Download Emily Novotny

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Sex education wikipedia , lookup

Abstinence-only sex education in Uganda wikipedia , lookup

Sexual abstinence wikipedia , lookup

Human female sexuality wikipedia , lookup

Sex and sexuality in speculative fiction wikipedia , lookup

Hookup culture wikipedia , lookup

Erotic plasticity wikipedia , lookup

Female promiscuity wikipedia , lookup

Virginity wikipedia , lookup

Zi Teng wikipedia , lookup

Human mating strategies wikipedia , lookup

Lesbian sexual practices wikipedia , lookup

Rochdale child sex abuse ring wikipedia , lookup

Sex in advertising wikipedia , lookup

Slut-shaming wikipedia , lookup

Safe sex wikipedia , lookup

Fornication wikipedia , lookup

History of human sexuality wikipedia , lookup

Sexual ethics wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
Emily Novotny
Attitudes on Premarital Sex
October 10, 2004
In this paper, the relationship between age, denomination of religion, and attendance of
religious services on attitudes about premarital sex is examined. Premarital sex is a highly
controversial issue in society and especially within the religious community. Changes in attitude
about this topic have been taking place and it will be of great value to study emily's
proposalthese transformations. This research will focus on three hypotheses. The first is that
older people will have a higher level of disapproval about premarital sex than younger people.
The second is that those who attend religious services more will have a higher level of
disapproval of premarital sex. The third is that Protestants will have a higher level of disapproval
of premarital sex than other religions.
Literature Review
Premarital sex is an issue that historically received a lot of attention. Presently, the
attention is no longer focusing on how premarital sex is taboo; it is instead looking at how the
issue has become more accepted within society. Since the 1960s there has been a sharp increase
in liberal attitudes toward premarital sex. Most of this increase appears to have occurred between
1969 and 1973, with much more moderate increases between 1973 and 1982 (Harding & Jencks,
2003). Why did premarital sex become less immoral? What are the factors that led up to this
change?
Religion is a large contributor to the condemnation of premarital sex. Many studies have
shown that religion variables (e.g., denominational affiliation, church attendance, and
fundamentalism) are related to sexual attitudes and behavior. Cochran & Beeghley (1991) cited
1
that in a 40-year period more than 80 studies reported such a relationship. Petersen &
Donnenwerth (1997) conclude that religion's ability to sustain traditional beliefs about premarital
sex has weakened over time.
Different religions have shown different levels of declining opinions for the morality of
premarital sex. Petersen & Donnenwerth (1997) studied this using the NORC General Social
Surveys' cumulative file for 1972 through 1993. Religious affiliation was measured by
classifying the respondent's religious preference as conservative Protestant, mainline Protestant,
Catholic, or none (no religious affiliation). The study predicted that the deterioration occurred
more slowly among conservative Protestants who attended church often than among any other
group of Christians. The data confirmed that, in fact, there was no erosion at all among this
group of Protestants (Petersen & Donnenworth, 1997) and that they still held on to their firm
belief that premarital sex is wrong. In all remaining categories of religious affiliation/attendance,
(except the none category), traditional beliefs about premarital sex declined over time.
In a study done by Lefkowitz, Gillen, Shearer, & Boone (2004), 205 college aged
students were given a survey about religious service attendance, religion in daily life, religious
adherence, religions negative sanctioning of behaviors, and sexual behaviors and attitudes. In
support of the researcher’s hypothesis, sexually abstinent youth reported attending religious
services almost weekly compared to less than once a month for the sexually active youth. The
abstinent youth also reported that religion had more of an influence in their daily lives and that
they adhered to the religion’s teachings more than the sexually active youth (Lefkowitz et al,
2004).
Among high school students, similar results were found relating religion and sexual
attitudes. Scales-Rostosky, Regnerus, & Comer-Wright (2003) support that religiosity has both
2
direct and indirect effects on coital debut. They used data from Waves 1 and 2 of the National
Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health in-home interviews from high school aged teenagers
in 1995-1996. They found that religiosity reduces the likelihood of coital debut.
Age is another factor that has been found to contribute to attitudes on premarital sex. In
the British National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles of 1990 (as cited in Scott, 1998),
fewer than one percent of men and women aged 16-24 were married at the time of their first
sexual intercourse. In the United States, the enormous change in attitudes of premarital sex began
to erupt in the 1960’s and 1970’s. This change was that people were beginning to accept a more
liberal view on premarital sex. All age groups were affected, but primarily the more recent
cohorts (Scott, 1998). Specifically, the affected cohorts were the ones that included those turning
age 18 between the 1920s and 1970s (Harding & Jencks, 2003).
In the past, there was societal consensus of morality. This could have been largely due to
religion. Presently, religion doesn’t appear to have the effect on morality as it once did. By the
1980’s, only two-fifths of women and one-third of men felt that sex before marriage was wrong
(Scott, 1998). This rate of disapproval was steady through the 1990s. Overall, Scott (1998)
emphasized that both Americans and the British have become far more liberal about premarital
sex at all age groups, but primarily amongst the younger ages.
Research Plan
The data set that will be used for this research comes from the General Social Survey in
the “Values” set. The independent variables “age” (age of respondent), “relig” (respondent’s
denomination of religion), “attend” (“how often respondent attends religious services”) will be
utilized for this research. The dependent variable “premarsx” (respondent’s view of morality of
3
sex before marriage) will be used. These variables will be used to test the three hypotheses. The
first is that older people will have a higher level of disapproval about premarital sex than
younger people. The second, that those who attend religious services more will have a higher
level of disapproval of premarital sex than those who attend less. The third is that Protestants
will have a higher level of disapproval of premarital sex than other religions.
4
References
Cochran, J. & Beeghley, L. (1991). The influence of religion on attitudes toward
nonmarital sexuality: A preliminary assessment of reference
group theory. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30, 45-62.
General Social Survey. (1998). http://webapp.icpsr.umich.edu/GSS/. (October 10, 2004).
Harding, D.J. & Jencks, C. (2003). Changing attitudes toward premarital sex:
Cohort, period, and aging effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(2), 211-227.
Lefkowitz, E.S., Gillen, M.M., Shearer, C.L., & Boone, T.L. (2004). Religiosity, sexual
behaviors, and sexual attitudes during emerging adulthood. The Journal of Sex
Research, 41(2), 150-159.
Petersen, L.R. & Donnenwerth, G.V. (1997). Secularization and the influence of
religion on beliefs about premarital sex. Social Forces, 75, 1071-1090.
Scales Rostosky, S., Regnerus, M.D., & Comer-Wright, M.L. Coital debut: the role of
religiosity and sex attitudes in the Add health survey. The Journal of Sex
Research, 40(4), 358-369.
Scott, J. (1998). Changing attitudes to sexual morality: A cross-national
comparison. Sociology, 32, 815-818.
5