Sie sind auf Seite 1von 12

Running head: A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 1

A Review of Casual Sex Encounters

Name:

Institutional Affiliation:
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 2

A Review of Casual Sex Encounters

Introduction

The twenty-first century is an unmatched period in the record of the sexuality of humans.

In the US, the age when individuals first get married and have children has risen considerably,

whereas the age when teenagers reach puberty has reduced. This situation has resulted in an age

where youngsters are physiologically capable of getting children but not socially or

psychologically prepared to take up family responsibilities (Bogle, 2007; Garcia & Reiber,

2008).

Scientific studies suggest that these developmental changes are some of the dynamics

behind the rise in casual sex encounters, uncommitted sexual experiences, or hookups, a

component of a trendy cultural change that has permeated the existences of budding grownups

all over the Western civilization

Casual sex is getting more ingrained in accepted civilization, mirroring both transforming

sexual and social scripts, and evolved sexual preferences. Casual sex encounters may comprise a

broad range of sexual conducts like penetrative intercourse, oral sex, and kissing. Nonetheless,

these experiences mostly take place with no desire for or promise of a more conventional

romantic association.

This paper reviews the literature regarding casual sex encounters and reflects on research

regarding the psychological outcomes of hookups. This is a trans-disciplinary review of literature

that draws on hypothetical tensions and evidence between socio-cultural conjecture and

evolutionary conjectural models. It implies that these experiences are getting more and more
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 3

normative among teenagers and youngsters in North America and can best be comprehended

from a bio-psychosocial point of view.

The current casual sex culture symbolizes a marked change in acceptance and openness

of uncommitted sex.

A Cultural Uprising

Casual sex, described in this paper as short uncommitted sexual experiences between

people who are not dating one another or romantic partners, have surfaced from more broad

social changes occurring in the last century. Casual sex encounters started to get more common

in the 1920s, with the expansion of motor vehicles and novel leisure like film theaters. Instead of

wooing at home under a guardians vigilant eye, youngsters left home and got the capability to

discover their sexuality more liberally.

In the 1960s, youngsters got even more sexually freed, with the growth of feminism, the

rise of sex-integrated school party occasions, and broad accessibility of birth control. Currently,

sexual conduct outside of conventional committed, passionate pair-bonds has got more and more

common and generally tolerable (Bogle, 2007, 2008).

Many of todays youngsters detail some casual sex encounter. The most current data

imply that around sixty to eighty percent of tertiary institution learners in the US have had

various types of unfussy sexual encounter. This is in order with the perception of up-and-coming

maturity (common age of college) as a time of growth changeover (Arnett, 2000), internalizing

and exploring sexuality and affectionate relationship, now comprising casual sex (Stinson, 2010).
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 4

Even if a large amount of the contemporary exploration has been undertaken on higher

learning institution grounds, among youngsters, seventy percent of sexually active twelve to

twenty-one-year-olds detailed having participated in informal sex in the previous twelve months

(Grello et al., 2003). Correspondingly, in a test group of students in either the seventh, ninth or

eleventh grade, thirty-two percent of partakers had encountered sexual interaction and sixty-one

of sexually knowledgeable youngsters had had a sexual experience outside a romantic

association; this symbolizes around a fifth of the whole test population (Manning et al., 2006).

Emotional Reactions to Casual Sex Encounters

Approximately, both women and men appear to have elevated constructive affect than

unconstructive affect after casual sex. In one research, among partakers who were requested to

describe the morning after a casual sex encounter, 82% of males and 57% of females were by

and large happy they had had it (Garcia & Reiber, 2008). The percentage difference between

males and females is remarkable and illustrates standard sex dissimilarity in emotional

responses.

Likewise, both sexes also encounter some unconstructive affect also. In a subjective

research that requested a hundred and eighty seven partakers to detail their thoughts following a

distinctive casual sex encounter, 35% detailed feeling disappointed or regretful, 27% happy or

good, 20% contented, 11% perplexed, 9% pompous, 7% nervous or excited, 5% uneasy, and 2%

wanted or desirable (Paul & Hayes, 2002).Nevertheless, the research also established that

emotions varied through casual sex weighed against after casual sex: in a common casual sex

encounter, sixty-five percent of partakers detailed feeling excited, aroused, or good, seventeen

percent wanted or desirable, seventeen percent nothing in particular or were on the casual sex
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 5

encounter, eight percent regretful or embarrassed, seven percent scared or nervous, six percent

puzzled, and five percent pompous (Paul & Hayes, 2002).

Casual Sex Culture and Sexual Threat

In spite of the commonness of affirmative feelings, casual sex encounters can comprise

negative consequences like unintended pregnancy, diseases that are transmitted sexually, sexual

cruelty, and psychological and emotional injury. In spite of those threats a subjective research of

seventy-one university learners (thirty-nine females and thirty-two males) established that almost

half of the partakers were not worried regarding getting infections that are transmitted through

sex from penetration during a casual sexual encounter, and most were not concerned regarding

getting infections from cunnilingus or fellatio in casual sexual encounters (Downing-Matibag &

Geisinger, 2009).

