1. "You Trying to Hook Up Tonight
"You Trying to Hook Up Tonight?": Investigating the Relationship Between Normative Gender Roles, the Sexual Double Standard, and Affirmative Consent
Jeffrey Phillips

2. Overview Gender Roles Communication Sexual Double Standard
Affirmative Consent
The Present Study

3. Gender Roles Traditional Roles When do they start?
Multicultural
When do they start?
How are they learned?
Childhood
Adolescence
Adulthood
Social Expectations
Effects

4. Communication Social expectations Gender-based communication
O'Byrne, Rapley, & Hansen (2006)
Gender-based communication
Potential problems
Hall, Xing, and Brooks (2014)
Henningsen (2004)

5. Sexual Double Standard
Traditional double standard
Single Standard
Reverse Double Standard
Attitudes and perceptions

6. Affirmative Consent Standard
Purpose
Three elements:
Enthusiastic agreement
Verbal agreement
Ongoing throughout the experience
Legal precedent
California 2014
Arguments against the standard

7. The Present Study No empirical research on affirmative consent
Establishing basic relationships between socialized, gender-based attitudes and the affirmative consent standard.
39 Female, 15 Male participants

8. Independent Variables
Attitudes toward traditional gender roles
Bem Sex-role Inventory (Holt & Ellis, 1998)
Attitudes toward the sexual double standard
Personal Acceptance of the Double Standard Scale (Milhausen & Herold, 2001)
Participant Sex included as a potential covariate

9. Dependent Variable Attitudes toward sexual consent behaviors
The Sexual Consent Scale – Revised (Humphreys & Brousseau, 2010)
Apply subscale behaviors to the affirmative consent standard

10. Hypotheses
H1. Individuals who exhibit more traditional attitudes toward gender roles will be more likely to prefer behaviors that are inconsistent with the affirmative consent standard.
H2. Individuals who endorse a sexual double standard will be more likely to prefer behaviors that are inconsistent with the affirmative consent standard.

11. Analysis and Results Sex as a covariate Sexual Double Standard
Independent Samples T-test
Sexual Double Standard
Males supported traditional double standard (M = .93)
Females supported reverse double standard (M = -.38)
Females slightly more egalitarian (closer to 0)
Affirmative Consent
Perceived behavioral control (M = 2.65)
Positive attitude toward establishing consent (M = 5.73)

12. Analysis and Results
Multiple regression analyses yielded no significant predictor effects for any dependent measure.

13. Discussion
Intuition vs. Findings
Affirmative Consent

14. Limitations Large disparity in participant sex Power 39 Female 15 Male
Table 4. Dependent Measure Univariate ANOVA Observed Power
Subscale
Observed Power
(Lack of) perceived behavioral control
.110
Positive attitude toward establishing consent
.165
Indirect behavioral approach to consent
.063
Sexual Consent Norms
.214

15. Future Research Replication with a more precise sampling method.
The development of measures that address consent standards.

16. References
Hall, J. A., Xing, C., & Brooks, S. (2014). Accurately Detecting Flirting: Error Management Theory, the Traditional Sexual Script, and Flirting Base Rate. Communication Research, 42(7), doi: /
Henningsen, D. D. (2004). Flirting with Meaning: An Examination of Miscommunication in Flirting Interactions. Sex Roles, 50(7/8), doi: /b:sers b
Holt, C. L., & Ellis, J. B. (1998). Assessing the Current Validity of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory. Sex Roles, 39(11-12),
Humphreys, T. P., & Brousseau, M. M. (2010). The Sexual Consent Scale–Revised: Development, Reliability, and Preliminary Validity. Journal of Sex Research, 47(5), doi: /
Milhausen, R. R., & Herold, E. S. (2001). Reconceptualizing the Sexual Double Standard. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 13(2), doi: /j056v13n02_05
O'Byrne, R., Rapley, M., & Hansen, S. (2006). 'You Couldn't Say "No", Could You?': Young Men's Understandings of Sexual Refusal. Feminism & Psychology, 16(2), doi: /

17. Questions?