A Multidimensional Framework for the Meanings of the Sexual Double Standard and its Application for the Sexual Health of Young Black Women in the U.S

Abstract

There has been debate in the literature as to whether a sexual double standard (SDS) currently exists in the United States. Studies vary greatly in how the SDS is operationalized, making it difficult to interpret findings across studies and translate academic literature into applied fields such as public health. To advance academic and applied research, we propose a multidimensional framework for the SDS that can accommodate complex and nuanced meanings, is flexible enough to allow for the dynamic nature of social ideologies, and is grounded in an understanding of social systems of inequality. In this article, we describe three dimensions that define the broad elements of the SDS: (a) polarized (hetero)sexualities, (b) active male and passive female roles, and (c) the power struggle narrative. To illustrate the use of the framework, we contextualize each dimension in terms of the intersection of race and gender for young Black women in the United States. And finally, to apply the framework, we explore the effects the SDS can have on sexual health and suggest some directions for public health interventions. These analyses lay the groundwork for more complex and comprehensive investigations of the SDS and its effects on sexual health.

The Potential of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for Women in Violent Relationships

“…In addition, PrEP stigma may lead to negative reactions from friends and family as the sexual double standard also suggests that women who adhere to this norm (i.e., good girls) are more worthy of respect and protection compared with those who do not. 23 The potential loss of external social supports due to PrEP use may be particularly problematic for women experiencing IPV because partners who are violent often attempt to isolate their partners from such supports.…”

“…25 Studies also suggest that women may view male sexual and relationship dominance (including force, coercion, pressure, and/or manipulation) as typical or acceptable aspects of heterosexual relationships. 23,24 While experiences of gendered power inequalities are not limited to women in violent relationships, violence may render women more vulnerable to these inequalities as well as increase the harmful consequences resulting from a breach of gendered sexual norms.…”

“…Furthermore, gendered social scripts regarding male control of sexual interactions and female sexual passivity can contribute to a reluctance to protect oneself against HIV as efforts to do so require a degree of sexual autonomy and agency. [23][24][25] Men may view violations of these sexual and relationship norms as a threat to their masculinity and may respond with violence. 25 Studies also suggest that women may view male sexual and relationship dominance (including force, coercion, pressure, and/or manipulation) as typical or acceptable aspects of heterosexual relationships.…”

“…For example, PrEP use is stigmatized because people associate its use with having multiple partners. 82,83 Gendered norms regarding female sexuality, such as a sexual double standard that dictates fidelity or chastity for women while encouraging male promiscuity, 23 may heighten this stigma among heterosexual women. The consequences of PrEP-associated stigma may be greater for women in violent relationships as it may increase partner violence in reaction to discovery of PrEP use.…”

A proposal of a measure of societal sexual double standard

“…The assessment of the prevalence of SDS is relevant for understanding sexual health, which is related to the ability to freely enjoy and express sexuality [3]. In accordance with this , SDS has been associated with several sexual related issues, such as sexual victimization [4,5], sexual assaults [4,6,7], higher risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections [8,9], and lower sexual satisfaction [10,11]. There are data that support the presence of SDS in Spanish society [12,13], as well as the existence of differential traditional sexual schemes for men and women, for example, in the field of sexual pleasure [14] or sexual satisfaction [15].…”