Complicating the threat of infections, individuals who engage in casual sexual encounters are

more likely to have multiple sexual partners. Furthermore, in a study population of one thousand

four hundred and sixty-eight university learners, in the four hundred and twenty-nine learners

who had engrossed in vaginal intercourse, anal sex, or oral sex in their most recent casual sexual

encounters, merely 46.6% detailed utilizing a condom (Lewis et al., 2011).

Casual Sex Culture and Psychological Health

A personal history of casual sex conduct has been linked to various psychological

wellness dynamics. In a research of three hundred and ninety-four youngsters followed over a

college three-month term, those who had higher depressive warning signs and higher feelings of

lonesomeness who participated in interactional casual sex afterward detailed a decrease in both

feelings of aloneness and depressive indications (Owen et al., 2011). Simultaneously, partakers
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 6

who detailed lesser depressive indicators and lesser loneliness feelings who took part in casual

sexual intercourse consequently documented a rise in the mutual feelings of isolation and

depressive indicators (Owen et al., 2011). In another research, among two hundred and ninety-

one sexually knowledgeable persons, folks who had the greatest regret following casual sexual

intercourse also had higher indicators of despair than the ones who had no lamentations (Welsh

et al., 2006). Nevertheless, in the same test population, females and not males extent of

depressive indications rose with the quantity of past sex patterns in the previous twelve months

(Welsh et al., 2006).

In the earliest investigation to examine the subject of sense of worth and casual sex, both

women and men who had ever participated in casual sex had lesser general confidence score

weighed against those with no unattached sexual encounters (Paul et al., 2000). The probable

underlying course of the link between sense of worth and casual sex is not yet clear (Fielder &

Carey, 2010; Paul et al., 2000).

Just as numerous stimuli can be in quarrel, an individuals affective response during and

after casual sex can be in disagreement. Inconsistencies between desires and conducts,

specifically with reverence to social-sexual associations, have spectacular propositions for

mental and physical wellness. In spite of the allure of participating in casual sex, scientific

studies indicate that individuals take part in these conducts even when they are not comfortable

about them (Lambert et al., 2003; Reiber & Garcia, 2010). Additionally, folks overrate the

comfort of other regarding uncommitted sex and allot variable connotations to those conducts

(Lambert et al., 2003; Reiber & Garcia, 2010). Misjudgment of sexual customs is one probable

motivator for individuals to conduct themselves in a way they do not individually approve. In a

duplication and expansion of Lambert et al.'s (2003) research Reiber and Garcia (2010)
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 7

established that seventy-eight percent of persons overrated the comfort of others concerning

many dissimilar casual sex conducts, with males predominantly overrating the actual comfort of

females with various casual sex behaviors.

Casual sex situations may comprise feelings of pressure and performance nervousness,

adding in to feelings of distress. According to a study on casual sex by Paul et al. (2000), sixteen

percent of partakers felt strained during their characteristic hookup. In the sample, twelve percent

of partakers felt out of power when penetration was not engrossed, while twenty-two percent felt

out of power when sexual penetration occurred. (It should be noted that this research questioned

partakers concerning normal hookups, and even if this is useful for overall models, it does not

capture definite dynamics swaying particular individual situations. For example, it is not clear

how one might rate a characteristic casual sex encounter if one occasion engrossed sexual

compulsion and lamentation while the other, after or before, was consenting and more

pleasurable).

Casual sex can lead to negative feelings and guilt. In an investigation of one hundred and

sixty-nine sexually experienced women and men assessed in bars meant for singles, when

handed the proclamation I feel culpable or would feel culpable regarding engaging in sexual

penetration with a person I had just known, seventy-two of females and thirty-two percent

males concurred (Herold & Mewhinney, 1993). The proportion of females conveying culpability

was further than double that of males. This finding is in line with an archetypal research

undertaken by Clark and Hatfield (1989) that established that males are a lot more probable than

females to allow informal sex propositions from persons they find eye-catching. Conley (2011)

imitated and expanded this establishment, illustrating that, under particular circumstances of

supposed soothe, the sexual category dissimilarities in approval of uncommitted sex are reduced.
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 8

Qualitative accounts of casual sex encounters divulge comparative sex category

dissimilarities regarding afterward feelings, with females exhibiting more unconstructive

responses than males (Paul & Hayes, 2002). The finding is also in line with previous work

illustrating sex dissimilarity, with females, by and large, identifying more emotional engagement

in apparently uncommitted (low investment) sexual experiences than males (Townsend,

1995).Furthermore, in a research of one hundred and forty ( one hundred and nine female and

thirty-one male), foremost semester undergraduates, females and not males, who had participated

in casual sex indicated greater rates of psychological anguish (Fielder & Carey, 2010). Probably

adding to findings on sex category dissimilarities in notions of anxiety, in a sample of five

hundred and seven undergraduate learners, more females than males hoped that connection

would grow following a casual sex encounter. Merely 4.4% of males and 8.2% of females

(6.45% of partakers) anticipated conventional romantic association as a result, while twenty-nine

percent of males and 42.9 percent of females (36.57% of partakers) idyllically sought such an

eventuality (Garcia & Reiber, 2008). Therefore, it is likely that lamentation and unconstructive

outcomes from casual sex encounters result from people endeavoring to bargain numerous

wishes. Finally, it is probable that a considerable fraction of budding grownups currently is

constrained to openly take part in casual sex while yearning both instant sexual satisfaction and

more steady loving attachments.

Conclusion

Casual sex, now being studied across various disciplines and theoretical perspectives is

best comprehended as a bio-psycho-social occurrence. Evidence implies that both reproductive


A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 9

and pleasure intentions may control these sexual models, as witnessed in partakers responses

after hookups. Moreover, the discoveries that a majority of both males and females are motivated

to take part in casual sex, but mostly yearn a more passionate association, are in line with a toned

perspective that takes into detail new models of development, transforming social scripts, and

biological and cross-cultural centrality of the pair-attachment.

By description, casual sex encounters offer the attraction of sex with no emotional

attachments. In spite of their growing social tolerability, nonetheless, budding studies imply that

casual sexual encounters may leave more emotional attachments than most partakers might

initially assume. Additionally, in spite of the ordinariness of confirmatory feelings, casual sexual

experiences can have harmful consequences like inadvertent pregnancy, infections that are

transmitted via sex, sexual brutality, and mental and emotional harm.

References
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 10

Arnett, J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the

twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-480. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-

066x.55.5.469

Bogle, K. (2007). The shift from dating to hooking up in college: What scholars have missed.

Sociology Compass, 1(2), 775788.

Bogle, K. (2008). Hooking up: Sex, dating, and relationships on campus. New York, NY: New

York University Press.

Clark, R. (1989). Gender Differences in Receptivity to Sexual Offers. Journal Of Psychology &

Human Sexuality, 2(1), 39-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/j056v02n01_04

Conley, T. (2011). Perceived proposer personality characteristics and gender differences in

acceptance of casual sex offers. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology,

100(2), 309-329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022152

Downing-Matibag, T., & Geisinger, B. (2009). Hooking Up and Sexual Risk Taking Among

College Students: A Health Belief Model Perspective. Qualitative Health

Research, 19(9), 1196-1209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049732309344206

Fielder, R., & Carey, M. (2009). Predictors and Consequences of Sexual Hookups Among

College Students: A Short-term Prospective Study. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 39(5),

1105-1119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9448-4

Garcia, J., & Reiber, C. (2008). Hook-up behavior: A biopsychosocial perspective. The Journal

of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2, 192208.


A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 11

Grello, C., Welsh, D., & Harper, M. (2006). No strings attached: The nature of casual sex in

college students. Journal Of Sex Research, 43(3), 255-267.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224490609552324

Grello, C., Welsh, D., Harper, M., & Dickson, J. (2003). Dating and sexual relationship

trajectories and adolescent functioning. Adolescent & Family Health, 3, 103112.

Herold, E., & Mewhinney, D. (1993). Gender differences in casual sex and AIDS prevention: A

survey of dating bars. Journal Of Sex Research, 30(1), 36-42.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224499309551676

Kunkel, D., Eyal, K., Finnerty, K., Biely, E., & Donnerstein, E. (2005). Sex on TV 4. Menlo

Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Lambert, T., Kahn, A., & Apple, K. (2003). Pluralistic ignorance and Hooking up. Journal Of

Sex Research, 40(2), 129-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224490309552174

Lewis, M., Granato, H., Blayney, J., Lostutter, T., & Kilmer, J. (2011). Predictors of Hooking Up

Sexual Behaviors and Emotional Reactions Among U.S. College Students.

Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 41(5), 1219-1229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9817-2

Manning, W., Giordano, P., & Longmore, M. (2006). Hooking Up. Journal Of Adolescent

Research, 21(5), 459-483. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0743558406291692

Owen, J., & Fincham, F. (2010). Young Adults Emotional Reactions After Hooking Up

Encounters. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 40(2), 321-330.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9652-x
A REVIEW OF CASUAL SEX ENCOUNTERS 12

Owen, J., Fincham, F., & Moore, J. (2011). Short-Term Prospective Study of Hooking Up

Among College Students. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 40(2), 331-341.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9697-x

Paul, E., & Hayes, K. (2002). The Casualties of `Casual' Sex: A Qualitative Exploration of the

Phenomenology of College Students' Hookups. Journal Of Social And Personal

Relationships, 19(5), 639-661. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407502195006

Paul, E., McManus, B., & Hayes, A. (2000). Hookups: Characteristics and correlates of

college students' spontaneous and anonymous sexual experiences. Journal Of Sex

Research, 37(1), 76-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224490009552023

Reiber, C., & Garcia, J. (2010). Hooking up: Gender differences, evolution, and pluralistic

ignorance. Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 390 404.

Stinson, R. (2010). Hooking Up in Young Adulthood: A Review of Factors Influencing the

Sexual Behavior of College Students. Journal Of College Student Psychotherapy, 24(2),

98-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/87568220903558596

Townsend, J. (1995). Sex without emotional involvement: An evolutionary interpretation of sex

differences. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 24(2), 173-206.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01541580

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen