Introduction
For the past seven million years of human evolution, humans have survived and thrived through the mutative and adaptive processes of both natural and sexual selection. Alterations of gene expression along with the transformation that humans undertook with each passing subsequent generation was a vital necessity in the process of the survival and progression of the species (Goldberg et al., 2018; Hosken & House, 2011). Through these two selective processes, males and females have both mate choice and sexual preferences inherit in their biological and perceptual systems. These systems help guide not only mating and sexual preferences, but corresponding behaviors that help achieve such mating success. This is paramount in understanding gender differentiation regarding sexuality. Another theory to be considered when analyzing gender differentiation in sexual behavior is that of sexual economic theory which is concomitant with that of sexual selection. This theory posits that males and females exchange resources in effort to fulfill mating desires through the process of weighing costs and benefits in choosing mates. Females generally seek out financial security and a stable partner to help raise offspring by providing an exclusive sexual engagement and social contract with a male counterpart (Baumeister et al., 2017).
In addition to understanding gender sexuality differentiation, there must also be clarification as to what classifies a pathological means of sexual behavior among the genders and a healthy means. Although a majority of the population adheres to a “healthier” means of achieving sexual satisfaction, there are those in the sexual minority camp that do not. This, of course, is not to say that all those that reside outside of the average pathway of sexual satisfaction are deemed unhealthy behaviors, but rather that within this camp there are those that push the bounds to the point of healthy maintenance, while there are others that have allowed sexual satisfaction to become the overarching aim of their perceptual framework. Those that are deemed unhealthy sexual seekers are best defined as desires and behaviors that consume an individual’s existence while neglecting all other matters such as family, work, health and well-being, friendships, etc. (King & Regan, 2019).
Sexual Selection
Sexual selection theory, first postulated by Charles Darwin in the 19th century, refers to the mating choice and success between males and females for reproductive purposes. Females are those that choose mates based off certain “healthy traits” exhibited through physical and psychological characteristics and abilities, while males compete amongst each other for social hierarchal position for increased selectivity of female mating opportunities (Jones & Ratterman, 2009). These traits are indicative of “good genes” that are then carried through subsequent generations which are aggregated across time that produce stronger, healthier, and more intelligent generations that help the survival and propagation of the species as a whole (Hosken & House, 2011).
Sexual Economic Theory
As mentioned previously, sexual economic theory postulates that males and females exchange resources (generally exclusive sexual access from females in exchange for wealth and security from males) through a process of weighing out costs and benefits in potential mate interaction. This strategic means of mating is predicated upon a supply and demand dynamic wherein female access is a demand and the number of available females a supply, although this can shift with any given context where there is an imbalance in gender ration where females outnumber males, and thus supply exceeds demand and the price for sex is low. In this framework, females compete among one another to appear more attractive for potential male mates, while males compete against one another to seem like a better provider than their rivals. (Baumeister et al., 2017).
Gender Difference in Mate Selection
Both sexual selection and sexual economic theory have been defined, and yet what do these theories have to do with male and female differences in sexuality? First, a better understanding of mate preference and selection among the two genders should be attained before light can be shed on sexual preferences and differences. According to sexual selection, mate preferences among males and females have evolved wherein females tend to prefer more masculine type males that are physically fit, taller than average, industrious, brave, symmetrical (Peters et al., 2009), and high socioeconomic status, all of which are indicative of higher testosterone levels and good overall health, which also equate to healthy offspring. Moreover, males prefer females that are younger, neotenous, facial femininity, low hip-to-waist ratio, and petite-like features. Mating strategies among males and females have also evolved differently with females seeking out long-term partnerships while males generally desire short-term sexual engagement. Although there are quite a few distinctive differences between males and females regarding mate preference, there are also similarities between the genders when it comes to long-term mating strategies that include desired traits such as respectful, kind, trustworthy, and committed (Buss, 2023).
In relationship to sexual economic theory, males and females differ in their exchange of resources with males seeking the resource of exclusive sexual access in exchange for resources of economic security and status. This exchange rate, of course, comes at an even greater costs for females besides solely allowing access to sexual intercourse, but also the potential for pregnancy. This supply and demand dynamic has influenced females to prefer male mates that are high socioeconomic status and willing to commit to a long-term relationship, while males prefer female mates that are attractive and sexually promiscuous, often through the perceptual lens of a short-term mating strategy (Baumeister et al., 2017).
Gender Differences in Sexual Preferences
With sexual selection and sexual economic theory in mind, how do these two theories help increase understanding of gender differences in sexuality? The short answer is mostly through the long-term impact and influence of the reciprocal environmental, social, and interpersonal factors mentioned earlier that have shaped both the perceptual system and brain that males and females possess. This process of reciprocal influence can be broken down into three primary domains: Long-term versus short-term mating strategies, perceived attractiveness, and testosterone.
Females on average desire more intimate, long-term relationships with a male counterpart while the opposite is true of males. This long-term strategy among females has helped influence a sexuality orientation that favors more intimate, romantic, and affectionate characteristics. Males on the other hand prefer more explicit and visual imagery when engaging in sexual activities that is related to predominately physically attractive features which reflects a more spontaneous and short-term mating strategy. Even though males predominately mate in accordance with perceived attractiveness, females too seek out partners, although to a lesser degree, that are attractive (King & Regan, 2019). One study conducted by Sherlock and colleagues found that higher rated orgasms among female participants were more frequent when engaged with a partner who was perceived as attractive compared to less attractive partners (2016).
Testosterone is another factor that plays a rather large role in sexual propensity among the male population as it helps increase sexual drive (Corona & Maggi, 2022), and it is associated with characteristics of increased appeal that females seek out in their male counterparts such as increased height and muscle mass (Peters et al., 2009). Heightened testosterone is also linked to increased assertiveness and dominance (Knight et al., 2022), which can be associated with the sexual fantasy of dominance that is favored by men and sexual submission that is favored by women (King & Regan, 2019). Moreover, females during ovulation, which is a time of increased sex drive, prefer more masculine males that is associated with higher testosterone levels (Little et al., 2013).
The Effects of Social Changes on Mate and Sexual Preferences
Although the selective mating patterns mentioned previously are still evident today among males and females, both social changes and technological advancements such as oral contraceptives, gender equality, and lower sexual engagement have shifted the initial perceptual mate preferences in another direction. For instance, oral contraceptive cause females to not ovulate, a time wherein females estrogen levels increase dramatically which contribute to increased perceived attractiveness by males (Roberts et al., 2004). Moreover, this anti-ovulation feature of oral contraceptives is also shifting females to become more attracted to less masculine males (Little et al., 2013).
The influence of gender equality in modern society has revealed its benefits for all of society, and yet there are changes that have influence the sexual dynamic interplay between males and females. These factors include the lowered desire for a high socioeconomic status in potential male partners (March & Grieve, 2014), and an increased prevalence for a dominant position during sexual intercourse (King & Regan, 2019). Another social change of consideration is that of lower levels of sexual engagement and increased celibacy among both males and females. From 2000 to 2016, men report an overall decline of weekly intercourse dropped from 60% to 47%This change in sex drive is multifaceted with influencing factors such as increased phone and internet usage, longer commutes, and financial stress (Castleman, 2021).
References
American Psychological Association, (2019). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
Baumeister, R., Reynolds, T., Winegard, B., & Vohs., K.D. (2017). Competing for love: Applying sexual economics theory to mating contests. Journal of Economic Psychology. 63, 230-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2017.07.009
Buss, D., (2006). Strategies of Human Mating. Psychological Topics. 15. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/41391479_Strategies_of_Human_Mating/citation/download
Buss, D., (2023). The Sexual Selection of Human Mating Strategies: Mate Preferences and Competition Tactics. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197524718.013.1.
Burtăverde, V., & Ene, C., (2021). The influence of environmental and social characteristics on women’s mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 175, 110736, ISSN 0191-8869, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110736
Cameron, J. J., Stinson, D. A., (2022). Ethical Gender/Sex Measurement in Canadian Research. Canadian Psychological Association, 63(4), 536–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap000033
Corona, G., & Maggi, M. (2022). The role of testosterone in male sexual function. Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders, 23(6), 1159–1172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11154-022-09748-3
Goldberg, A., Uricchio, L., & Rosenberg, N., (2018). Natural Selection in Human Populations. Evolutionary Biology – Oxford Bibliographies. DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780199941728-0112
Hosken, D. J., House, C. M., (2011). Sexual selection. Current Biology, 21 (2), R62-R65, ISSN 0960-9822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2010.11.053
Knight, E. L., Morales, P. J., Christian, C. B., Prasad, S., Harbaugh, W. T., Mehta, P. H., & Mayr, U. (2022). The causal effect of testosterone on men’s competitive behavior is moderated by basal cortisol and cues to an opponent’s status: Evidence for a context-dependent dual-hormone hypothesis. Journal of personality and social psychology, 123(4), 693–716. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000305
Little, A. C., Burriss, R. P., Petrie, M., Jones, B. C., & Roberts, S. C. (2013). Oral contraceptive use in women changes preferences for male facial masculinity and is associated with partner facial masculinity. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(9), 1777–1785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2013.02.014
National Academy of Sciences (US); Avise JC, Ayala FJ, editors. In the Light of Evolution: Volume III: Two Centuries of Darwin. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2009. 9, Mate Choice and Sexual Selection: What Have We Learned Since Darwin? Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK219729/
Peters, M., Simmons, L. W., & Rhodes, G. (2009). Preferences across the menstrual cycle for masculinity and symmetry in photographs of male faces and bodies. PloS one, 4(1), e4138. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0004138
Price, G. C., Jansen, K. L., & Weick, M. R. (2020). Let’s talk about sex: Ethical considerations in survey research with minority populations. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 6(3), 214–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000270
Qiao H. (2018). A brief introduction to institutional review boards in the United States. Pediatric investigation, 2(1), 46–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/ped4.12023
Roberts, S. C., Havlicek, J., Flegr, J., Hruskova, M., Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., Perrett, D. I., & Petrie, M. (2004). Female facial attractiveness increases during the fertile phase of the menstrual cycle. Proceedings. Biological sciences, 271 Suppl 5(Suppl 5), S270–S272. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2004.0174
Sherlock, J. M., Sidari, M. J., Harris, E. A., Barlow, F. K., & Zietsch, B. P. (2016). Testing the mate-choice hypothesis of the female orgasm: disentangling traits and behaviours. Socioaffective neuroscience & psychology, 6, 31562. https://doi.org/10.3402/snp.v6.31562
Michael Thacker 