New research throws doubt on fundamental gender stereotypes: Women are as likely as men to be unfaithful, given the same power and resources.
The traditional dichotomy of men being aggressive, sexually driven, leaders, while women are passive, emphatic followers, is so deeply ingrained in out culture, that even feminists fall for it (arguing that women are for peace, while men are war mongering beasts).
Real life experience
I have known too many aggressive, outspoken, and dominant women to believe in this myth.
I grew up in a part of Scandinavia that used to rely on fishing and whaling. The men were out, the women ruled at home. In nearly all the families I knew when growing up the women dominated conversations and made all the important decisions regarding the family. This led to a double set of stereotypes: The traditional one of men being in charge (as they seemingly controlled the revenue) and a parallel one of men being under the heels of women.
Over and over again I found that my male friends dreamed more about establishing a family with kids, than "nailing" the best looking girl at the party. They tried to behave according to the stereotype of the manly Casanova -- that is true -- but their main objective was love, not sex alone.
That did not stop them from repeating the stereotypes in their conversations, however.
Transgender confusion: What does it mean to be a man or a woman?
It is interesting to see that so many crossdreamers report a psychological profile that is similar to what the cultural stereotypes tell us to expect from their target sex.
To give one example: A significant portion of M2F crossdreamers taking part in the discussions over at Crossdream Life seem to be introvert and reactive. Their identification with their ideal of the female sex goes far beyond the realm of sexual arousal.
In spite of this I constantly hear, from the crossdreamers themselves, that their sexuality is far from female. The problem, it seems, is that they are too easily sexually aroused.
Their argument is that "women do not have such fantasies", if they have any sexual fantasies at all. That is: Many male to female crossdreamers have a vision of XX women as chaste, asexual beings, who rarely masturbate, who never take the initiative sexually and who are not promiscuous.
I have gone through a wide variety of studies on female sexuality and their erotic fantasies, and I have read erotica written by XX women and "femme" lesbians, and I am totally unable to see any significant difference between the fantasies of XX women and XY M2F crossdreamers. Really! I am not kidding! The same elements are present in both groups, also among the XX women: fantasies about hot sex, submission, sexy lingerie, being desired -- fantasies of being raped even!
Apparently more than 40 percent of American women have used a dildo. So what do you think goes through their minds when they are using it? Dreams about a chaste white wedding? I think not!
I'll come back to this in a later post.
Understanding the stereotypes may set us free
I have become more and more convinced that there is something seriously wrong with our perceptions about sex and gender. And I think this is important for the transgender population for three important reasons:
1. Many trangender people are sincerely confused about who they are. They compare themselves not to real life men and women, but to the stereotypes of what men and women are supposed to be. Since real life men and women rarely manage to live up to the stereotypes, it should come as no surprise that many transgender people find it hard to fit in.
2. Some militant transexuals somehow manage to live up to the stereotypes (or believe they do). They then start using the same artificial standards to verbally abuse other transgender people who fall outside these strict norms. Again the result is a lot of unnecessary suffering.
3. Many researchers are also stuck in the stereotypes. They produce an endless stream of quasi-Darwinist papers, where the existence of the present socio-cultural norms and practices are mistaken for proofs of an underpinning biology.
If we can get a more realistic understanding of the diversity of male and female living, we may also leave more room for various forms of gender expressions, being that the male bodied person who wants to explore the life of a woman through crossdressing or the female bodied person who knows that he is a man.
The Dutch study on power and infidelity
New studies show that the myth of women being naturally monogamous, is also just that: a myth. In fact, it seems promiscuity is more an effect of power than gender, as women in leading positions are as likely to be unfaithful as men.
A brand new study from the Netherlands seriously undermines the idea that women from nature's side are less promiscuous than men.
The "fact" that infidelity is a man thing is often taken for granted, and is often a favorite topic in female circles. "All men are cheating bastards!" It turns out that infidelity is not so much a gender trait, as a power trait.
The study has not been published yet, but the lead researcher, Dr. Joris Lammers of the Department of Social Psychology at the Tilburg University has been kind enough to send me a copy.
Lammers & Co used data from a survey of 1561 persons to map the relationship between power and infidelity. The respondents were working professionals, from junior employees to senior CEOs.
The hypothesis
The underpinning hypothesis for the study was that the psychological experience may change the psychological state of people. Based on previous research, the team postulated that:
"One important effect of power is that it leads people to behave more confidently towards potential partners.As a result of the activation of the behavioral approach system, people in power generally are more confident, self-uassertive, and impulsive than people low in power."
Moreover, research has shown that power makes people focus their attention on physically attractive others, it increases romantic approach behavior, and it makes people optimistic in their perception of sexual interest on the part of potential mates.
Note that these are traits and patterns of behavior that are more often than not associated with stereotypical male behavior.
The researchers also notes that power may lead to a greater emotional distance to one's spouse. Power may also lead to these people taking greater risks. And then there is the increase in opportunities: business meetings, trips, conferences and so on.
Evolutionary theories
Lammers and Co do discuss evolutionary theories where men are supposed to spread their genes to as many women as possible, while women are more likely to stick to one partner in order to gain support for bringing up the kids:
"According to this view , power should increase infidelity among men, because an increase in power -- and therefore in status and wealth -- should make men more attractive to women."
Still, as Lammers & Co. point out, this might as well be a result of the cultural suppression of women. Attracting a powerful male is often the only option a woman has in order to establish a stable and secure relationship.
"In this view, female infidelity should increase if women obtain independent sources of power," Lammers & Co. argue, "because then they would no longer be dependent on their partners for wealth an status."
Which is why they compared working men and women with their own source of income, instead of all men and women.
The results
The researchers make the following conclusions:
Respondent who were more powerful had stronger intentions to be unfaithful. The observed effect was not moderated by gender. In other words: Powerful women are as likely as men to consider being unfaithful
So what about the real deed? Are men more likely to be unfaithful in real life, and turn the temptation into an act?
Here's what the researchers say:
"Controlling of gender, age, and education, we found a significant effect of power on actual infidelity(...) Again we did not find a main effect of gender (...), and the effect of power was not moderated by gender."
I repeat: Gender did not make a difference.
"Among the women who had an independent source of income (as all our female respondents did, because they were working professionals), power had a positive relationship with infidelity, and this relationship was comparable to that found among men."
In the Tilburg study 26 percent of men and 26 percent of women reported to have been unfaithful at least once.
The most significant effect of power was increased confidence. A confident person is -- I guess -- more likely to try and therefore also to succeed in seducing another person.
Give women equal power and they become equally amorous.
Norwegian experts
The Norwegian newspaper Verdens Gang followed up on this study, asking Norwegian experts about female infidelity. Remember that Norway is probably one of the countries that have come furthest as regards equality between the sexes -- even more so than the Dutch.
Psychologist Eva Trytli argues that the attitudes among Norwegian woman have changed significantly during the last decades:
"Women have now the same opportunities as men to [find sex] through job travels, on congresses and the like."
She thinks women are better at exposing infidelity in their partner, though. Another female relationship expert, Åsa Rytter Evensen, agrees:
"Women are now working outside the home and find as many temptations as men do. Still; I think there may be something to the idea that women are more alert, and that they are better at keeping their escapades secret. Women are probably also better at lying and at covering their tracks."
“Is it that men are bragging about it and women are lying to everybody including themselves?” Dr. Helen E. Fisher asked the New York Times. “Men want to think women don’t cheat, and women want men to think they don’t cheat, and therefore the sexes have been playing a little psychological game with each other.”
In other words: Women manage to keep up the stereotypical view of women being chaste, by keeping the men in the dark: "What he does not know, will not hurt him." And then they reinforce this belief among themself.
The men (as well as selected transwomen) never stop to ask the obvious question: Who are the women all the testosterone-driven men are sleeping with?" Maybe there is only one whore, sleeping with them all?
Upside down
I am sure someone will come up with the obvious argument: The reason the women taking part in the Dutch study are as unfaithful as men is that they are "manly". Only masculine women will try to strive for positions of power. In other words: There is something "wrong" with them.
This means of course that women like Margaret Thatcher, Hillary Clinton, Condolezza Rice, Gro Harlem Brundtland, Indira Gandhi and Elisabeth I, all have to be labelled "masculine".
Having had quite a few female superiors in my working life myself, I know that this argument is crap. Female bosses are generally not less feminine or sexy than other women, and if there is any difference at all, it can be explained by the fact that they are older.
Other studies
In Verdens Gang psychologist Peder Kjøs points to an American study of 2007 which shows that 21 percent of men living in a committed relationship have been unfaithful. The number for women is very close to this: 19 percent (I have not been able to track down study he is referring to).
Earlier studies show a greater difference between women and men, and some show lower numbers for both sexes. An American summary from 2006 show 21.7 percent for men and 12.6 for women. But then again these are numbers for the population as a whole. The Dutch study focus on men and women in career positions.
There seems to be agreement regarding women catching up cheating wise, though. Equal opportunity equals equal adultery.
Given that women are more likely than men to answer "No" to the question of infidelity -- due to the social and cultural stigma attached -- I think it is fair to conclude that women are no more sexually "innocent" or "pure" than men.
And if we think carefully about this, that is to be expected. We are not different species, after all.
One more thing
I realize that this may lead some transpeople even more confused than before. A M2F crossdresser or a transwoman may say:
"Hey, I do not identify with a career driven cheating woman! I identify with the more traditional feminine values of faithfulness and love!!!"
My point is not that all men and women are sex driven power players. My point is that as personality profiles go, you will normally find the same traits in both men and women.
Note that 3/4 of men and women are faithful. That does not meant that they are not tempted, but for various reasons most men and women decide to stay faithful. Loving and caring for your family is not a female trait. It is a human trait. A man can be emphatic and non-combative, and still identify as a man. His friend will recognize him as a man.
This tells me at least that sex identity and the causes of gender dysphoria runs deeper than culturally defined gender traits. It is not your love for shopping that makes male bodied person feel like a woman, but something more basic. That's the riddle that has to be solved.
ABSTRACT OF PAPER
Joris Lammers, Janka I. Stoker, Jennifer Jordan, Monique Pollmann, and Diederik A. Stapel "Power Increases Infidelity Among Men and Women"
To be published in Psychological Science 2011.
"Data from a large survey of 1,561 professionals were used to examine the relationship between power and infidelity and the process underlying this relationship. Results showed that elevated power is positively associated with infidelity because power increases confidence in the ability to attract partners. This association was found for both actual infidelity and intentions to engage in infidelity in the future. Gender did not moderate these results: The relationship between power and infidelity was the same for women as for men, and for the same reason. These findings suggest that the common assumption (and often-found effect) that women are less likely to engage in infidelity than men is, at least partially, a reflection of traditional gender-based differences in power that exist in society."
Participants and design
"We e-mailed readers of Intermediair, a weekly Dutch magazine aimed at professionals, to ask them to voluntarily complete a questionnaire on the Internet. To minimize selection bias, we did not disclose that some of the questions were about marital infidelity. A total of 1,561 respondents completed the questionnaire. Because we were interested in infidelity— which is logically possible only if one has a partner to be unfaithful to—we excluded from our main analyses 286 respondents who did not currently have a partner, which left us with 1,275 participants (46% women, 54% men; mean age = 39.1 years, SD = 8.2 years).
As anticipated, respondents varied strongly in workplace power; 58% had a nonmanagement function, 22% had a lower-management function (e.g., team leader), 14% were in middle management (e.g., district manager), and 6% were in top management (e.g., CEO). The sample was generally highly educated; the highest level of education attained was a bachelor’s degree for 43% of respondents, a master’s degree for 43%, a Ph.D. for 11%, and some other credential for 2%."
"I am totally unable to see any significant difference between the fantasies of XX women and XY M2F crossdreamers."
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be repeating the usual misunderstanding over and over. For example (but simplistically), the typical feminine sexuality is aroused by large masculine arms. But the autogynephiliac instance is not necessarily an arousal in large arms, but arousal in the notion of oneself aroused by large arms.
-wxhluyp
"This tells me at least that sex identity and the causes of gender dysphoria runs deeper than culturally defined gender traits. It is not your love for shopping that makes male bodied person feel like a woman, but something more basic. That's the riddle that has to be solved."
ReplyDeleteYes. There is something called as masculine emotions and something called a feminine emotions. A masculine man can be soft and caring in the masculine way while a feminine person will be showing the same traits in a feminine way.
