356

A team of researchers, including Binghamton psychology professor Richard Mattson and graduate student Michael Shaw asked men between the ages of 18–25 to respond to hypothetical sexual hookup situations in which a woman responds passively to a sexual advance, meaning the woman does not express any overt verbal or behavioral response to indicate consent to increase the level of physical intimacy. The team then surveyed how consensual each man perceived the situation to be, as well as how he would likely behave.

The work is published in the journal Sex Roles.

"A passive response to a sexual advance is a normative indicator of consent, but also might reflect distress or fear, and whether men are able to differentiate between the two during a hookup was important to explore," said Mattson.

The team found that men varied in their perception of passive responses in terms of consent and that the level of perceived consent was strongly linked to an increased likelihood of continuing or advancing sexual behavior.

"The biggest takeaway is that men differed in how they interpreted an ambiguous female response to their sexual advances with respect to their perception of consent, which in turn influenced their sexual decisions," said Mattson.

"But certain types of men (e.g., those high in toxic masculine traits) tended to view situations as more consensual and reported that they would escalate the level of sexual intimacy regardless of whether or not they thought it was consensual."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] weaponG@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

If we are going to broadly add buzzword adjectives to one gender, we should add them to all genders, equally: toxic femininity.

[-] EmilyIsTrans 33 points 1 year ago

Just because you don't understand academic terminology doesn't mean it is a buzzword

[-] weaponG@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

That is hardly academic. Rather it is tied to a generation that misunderstands the basis of gender as a whole.

[-] EmilyIsTrans 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah see, I don't think you get it. First of all the term has existed across multiple generations at this point, and really only unifies discussions of hegemonic masculinity that have spanned far longer.

Secondly, and more importantly, toxic masculinity has nothing to do with the "basis of gender", unless of course you're claiming that these traits are inherent to males, in which case I suggest you start with "The Second Sex" and work your way up to a real conversation. To put it simply for you, toxic masculinity is just a term used to encompass certain behaviours, and (more importantly) how they are taught and reinforced. It's obviously more complex than that, I haven't even mentioned the study of how the rigid enforcement of these behaviours can negatively affect men, but I suggest you learn from a book instead of random women on Lemmy.

[-] Lemminary@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

toxic femininity

Yes, that is a thing. So is performative masculinity/femininity and so on.

The problem is that one is disparately expressed more than the other so you hear about that often. Like, toxicity over underperforming masculinity can get you harassed, bullied, and even killed. Toxic masculinity can also lead to rape if a woman isn't feminine enough.

[-] slacktoid@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe elaborate? I know what toxic masculinity means, what do you mean by that, and toxic femininity? (everyones a shithead but bring receipts if you wanna be taken seriously)

[-] weaponG@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago
[-] slacktoid@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

Bite my shiny metal ass

[-] Catoblepas 22 points 1 year ago

What do you think the researchers mean by toxic masculinity? And how is “toxic femininity” relevant to this study?

[-] weaponG@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

How is the combination of adjective plus noun going to get you an unbiased study? Toxic anything creates bias before the research on anything has begun.

[-] Catoblepas 10 points 1 year ago

What do you think the researchers mean by toxic masculinity? And how is “toxic femininity” relevant to this study?

[-] sparkle@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Toxic masculinity" is a term with a certain usage by sociology/psychology/gender studies/etc. researchers which is separate from "masculinity". Toxic masculinity is using performative gender expression / the presence or absence of certain gendered traits as a way to determine how "man" someone is. Toxic masculinity can be considered basically weaponizing the concept of masculinity, directly or indirectly. People who display stronger beliefs/behaviours/traits indicative of said toxic masculinity are labelled as having more toxic masculinity (poor wording I would say since it's not something you "have").

Not sure where you think "bias" comes into play. Biased in what way? Who or what is being biased for or against here?

[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Feel free to explain how this "toxic feminity" poses a threat to all and sundry on a daily basis.

[-] weaponG@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Feel free to explain the opposite. It's a poor premise of masculinity, if that is what you think of it.

[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

It’s a poor premise of masculinity

Perhaps because masculinity itself is such a piss-poor premise.

this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
356 points (100.0% liked)

News

31384 readers
2301 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS