DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR SEXUAL JEALOUSY - MANIPULATIVE MORALITY OR A REFLECTION OF EVOLVED SEX-DIFFERENCES

This work tests two conflicting views about double standards: whether they reflect evolved sex differences in behavior or a manipulative mor ality serving male interests. Two questionnaires on jealous reactions to mild (flirting) and serious (cheating) sexual transgressions were r andomly assigned to 172 young women and men. One questionnaire assesse d standards for appropriate behavior and perceptions of how young wome n and men usually react. The second asked people to report how they ha d reacted or, if naive, how they would react. The questions concerned anger at and blame of partner and rival and the self-oriented response s of loss of self-esteem, feelings of hurt, and fear of losing the par tner. As predicted by the idea of manipulative morality, both sexes ad vanced sets of double standards that serve the interests of their own sex at the expense of the opposite sex. Much of the data contradict th e idea of a match between double standards and evolved sex differences . First, subjects who set self-serving double standards did not percei ve gender differences in jealous reactions. Second, there were few gen der differences in judgments regarding jealous responses. Third, in co ntrast with the familiar double standard, women were more aggressively reactive to a flirting rival than men. Fourth, self-reports of the st rength of aggressive jealous reactions suggest that women's behavior i s stronger than the prescriptions for it. These data suggest that doub le standards represent a communication strategy which assists men's co ntrol of women. The data on jealous reactions were interpreted in term s of the degree of threat to fitness posed by infidelity in different situations.