Friday, May 4, 2012

'Hey, you wanna grab a movie tonight as I am quite bored?' 'Sure, yeah, sounds good.' Her internal voice: 'man, I am so glad I have a friend I can do stuff with'. His internal voice 'man, I am so glad I have a friend I can have sex with'.

Ahh, the age old question and debacle on whether or not guys and girls can be 'just' friends or if sex will always be a third wheel in the relationship.  The concept first came from the movie When Harry Met Sally which sets the stage for the question:

What I'm saying is... and this is not a come-on in any way, shape or form, is that men and women can't be friends because the sex part always gets in the way.
Then, in a more recent movie called Young People F**king, there is the storyline of the best friends who decide to become friends with benefits, but discover romantic feelings for each other:

 Sometimes its something, sometimes its meaningful sometimes its caressing faces, and fingers intertwined and whispering little secrets in ears and sometimes a fuck is just a fuck, its grinding your shit and emptying your balls and falling asleep right after you cum and that’s what you and I are going to do to one another coz that’s what friends are for..
One slightly funny thing about the above two quotes is that the first one comes from Harry, the boy, while the second one comes from Kris, the girl.  So that can beg a question as to whether or not it is just boys who think about the sex aspect of a cross-sex friendship or if it is also girls who have that mentality.  It always seems like boys have the ulterior motive; that boys always has sex on the brain, that boys are more promiscuous than girls, which can lead to men wanting to have sexual relations with their female friends.  Is sex the pure motive for opposite sex friendships for men?  Is sex anyhow related to a motive for a female to have a male as a friend?  In all honesty, how much does sex play in opposite sex friendships?

If the sex aspect does come into play in the relationship, who does it affect the most - girls or guys?  Some may think that it will affect the girls more because they connect both emotionally and physically that the sex aspect may throw a wrench into things and that for guys, sex is a pleasurable thing they search for and they don't have the same emotional connection with sex that girls do.  Some may think that it won't affect the girls because having that connection is better than having no connection at all.   

First off, there has been an emphasis on heterosexual romantic relationships which leads to a cultural expectation that the relationship between a man and a woman should be romantic or sexual in nature.  Therefore, cross-sex friendships are viewed as containing a hidden sexual agenda by at least one of the sexes, which is stereotypically the male (Kaplan, D.L & Keys, C.B. (1997).  Sex and relationship variables as predictors of sexual attraction in cross-sex platonic friendships between young heterosexual adults.  Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14(2), 191-206.)  Halastis and Christakis (2009) found the same thing; attraction is an intense challenge in cross sex friendships even when there is no sexual tension because of the dominant social and cultural perception of there being manifest or latent sexual/romantic attraction in the friendship (Halatsis, P. & Christakis, N. (2009).  The challenge of sexual attraction within heterosexuals' cross-sex friendship.  Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26 (6-7), 919-937). But here is some food for thought - it is more cultural expectations or just the way we are hardwired?  As in, is it more of something that has been instilled in us that women and men need to be together to procreate and continue family lines and all that jazz? 

Secondly, does the attraction happen on both sides of the relationship or does one sex feel an attraction more than the other?  Gut instinct says that guys feel the attraction more than women, but how accurate is that?  Slightly surprisingly, a majority of men reported to having low to moderate levels of sexual attraction towards their female friends (53 % males and 31% females) in a study done by Schneider and Kenny (Schneider, C.S. & Kenny, D.A. (2000). Cross-sex friends who were once romantic partners:  Are they platonic friends now?  Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(3), 451-466). However, in Afifi and Faulkner's study (2000), they found that at least one member of many cross-sex friendships experience sexual attraction for their friend (Afifi, W. A & Faulkner, S. L. (2000).  On being 'just friends': The frequency and impact of sexual activity in cross-sex friendships.  Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(2), 205-222).  So even studies are at odds with each other as to how prevalent attraction is between men and women in a platonic relationship.  It would be hard to refute that it does not happen as you can see in many stories that relationships arise out of friendships first, but when you have two people who have no desire to be in a relationship, does that thinking of the need to have sex with the opposite sex become too much to handle?

Finally, if the sexes are aware of this potential attraction, is that why they enter the relationship in the first place?  We have the need to feel loved, wanted, enjoyed, surrounded by people we love and who love us; we are social creatures by habit so it would make sense to surround ourselves with people who love us in return, either sexual love or platonic love.  Ackerman and Kenrick (2009) found that people do want to feel attractive to others, want to find that companionship and connect with romantic partners who are warm, committed, intelligent and interesting (Ackerman, J. M & Kenrick, D. T. (2009). Cooperative courtship:  Helping friends raise and raze relationship barriers.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(10), 1285-1300).  This should cause a pause in thought as it adds to the argument that there is always underlying reasons for the friendships; it is another reason why people are always looking for more than just a friendship.  Another reason that was found in why cross-friendships occurred was in the hopes for potential relationships outside the immediate friendship; having a friend to introduce them to the opposite sex was perceived as beneficial to men and women in opposite sex friendships (Bleske, A.L. & Buss, D.M. (2000). Can men and women be just friends? Personal Relationships, 7, 131-151.).  That statement has quite a bit of weight to it cause, come on, how many of us girls have heard that age old line 'is your friend hot?'.  It gets annoying really.  Furthermore, being in a cross-sex friendship may help people feel good about themselves when they are having one of those down in the dumps day, where they just want to feel sexy and wanted;  66% of individuals in cross-sex friendships engaged in sexual remarks, teasing or jokes with their opposite-sex friends (Afifi & Faulkner, 2000). 

Okay, so what about individual sexes?  When parsing men and women apart, how does their individual thinking apply to the relationship?  With men, one may think that sex is clearly the main reason to enter into a non-relationship relationship with a woman as we all think that sex is the only thing on a male's mind. This was found in many, many studies:  single men and mated men judged sexual attraction as a more important reason than did women for initiating their most important opposite-sex friendship (Bleske-Rechek, A.L & Buss, D.M. (2001). Opposite-sex friendship:  Sex differences and similarities in initiation, selection and dissolution.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1310-1323), men more than women seem to be motivated by sexual attraction to establish cross-sex friendships; men enjoy flirting with cross-sex friends more than women and that men are more likely than women to believe that cross-sex friends can become sexual partners (Kaplan & Keys, 1997), sexual elements appears stronger for men (Halatsis & Christakis, 2009) and men valued the possibility of sexual activity within opposite-sex friends and preferred traits consistent with this possibility (eg physical attractiveness) in their friends (Ackerman & Kenrick, 2009).  However, there was one study, just *one* that found that sex is clearly not the only motivator - men rated companionship, self-disclosure and gaining information about the opposite sex as higher in benefit than sex (Bleske & Buss, 2000).  But, the evidence is pretty clear that men do have sex on the brain at all times and thus is the main reason why they enter into friendships with women. 

Now lets look at the women; do women have sex on the brain as well or is there a different motivator to be friends with men?  The evidence is not as plentiful as with the men, but it was found that women are likely to perceive their opposite-sex friends as both potential long-term partners and short-term sex partners (Bleske-Rechek & Buss, 2001) and single women perceived sexual attraction as a more important reason for initiating an opposite-sex friendship than did mated women (Bleske-Rechek & Buss, 2001).  However, on the flip side, it was found in a study that four out of every ten women wanted a sexual dimension in at least some of their male friendship (Halatsis & Christakis, 2009), so that is a little less than half.  It was finally found that women may form relationships with men who are both physically strong and willing to provide physical protection in dangerous situations (Ackerman & Kenrick, (2009).  The evidence is fairly split as to what prompts women to enter into friendships with men - it could be because women feel the need to have that strong, masculine figure in their life (benevolent sexism at its finest) or that women are just as horny of creatures as men and are looking for that sexual aspect that is lacking in their life. 

