Instead of liberating women from the unjustified and prejudicial sexual double standard, the suggestions offered in connection with securing marriage proposals actually do the exact opposite by encouraging women to play into preconceived stereotypes and attitudes that ensure their continued social and sexual inequality.
Conversely, according to contemporary psychologists with formal training in human relations and psychosexual development, redressing the social and sexual inequality still faced by women in modern society requires a diametrically opposite approach to understanding the fundamental basis of moral judgment. Specifically, it requires recognizing the illusory, illogical, and unfair assumptions that are responsible for generating completely different sets of rules and behavioral expectations based on gender
(Branden, 1999; 91, 98, 111). Instead of encouraging women to continue conforming their behavior to traditional expectations imposed by invalid presumptions of "acceptable" female social and sexual conduct, the more sound advice would be to critically evaluate the worth of prospective male mates who still subscribe to them.
Nowhere in the philosophy espoused by Fein & Schneider throughout their work is any indication that believing in antiquated sexual stereotypes and nonsensical values on the part of males lessens their desirability as prospective partners for long-term commitment. In fact, their advice is flawed on several different levels. First, even if
delaying the onset of sexual relations within relationships does succeed in prolonging the "honeymoon" phase of the relationship (Fein & Schneider, 72-73) and even increase the determination of the man to establish an exclusive relationship leading to marriage, the ultimate result is counterproductive. That is because the reciprocal aspect of the honeymoon period neglected from their analysis is that the truest measure of a man's genuine feelings about a woman very often only begin to become evident after consummation...
Therefore, if anything, the goal of the woman to be to discover a man's genuine level of interest by allowing sexual relations to develop naturally.
Second, the authors never suggest that perhaps a man's subscribing to the profoundly unfair traditional sexual inequality in sexual mores is a character flaw that should factor into his worthiness as a potential marital partner. Certainly, most men do maintain conflicted moral values that cause them to doubt the moral character of women who express themselves sexually as freely as men are encouraged to in society.
However, there are undoubtedly also men of much higher moral character and intellectual integrity (Branden, 1999; 47, 133) who would respect a woman for rejecting unfounded sexual mores. The much more sound advice to women would be to limit their choice of prospective male suitors to those not encumbered by rigid, unexamined adherence to illogical and unfair social mores.
In principle, no man who accepts the ridiculous premise that a person's gender ought to determine the moral character of their behavior should be considered a viable prospect for a meaningful relationship by any woman who does not happen to share that same point-of-view. However, the mere fact that Fein & Schneider must preach that women resist some of their own urges is ample evidence that their advice is intended for women who actually reject the validity of the gender-based sexual double standard.
In effect, their advice is that women abandon their independent view of the underlying moral issues and that they seek to secure marriage proposals from prospective partners who do not share their fundamental beliefs and "world view." Unfortunately,
this is the antithesis of the suggestions from trained psychologists according to whom a shared world view and a similar perspective of fundamental moral issues and beliefs is one of the most crucial determinants of long-term compatibility after the honeymoon period of relationships end (Branden 1999, 197-201). Therefore, if the goal is to secure a marriage proposal from the highest quality individual who is most compatible at the deepest level of meaningful values and thought, perhaps the single best rule of all is simply to avoid any of the suggestions offered in the Rules.
Ackerman, Diane. A Natural History of Love. New York: Vintage (1995).
Baker, Robert, and Elliston, Frederick. Philosophy & Sex. Buffalo: Prometheus (1998).
Branden, Nathaniel. The Psychology of Romantic Love. New York: Bantam (1999).
Fein, Ellen, and Schneider, Sherrie. All the Rules: Time Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right. New York: Grand Central Publishing (2007).
Margulis, Lynn, and Sagan, Dorion. Mystery Dance: On the Evolution of Human
Sexuality. New York: Summit (1999).
Zuk, Marlene Sexual Selection: What We…
" Conclusion: The gender-based sexual double standard is logically indefensible on any level. Piercing the thin veil of justifications offered supporting it requires little more than substitution of the identity of the subjects in any hypothetical or analogy based on the premise. Nevertheless, it persists throughout most of American culture, and sadly, its manifestations in the Western World are infinitely more benign than the cruelty it inspires elsewhere. Ultimately, its roots lie both
Western Sexual Mores and Fundamental Beliefs about Romantic Love: Beyond the unfair effect of gender-based differential sexual socialization on sexually liberated women in dating relationships, another component of American social psychology often undermines romantic happiness. Specifically, the many messages about romance and marriage that help shape the American view of love suggest that: (1) sexual desire between couples who love each other is exclusive; (2) sexual desire for others indicates a
Unfortunately, ordinary experience is enough to demonstrate how often that dynamic encourages deceptive behavior by men in the pursuit of sex. Put simply, most of the time that women are receptive to sexuality with a particular male partner, they would be at least potentially interested in more of a relationship with that particular man; otherwise, they are much less likely to become sexual with him. The same is not
In comparison to traditional sexual education programs, it provides absolutely no benefit, and conceivably causes additional harm attributable to the deliberate withholding of invaluable information about STD transmission and unwanted pregnancy. As part of its message, it distorts the truth about the relative effectiveness of condom use, thereby only decreasing the likelihood that teenagers who ultimately choose to reject abstinence (as virtually all adults do in our society before
Gender and Domestic Violence Discussions of domestic violence almost always implicate modern gender norms because of the assumption that gender norms overtly and subtly promote the idea of violence against women. First, social roles about masculinity mean that, almost across cultures, it is the male role to protect and provide for the family, which includes an element of control over female family members. Next, there is the notion that some societies
Likewise, woman in Saudi Arabia are still suppressed enough that they are not allowed to drive on the road. When recently one Saudi woman rebelled and was jailed and the foreign media raised the issue, the government of Saudi Arabia stood firm by their laws pertaining to female liberties in the face of the international media. 3. Provide an overview of hegemonic masculinity The concept of hegemonic masculinity is a normative