There are some masculine men that are arrogant by nature and so also, there are some feminine males who are arrogant or dominating by nature. Yet, the way they feel and display their traits outwardly will vary.
That is what gender identity is all about- not the human traits themselves, but the way you feel or display it.
I go to shopping thinking about and comparing myself to gorgeous women in the Barbara street, so
I am somehow atleast a male lesbian. A man would also go to shopping and dressing on Barbara street but would think about and compare himself to other men.
So, why do I compare myself to women on shopping and not the men? Because my neurology is feminine driven and gives me feminine energy.When I cry or get excited, even then my feminine energies dominate.
ReplyDeleteI am sure that for a masculine man, it will be the opposite. A man wanting to look good or feel skinny will still feel like a man because his neurology is masculine driven.
@wxhluyp
ReplyDelete"For example (but simplistically), the typical feminine sexuality is aroused by large masculine arms. But the autogynephiliac instance is not necessarily an arousal in large arms, but arousal in the notion of oneself aroused by large arms."
No, this is too simple. A typical feminine sexuality also contains arousal in the notion of oneself as being desired, being admired and in performing the role of --let's say -- the vulnerable woman in the arms of a strong lover.
This is the foundation for the romance novel industry. They read these novels (which are often pure pornography) because the idea of being the damsel overwhelmed by masculinity turns them on.
I believe the main reason women spend so much time and money on clothes, make-up, perfume etc., is not to attract men per se (they are normally unable to distinguis a Gucci from a Hermes anyway). They try to establish a self-image as a beautiful, desirable woman and revel in the confirmation they get from both men and women.
For me the clear demonstration of this fact is the way women dress up for each other. Their desirability is confirmed by other women as well. In fact, the verdict of a woman is often considered more important thatn a man's.
The M2F crossdreamer is no different from most women in this respect.The idea of being desired is indeed a powerful aphrodisiac, but the crossdreamer also dream about being WITH another person, loving another person. Which is why so many of them fall in love and get married.
The fact that a majority of M2F crossdreamers are gynephilic, makes this a little bit more complicated though, as a woman -- in our culture -- is not expected to take the active, penetrating role. The crossdreamer find it hard to imagine that the woman can reaffirming the crossdreamer's femininity in the traditional way, which is why they often find vanilla heterosex so unsatisfying.
This is probably why so many M2F crossdreamers dream of faceless men, or real women with a strap-on or a penis ("shemales").
The real parallell here is probably lesbian femmes and their desire for a female bodied partner with a "masculine" sexuality. Femmes are not "autogynephiliacs", and nor are the M2F crossdreamers, but most of them combine the desire for women with the desire for taking the submissive role in sexual role playing.
I am not denying that much of this is shaped by socialization. But find no proof of M2F crossdreamer sexuality being essentially different from the one of most women.
Among women I guess the mirror image is found in butch lesbians and F2M crossdreamers.
"A typical feminine sexuality also contains arousal in the notion of oneself as being desired, being admired and in performing the role of --let's say -- the vulnerable woman in the arms of a strong lover."
ReplyDeleteIt is true that femininity is generally more objectified and thus there is a slightly stronger sense of self-image.
Self-representation isn't a prerequisite for feminine arousal, it is rather a popular manifestation/scenario of feminine identity/sexual orientation.
The instance/structure of autogynephilic arousal doesn't necessitate anything beyond the relation to self through reflexive femininity. It doesn't necessitate a particular biological sex, or that you identify as any gender stereotype or sexual orientation stereotype etc.
Have you researched queer theory, modern post-structuralism in the mold of Judith Butler yet? On semiotic constructivist ground, there are many terms which you are taking for granted. It is unfortunate that the article in Jasper's Wardrobe has been overlooked. It remains the most complete explanation of crossdreaming. http://jasperswardrobe.com/2010/11/13/autogynephilia-fetish-femininity-post-gendered-erotic-subjectivity/
-wxhluyp
Utter and pure Poppy-cock! So 25% of females “in power” MAY have an affair is extrapolated to the 75% of women who don’t? Jack please!! Are you running out of ideas or what? Are you writing for the sake of writing........ I’m disappointed in this.
ReplyDelete"Utter and pure Poppy-cock! So 25% of females “in power” MAY have an affair is extrapolated to the 75% of women who don’t?"
ReplyDeleteI am not sure what you mean by this.
This study shows the same numbers of infidelity among men and women if the framework conditions are the same.
The 26% does not refer to men and women who MAY have an affair. It refers to the portion that says that they HAVE had an affair.
This is not extrapolated to the 75% who say they don't, and I think I made that perfectly clear.
The point is that there is no difference between men and women in this respect. The women are as faithful (or as unfaithful) as the men.
Given that the common "truism" is that women are less sexually charged, less aggressive and much more faithful by nature, this study is a clear indication that this is not so.
If we want to get a clear idea about what sex and gender is, that is an important observation.
This is definitely not writing for the sake of writing. For me, this is about finding out what my "inner woman" truly is! Ultimately it is also input to the gender "essentialism" debate: What is inborn and what is not.
Jack,
ReplyDeleteEven your social reactions to a particular phenomenon is feminine, means that you have a strong inner woman. If you had a strong inner man, you wouldn't be influenced by the fake cultural norms certainly!
Because, if that were the case, all powerful men might want to be women, which is obviously not the case.
What happens is that the stronger your inner woman is, the stronger is your dissociation from the world of masculinity and the more vulnerable you are to social and cultural stereotypes as well.
ReplyDelete@Monty "What happens is that the stronger your inner woman is, the stronger is your dissociation from the world of masculinity and the more vulnerable you are to social and cultural stereotypes as well."
ReplyDeleteGiven the male supremacy in most cultures this would definitely apply to political power and independence.
But I am sure the "average" male suffers to. It is not only transgender male bodies persons who suffer from being forced to suppress non-masculine sides of their personality.
Yes, but the degree of your discontentment will be greater. You will start wishing you were a female. You will want to flee way from the male body itself because alongwith a few socially unmanly traits, you will have more of your natural femininity also flowing out that you can no longer repress, as you have started enjoying them.
ReplyDeleteThe average male will only feel socially emasculated however, and will rather hence repress it. He enjoys the masculine identity and not the temptations of natural femininity like you.
If he by any chance for example, suddenly finds himself wanting a passive role in sex, he will repress it for, it evades his masculine self image.
ReplyDeleteBut at that moment,in your case, you will start feeling ultrafeminine and will enjoy it like anything. You cannot repress that any longer, you have to get a different body.
“New research throws doubt on fundamental gender stereotypes: Women are as likely as men to be unfaithful, given the same power and resources.”
ReplyDeleteDear me Jack, you’re all over the place in this article. You stray so often from your opening statement you’re like a Chameleon changing colours. So what’s your point? Power corrupts? On that I would agree. All humans of either sex are capable of anything given the right circumstances. Because women rob banks or fight in the military and kill, as Russian women did in the Second World War, does that disprove your “myths” about what the sexes are capable of as well?
Having been a Sociologist for 30 years one thing I find is very clear; men ARE more aggressive, competitive and sexually driven than women; women ARE much more nurturing AND much less likely to be unfaithful than men, but because some studies tell you that a few do not fit the norm does that imply all women who have economic power, or who hold executive positions are unfaithful?
You have on hand dismissed social stereotyping but on the other have approved of it by dismissing basic biological fact simply to fit an agenda.
Estrogen and Testosterone DO determine much of how the sexes react in various circumstances no matter how much you try to disprove this fact. You make mention of a study in Holland for instance, that found 26% of men and women though married, were unfaithful and this using a very small poll sample of 1500 people out of a population of 16,000,000. I was never very good at math but that translates to me that 74% of those surveyed “did not” were not unfaithful, and this in one of the most sexually permissive societies on the planet. Yet given your blogs title and what you imply, you have missed the mark terrible by inferring that all professional women are as likely as men to be unfaithful which, as someone replying to this writing stated, is pure “Poppy-“Cock.
Susan C
@Anonymous
ReplyDelete"Having been a Sociologist for 30 years one thing I find is very clear; men ARE more aggressive, competitive and sexually driven than women; women ARE much more nurturing AND much less likely to be unfaithful than men".
I hear you, but I have come to the conclusion that all of what you say here is -- to use your expression -- pure poppy-cock! And I am not alone in saying so.
I would strongly recommend that you and anyone interested in this discussion take a look a the following books, and especially the first one:
Rebecca M. Jordan-Young: Brain Storm, The Flaws in the Science of Sex Differences
Cordelia Fine: Delusions of Gender
Anne Fausto-Sterling: Myths of Gender
Anne Fausto-Sterling: Sexing the Body
Debora Rudacille: The Riddle of Gender
A popular presentation of the same ideas is found in Lise Eliot: Pink Brain, Blue Brain.
I started wondering about this when I found than none of my own experiences fit with the dogma you are presenting, which is why I made the point of the fishing and whaling communities along the Norwegian coast.
In my experience women were more aggressive, more dominating and more manipulative, while the literature told me the exact opposite.
Personal experience is not proof, as we all know, which is why I decided to present this Dutch study as an example of new research that debunks the myths of men being from Mars and women from Venus by nature.
The reason so many researchers, especially in the natural sciences, get their prejudices confirmed again and again is manyfold:
1. Their respondents behave according to the stereotypes because they are conditioned to do so.
2. The respondents are more likely to give socially correct answers in order to fit in.
3. The respondents are influenced by the way the questions are asked. If a study underlines that it is a meant to study the lack of spatial capabilities in women, women are more likely to perform worse. That is: The expectations of society influence our self confidence and the way we perform.
4. The researchers see what they want to see, reformulating questions, methods and typologies until they fit with the stereotypes.
Cont...
...cont.
ReplyDeleteBaron-Cohen's study of the male and female brain is an excellent example. His study is based on questionnaires delivered to people who are already trapped in the stereotypes of the day. And indeed, women and men differed as regards having a female empathic brain or a male analytical one.
In spite of this less than 50 percent of women had an "empathic" female brain! Does this mean that the other 50 percent were not women? Of course not!
I know that we are talking about statistical aggregates, but the problem is that as soon as you start looking at the numbers in a critical way, taking social and cultural influences into consideration, the findings become less and less significant, often to the point of disappearing all together.
In most cases the differences are down to a few percentage points.If some 30 to 45 percent of women have a manly trait, it makes no sense to call it "masculine" in my book.
From what I have seen in Norway, which is even more liberated than the Netherlands (with nearly no women staying at home) I am absolute positive that women are as unfaithful as men,and that men are as faithful as women. The women are also equally sexually active and aggressive.
Not many years ago Norwegian women were thought unfit for academic work because of their weak brains. Now they are completely dominating the universities. Now the discussion is on whether boys are genetically less fit for academic life! God help us!
There is as far as I can see only one major difference left: Women are still less likely to strive for leading positions. I guess it is because they are allowed to avoid that kind of hassle.
So what about testosterone and estrogen? The idea that testosterone is a male hormone priming aggressiveness has become a truism, in the same way Renaissance men were thought to be dominant due to excess "fire".
Recent research shows that this is far much complex that previously believed, and as Fausto-Sterling points out the proof for testosterone actually triggering aggressiveness are inconclusive.
And, again, when I look at my own life, this is obvious, in real life women are no less angry or aggressive than men. But the expectations of society and the fact that they -- relatively speaking -- are physically weaker, may lead them to choosing other ways of expressing their anger.
In the schoolyard the boys fight it out with their fists, while the girls kill each other socially with poisoned words. I don't know which is worst.
Jack,
ReplyDeleteYes, what Anonymous says is pure poppy-cock indeed! Its all cultural.
But I just have to say one thing.
Men express their aggressive nature in a masculine way. Females do so in a feminine way.
The case of Julia Serano is fascinating. She is not what you call a stereotypically feminine woman post-op and did not act effeminate at all pre-op. But she was still unmanly pre-op and had many inner struggles.
These struggles went on and bothered her so much, yet she was really rough and tough, and also intellectual (which is a manly trait).
Yet despite having these so called socially manly traits (including her attraction to women and being a gynephilic), she was not happy as a man. She had to change into a female.
So,what we have here is something called as natural masculinity and natural femininity that determines an individual's gender identity and also the gender you more relate to (in your fantasies, reveries and daydreams), regardless of how much soft or dominant or intellectual you are.
@abhirup
ReplyDeleteYes, I think you are very close to the mark. And we need to gain an understanding of what that subcoscious core is.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete