I really really really hate pseudo science. Especially when it is used for political agendas and to undermine social movements for equality. For example, take this recent article from "Science Daily":
Women Have Not Adapted To Casual Sex, Research Shows.
ScienceDaily (June 26, 2008) — The sexual and feminist revolutions were supposed to free women to enjoy casual sex just as men always had. Yet according to Professor Anne Campbell from Durham University in the UK, the negative feelings reported by women after one-night stands suggest that they are not well adapted to fleeting sexual encounters.
So from the start, the article sets up a struggle between feminism's goal of allowing women to be seen as full human (including sexual) beings and the idea that women might have negative feelings after a one-night stand. But feminism is not about forcing women to have one night stands. It is about allowing those women who want casual sex to have casual sex without judgment or retribution.
The real pseudo-science begins, however, in the second paragraph:
Men are more likely to reproduce and therefore to benefit from numerous
short-term partners. For women, however, quality seems to be more
important than quantity. Also for women, finding partners of high
genetic quality is a stronger motivator than sheer number, and it is
commonly believed that women are more willing to have casual sex when
there is a chance of forming a long-term relationship.
The article says this as if it were fact. But there is no credible science or evidence to back up any of these statements. In fact, almost all the sociological, anthropological, and biological data suggests the opposite -- that the number and length of sexual partnerships is based far more on geography, culture, economics, and social structure than on gender. In some cultures, women have more partners than men; in others, men more than women. This whole "biology is destiny" argument has about as much basis as the argument against climate change. Yet it is perpetuated by the media without any investigation into its veracity.
Next, we have this gem:
Professor Campbell looked at whether women have adapted to casual sex
by examining their feelings following a one-night stand. If women have
adapted, then although they may take part in casual sex less often than
men because of their stricter criteria when selecting partners, they
should rate the experience positively. To test the theory, a total of
1743 men and women who had experienced a one-night stand were asked to
rate both their positive and negative feelings the following morning,
in an internet survey.
Okay, first, Internet survey? Yeah, that's scientific. Second, evolutionary adaptation takes at least a generation and often centuries to happen. Modern feminism has only been with us for 30-40 years. Thus, even if there has been an evolutionary effect from feminism, we would only begin to see it among the youngest feminists. This study fails to take into account any age variation.
Next, we have the really interesting bit:
Overall women’s feelings were more negative than men’s. Eighty per cent
of men had overall positive feelings about the experience compared to
54 per cent of women.
Wait a minute. Stop the presses. 54% of women have positive feelings about one-night stands? Isn't that more women than not? Doesn't that mean that even this non-scientific, non-controlled, biased study suggests that most women have positive feelings about one-night stands and not the negative feelings suggested by the headline and the first several paragraphs?!?
Despite this, the article then goes on to reveal the real reason women are not enjoying one-night stands as much as they would like:
The predominant negative feeling reported by women was regret at
having been “used”. Women were also more likely to feel that they had
let themselves down and were worried about the potential damage to
their reputation if other people found out. Women found the experience
less sexually satisfying and, contrary to popular belief, they did not
seem to view taking part in casual sex as a prelude to long-term
relationships.
“What the women seemed to object to was not the briefness of the
encounter but the fact that the man did not seem to appreciate her. The
women thought this lack of gratitude implied that she did this with
anybody,” Professor Campbell explained.
So the real reason women aren't indulging in one-night stands as much as men (even though over half of them have positive feelings about it) is because of exactly what feminism is fighting against: being exploited, being judged, and not being appreciated. What I take away from this is that if women felt respected by both their partners and society for having one-night stands, they would have overwhelming positive feelings about such situations. That, to me, says much more about our society and how we judge women than about how well women are "adapting" to casual sex.
