnicity/cultureAgeSituation/contextPower