SSStttooonnnyyy BBBrrrooooookkk UUUnnniiivvveeerrrsssiiitttyyy The official electronic file of this thesis or dissertation is maintained by the University Libraries on behalf of The Graduate School at Stony Brook University. ©©© AAAllllll RRRiiiggghhhtttsss RRReeessseeerrrvvveeeddd bbbyyy AAAuuuttthhhooorrr... Sexual Decision Making in the Context of Hookup Culture: A Mixed-Method Examination A Dissertation Presented by Rachel Kalish to The Graduate School in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology Stony Brook University May 2014 Copyright by Rachel Kalish 2014 Stony Brook University The Graduate School Rachel Kalish We, the dissertation committee for the above candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, hereby recommend acceptance of this dissertation. Michael S. Kimmel – Dissertation Advisor Professor, Sociology Kenneth A. Feldman - Chairperson of Defense Professor, Sociology Catherine Marrone Lecturer, Sociology Paula England Professor of Sociology, New York University This dissertation is accepted by the Graduate School Charles Taber Dean of the Graduate School ii Abstract of the Dissertation Sexual Decision Making in the Context of Hookup Culture: A Mixed-Method Examination by Rachel Kalish Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology Stony Brook University 2014 This dissertation is a multi-method study of college students’ sexual decision-making. It relies on interviews and focus groups to examine how college students make decisions within the context of the “hook-up culture” (Heldman and Wade 2010) prominent on American campuses. Patterns in the qualitative data are examined quantitatively using the Online College Social Life Survey. To understand how students make decisions in hookup culture, I examine their views of relationships, how they enact relationships, and the effects of hooking up on relationships. I find that students envision relationships in their future, and choose not to expend time on them during their early undergraduate studies. Counter to common stereotypes, both male and female students express experience with and desire for relationships, which often form after a period of hooking up, not traditional dating, yet high-status students are more likely to experience dates and relationships. Hooking up also impacts relationships, as students rely on gendered stereotypes to evaluate their peers’ behaviors and motivations; females think that males want sex, and males expect females to want a relationship, which complicates things for students whose desires are counter to these stereotypes. I next examine decisions about choice of partner and sexual activity. Gender expectations shape these choices for undergraduates. Men make decisions based on the accolades they expect from peers, while women make decisions to shield them from being labeled a slut, evidence of the double standard. To men, a “good” partner is one who is highly desired by others; women consider a “good” partner someone who is trusting and non-coercive. These gendered stereotypes also factor into sexual behaviors, where women engage in sex acts to cement the bond with her partner, as evidence of the relational imperative. Young men are also affected, and engage in sex acts when they do not want to, but do so to mitigate against any threat to his masculinity. As a result of gender role expectations, much of the sex on college iii campuses may not be fully desired by the parties, but it is an agentic choice because of the social outcome it produces. iv Dedication Page This dissertation is dedicated to the memory of my grandparents, William and Evelyn Kalish and Mitzi and Mack Rapp, who taught me how important it is to “have fun and learn something.” v Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Background of Study 1 Problem Statement 2 Significance of the Study 2 Overview of Methodology 3 Research Questions and Hypotheses 3 Delimitations 5 Background: Factors encouraging the emergence of hooking up 6 Review of Literature on Hooking Up 13 Chapter 2: Theory 22 Gender Performativity 30 Agency 36 Chapter 3: Methodology 41 General Perspective 41 Research Context 43 Research Participants 43 Interviews 43 Focus Groups 46 Online College Social Life Survey 47 Instruments Used in Data Collection 48 Interviews 48 Focus Groups 50 Survey 51 Analysis 52 Qualitative Analysis 52 Quantitative Analysis 52 Mixed Methods 54 Summary and Conclusion 55 Chapter 4: Relationships 56 Dating 56 Hooking up as a Pathway to Relationships 65 Views of Relationships 66 Sex in Relationships 71 Views of Hooking up Compared to Relationships 74 Effects of Hooking up on Relationships 78 Sexual Agency in Relationships: “There’s no cuddling in a hookup” 87 Campus Culture and the Hegemony of Hooking Up 90 Discussion 93 Chapter 5: Asserting Agency 97 Establishing Exclusivity 98 vi Contraception and Safe Sex 104 Choice of Partner 109 Sexual Behaviors 118 Discussion 123 Chapter 6: Abdicating Agency 126 Young Women 