Just Say Yes? A Cluster Analytic Approach to Evaluating College Students' Understandings of Affirmative Consent.

Affirmative consent policies on college campuses establish more stringent standards for inferring consent to sex. Although these policies often permit nonverbal communication of consent, they rarely outline finer-grained distinctions about which specific behaviors can stand-in for verbal affirmation. It thus remains possible that students hold different understandings of this policy vis-à-vis the nonverbals used to convey and infer consent, which could undermine the purported utility of affirmative consent initiatives. We presently sampled 442 college undergraduates and asked them to rate whether specific behaviors often present during sexual interaction constitute affirmative indicators of consent. We hypothesized that students would separate into one of three groups depending on how restrictive (e.g., verbal communication only), inclusive (e.g., verbal and clear nonverbals) or potentially non-diagnostic (e.g., sexual arousal, passivity) their behavioral definitions were of affirmative consent. Using cluster analysis, we ultimately identified two groups adhering to a restrictive versus more inclusive operationalization. The former cluster understood affirmative consent as comprising verbal affirmation with variable endorsements of specific nonverbals, whereas the latter consistently endorsed a broader set of nonverbals along with variable ascription to behaviors that do not strongly imply consent. Students in the more inclusive group were more sexually experienced, less likely to use condoms, and viewed casual sex more favorably; as well as were likelier to have received sexual assault education from their parents before and during college, as well as from social media. These findings suggest that subgroups of college students construe affirmative consent policy differently and that these understandings may relate broadly to an individual's sexual experiences, attitudes, and/or education.

Person- and Incident-Level Predictors of Blame, Disclosure, and Reporting to Authorities in Rape Scenarios.

Rapes perpetrated during college are both common and underreported. Research highlights that several person- and incident-level factors relating to gender and sexuality may diminish reporting, by themselves and as they pertain to attributions of blame for the assault. In this study, male and female college students (N = 916) read vignettes describing a rape perpetrated by a man against a woman, a man against a man, or a woman against a man. Participants rated the blameworthiness of both perpetrator and victim and rated the likelihood that they would disclose the rape to social ties or health services or report it to authorities if they were in the victim's position. We found that male gender and heterosexual orientation predicted higher victim blame, lower perpetrator blame, and lower likelihood of disclosure, although relative endorsement of masculine gender ideology seemed to be driving these associations, as well as predicted lower likelihood of reporting to authorities. Controlling for other factors, vignettes portraying a woman raping a man led to a lower likelihood of disclosing or reporting the assault, compared with a male-on-female rape. We also found that the effects of female-on-male rape and traditional masculine ideologies tied to rape disclosure partially by decreasing blame to the perpetrator, which itself carried a unique influence on decisions to report. Our findings overall indicate that factors related to gender, sexuality, and blame have myriad influences and may contribute to low rates of disclosing rape to important outlets.

Modern Prejudice and Same-Sex Parenting: Shifting Judgments in Positive and Negative Parenting Situations.

The current study compares the effects of traditional and modern anti-homosexual prejudice on evaluations of parenting practices of same-sex and opposite-sex couples. Undergraduate university student participants (N = 436) completed measures of traditional and modern anti-homosexual prejudice and responded to a vignette describing a restaurant scene in which parents react to their child's undesirable behavior. The parents' sexual orientation and the quality of their parenting (positive or negative quality) were varied randomly. It was predicted that participants who score higher in modern prejudice would rate the negative parenting behaviors of same-sex parents more negatively than similar behaviors in opposite-sex parents. It was also predicted that this modern prejudice effect would be most pronounced for male participants. Both hypotheses were supported.

Sexual Hookup Culture: A Review.

"Hookups," or uncommitted sexual encounters, are becoming progressively more engrained in popular culture, reflecting both evolved sexual predilections and changing social and sexual scripts. Hook-up activities may include a wide range of sexual behaviors, such as kissing, oral sex, and penetrative intercourse. However, these encounters often transpire without any promise of, or desire for, a more traditional romantic relationship. A review of the literature suggests that these encounters are becoming increasingly normative among adolescents and young adults in North America, representing a marked shift in openness and acceptance of uncommitted sex. We reviewed the current literature on sexual hookups and considered the multiple forces influencing hookup culture, using examples from popular culture to place hooking up in context. We argue that contemporary hookup culture is best understood as the convergence of evolutionary and social forces during the developmental period of emerging adulthood. We suggest that researchers must consider both evolutionary mechanisms and social processes, and be considerate of the contemporary popular cultural climate in which hookups occur, in order to provide a comprehensive and synergistic biopsychosocial view of "casual sex" among emerging adults today.

Polymorphous prejudice: liberating the measurement of heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay men.

A multidimensional measure of sexual prejudice was developed to assess the increasing complexity of heterosexuals' attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a valid and reliable 7-factor measure that assessed: 1) traditional heterosexism; 2) tendency to deny anti-gay discrimination continues; 3) aversion toward gay men; 4) aversion to lesbians; 5) judgments regarding the value of the gay and lesbian movement; 6) resistance to heteronormative expectations; and 7) endorsement of positive beliefs about gay people. A modern heterosexism theory was supported and queer/liberationist notions of anti-heteronormativity and positive beliefs were found to be related to pro-homosexual attitudes.