Sex At First Site?
A new study suggest that it leads men to behavior differently:
Scientists found that the hornier the participant got, the greater their immediacy behaviors (a fancy term for “come-ons”) synchronized with the insider (wait, were they faking it?).
The other three studies incorporated slow dancing (again, with secret insiders), subliminal flashes of erotica and a damn J.Lo movie — before segueing into discussions about “interpersonal dilemmas.”
Scientists found the “activation of the sexual system” resulted in behaviors that suggested caring about a potential partner’s well-being — an established signal for interest in a relationship, they say.
So am I to understand that people who are sexually attracted to other people engage in courting-type behavior? Most astonishing.
But it doesn’t exactly say much about the sexual timeline of a relationship.
It’s odd that you would say “men” here, Will:
Report
Good catch!Report
I’m not sure that I’m the best person to respond. However, being off the heels of a 12 month relationship where sexual chemistry included courtship does indeed exist in relationships. But once commitment phobic individuals fear a relationship deepening beyond the physical, not only does the style of the courtship change, but so does the conversation. It makes absolutely no difference what so ever. If you’re with someone for three months, then marry three months later, or together a year, and they run for the hills over unconfirmed fears, it’s the individual not the courtship.
PS- my avatar is spongebob on meth.Report
Good comment.Report
The abstract:
“””Sexual desire has long been theorized to serve a relationship-initiation function by bringing partners together. Four studies addressed this possibility, examining whether activation of the sexual system encouraged the enactment of nonsexual behaviors that signal warmth and contact readiness. In Study 1, participants mimed together with an opposite-sex confederate to prerecorded music. Participant’s desire for the confederate was associated with coded immediacy behaviors toward the confederate (e.g., proximity seeking, synchronization). Study 2 extended these findings, showing that participants, who slow danced with a confederate perceived to be more desirable, were more synchronized with the confederate. Synchronization, in turn, was associated with greater interest in future interactions with the confederate. Studies 3 and 4 established a causal connection between sexual activation and engagement in relationship-promoting behaviors (provision of responsiveness and help, respectively). These findings suggest that intense desire, which attracts new partners to each other, elicits behaviors that support the attachment-bonding process.”””
(Is there a way to blockquote on the new forum?)
So, setting aside the normal bad science journalism, what does this say?
1. People want to dance with those they find hot. When they do, their dancing is more “synchronized.”
Okay, that makes sense, rather unsurprising.
2. If someone turns you on, you may want to have more of a relationship with them, as opposed to if they don’t turn you on.
Thanks science! I had no idea that sexual desire led to a desire for a relationship. I’m glad they cleared that up.
But seriously, this is obvious. Furthermore, unless I’m missing something, this study says nothing about actually having sex with anyone. In other words, the article is crappy clickbait. The editors should sit in a corner and feel bad for what they’ve done.Report
“Look, we started dancing real close and talking, and I’m gettin aroused, ya know?, and then these feelings for her as a person sorta came outa nowhere. It was really weird, but it happened.”
“No way. I don’t believe it.”
“No really. It’s true. The scientists say so.”Report
There was no sex at the first site, but I’m pretty sure the second one had it.Report