126 Young Men 144 Discussion 148 Chapter 7: Discussion and Conclusion 152 Statement of Problem and Methods 152 Summary of Results 153 Discussion 156 Collegiate Context 156 Hegemonic Masculinity 158 Emphasized Femininity 160 Implications 163 Limitations and Directions for Future Research 165 Conclusion 167 Bibliography 169 Appendix A: Interview Guide 181 vii List of Tables Table 3-1 45 Characteristics of Participants Table 4-1 60 Do You Go on Dates? Table 4-2 64 Students’ Reports of Hooking Up and Dating as a Pathway to a Relationship Table 4-3 68 Have You had a Relationship? Table 4-4 73 Sexual Activity in Most Recent Hookup and Relationship Table 5-1 100 How Did it Become Clear this Person was your Boyfriend or Girlfriend? Table 5-2 102 How Did you Become Exclusive? Table 6-1 141 Have you ever “Finished” a Partner? viii Acknowledgments This dissertation would not have been completed without the help of many people over the course of my graduate career. I would very much like to thank my Chair, Michael Kimmel, for his unwavering support over my graduate (and undergraduate) career. He has been instrumental in guiding this research, and assisting me with gaining access to data, participants, and helping me to get feedback on my work from other experts in the field. My Defense Chair, Ken Feldman, has also been a major source of support, from preparing me for my Specialty Examination, to giving me feedback on my teaching, to editorial assistance on my dissertation. Cathy Marrone has been inspirational to me from the start of my graduate career. She has shown me what kind of a teacher and scholar I can be, and does so with a fresh outlook on teaching and research. I am especially indebted to my Outside Committee Member, Paula England, who not only granted me access to the Online College Social Life Survey, but has also provided me with a great deal of help with both the qualitative and quantitative analyses. She has given me advice from far away locales such as Abu Dhabi, and has always had time for my questions, even as her time became scarce after being elected the 2014 President-Elect of the American Sociological Association. I have been lucky to have had assistance and support from many others, and I would like to mention them here. John M. Shandra was invaluable to me in the early stages of this dissertation, and he must be recognized for helping me to get over my fear of statistics and to really enjoy the process of research. Dean Jerrold Stein has also been a source of inspiration and support, all the way back to my years as an undergraduate. Javier Auyero also helped me with qualitative methods in my early stages of graduate school. Jeanice Barcelo helped me to become interested in Sociology, and to her I owe my gratitude. I have also been blessed to have a supportive community of graduate students, who have created mentoring groups and a paper discussion group so that graduate students can help and support each other. I would like to thank Eran Shor, Dave Roelfs and Paul Bugyi for creating these groups, as well as Misty Curreli, Amy Braksmajer, and Michael Restivo, who not only gave me feedback on my own work, but have formed bonds of friendship that will endure long after our graduate school journeys. I could not have done this without each and every one of you. I can add a special thank you to Paul, for making the best coffee ever, and keeping me fed and smiling. I would also like to thank a group of sexuality scholars at Stony Brook: Bethany Coston, Liz Nagel, Suzie Walters, Heidi Rademacher, Cliff Leek, Juhi Tyagi, Marina Yasupova, Cheryl Llewellyn, Amanda Kennedy, and Sasha Rodriguez. I would also like to thank Kent Henderson for data entry assistance. Special thanks go to Zev Averbach and the staff at AV ix Transcription, for helping me with transcription services, and making sure I had my data in a timely and affordable manner. I would also like to thank some individuals who have helped me through my graduate school journey: Pat Bremer, Sharon Worksman, Chris Tanaka, Christine Szaras, Jenny Hwang, Joan Kuchner, Eric Anderson, Lauren Joseph, Tyson Smith, Carla Barrett, Kerwin Kaye-Brook, Trevor Milton, Naintara Vaid, the late Joseph Conforti, Carol-Ann Watson, Annee Roschelle, Joanne Gorman, Clarice Murphy, Joanne Bagshaw, Katie Murphy, Beth Fischgrund, Erika Lubliner, Emma Heffernan, Suepattra May Slater, Karen Mahoney, Meghan Pifko, Marianne Als, Mary Jo Bona, Diane M. Johnson, Joanna Russo, Brian Carr, Jason Laker, Jennifer Citron, Karen Munante Trzaska, and Carol Frey, who once told me a dissertation is “better done than good.” Wise words, those. I also owe a large debt of gratitude to the students who helped me with ideas for my project, and feedback along the way: Clive Neal, Patrick Charles, Bianca Gambrah, LaDeidra McCullough, Alexandria Lanza, and Jeannie Romero. I would also like to thank the countless people who generously agreed to speak with me, and provided the data for this project.