Once that sexual aspect has been introduced into the relationship, is the friendship then doomed and put into the 'friends with benefits' category instead or does the friendship remain intact with a little side funness?  The evidence is quite one-sided when scientists looked at the aftermath of having sex with a friend - a substantial number of opposite-sex friendships end because of physical distance or failed attempts at romance (Bleske-Rechek & Buss (2001),  causes confusion concerning the relationship's definition and nullifies the benefits of the cross-sex friendship (Halatsis & Charistakis, 2009) and that, for most of the participants, sexual attraction that emerges in cross-sex friendship is described as something that will inevitably devalue the friendship (Halatsis & Charistakis, 2009).  This may have to do with the fact that there are added expectations placed on the friendship, that there is more pressure on the sexes to act and behave a certain way and also that jealousy may rear its ugly head as there may be a little bit of possessiveness that comes with that sexual attraction. 

When it all comes down to it, yes, sex plays a massive role in cross-sex friendships.  In a round about way, the answer to whether or not men and women can be just friends is no because both sexes usually have sex on the brain and once that sexual aspect has been introduced, the friendship deteriorates.  The way Harry put it is the best way to answer this age old question:


 
Harry: Because no man can be friends with a woman he finds attractive, he
always wants to have sex with her.
Sally: So you're saying that a man can be friends with a woman he finds
unattractive.
Harry: Nuh, you pretty much wanna nail'em too.
Sally: What if they don't want to have sex with you?
Harry: Doesn't matter, because the sex thing is already out there so the
friendship is ultimately doomed and that is the end of the story.

Monday, January 9, 2012

Merry Christmas!! She opens her gift, all excited and then is puzzled "You got me earrings? But I don't even have pierced ears?!" Him, looking all smug 'Well, they were expensive, so I thought you would appreciate them more." She then hides her thoughtful card and tells him that his gift is on its way. And this will be the first of many confusing gift giving moments.

Oh, Christmastime - that wonderful last time of the year when you have to rake your mind to come up with the most thoughtful gift for that special someone who gives you a gift certificate to a restaurant you don't even like (but they do) in return.  Between birthdays, valentine's day, special occasions and Christmas, it seems like gifts are given all year round, which isn't a bad thing mind you, but maybe people view it more material than emotional.  Maybe, just maybe, some people have listened to Material Girl by Madonna or Santa Baby by Marilyn Monroe one too many times.  It is as Eric Fromm put it - "we live in a world of things, and our only connection with them is that we know how to manipulate or to consume them".


First off, what is a "gift"? According to J. Clarke (2007), a gift is "a ritual offering that is a sign of involvement in and connectedness to another" (The Four 'S's' of Experience Gift Giving Behavior, Hospitality Management, 26, 98-116).  In another article, a gift is defined as "a good or service voluntarily provided to another person or group through some sort of ritual presentation" (Nguyen, H.P. & Munch, J.M. (2011).  Romantic gift giving as chore or pleasure:  The effects of attachment orientations on gift giving perceptions.  Journal of Business Research, 64, 113-118.) And then there is Webster's definition being "anything given; anything voluntarily transferred by one person to another without compensation; a present; an offering".  There are some re-occurring themes between the three definitions - offerings, rituals, voluntary and between people.  However, the differences are the key - involvement, connectedness and without compensation.


When it comes to birthdays or special occasions (like graduation, first communion, etc), people give gifts without compensation - they are giving gifts because it is the 'ritual' thing to do, so we are not going to focus on that as we want to focus more on the offerings that are between people.  Like, for example, when the gifts are between romantic people, for Christmas, for anniversaries, events like that.  Usually there is some form of compensation that is at the base of the reason of giving the gift in the first place.  Gifts can be used as a way to jump start the relationship ('for our one month, I got you a pair of Christian Louboutin shoes'), initiate and reciprocate gift giving ('since I got you shoes, what did you get me?') and can help the givers reinforce highly valued unstable relationships ('I am so sorry I lied to you about smoking, here are some donuts') (Nguyen & Munch, 2011).  Regardless of the reason, the giver is usually looking for something in return.  However, there can be other reasons for providing gifts, other than societal practices: the need to recognize and maintain a status hierarchy, the need to establish or maintain peaceful relations or simply the expectation of reciprocal giving (Nguyen & Munch, 2011). 


So, judging from the above, do people give gifts because they feel it is an obligation? Due to their personality? Or a combination of both?  Clarke (2007) found that there is an obligation in giving gifts in that there is a sense of indebtedness to the recipient as well as the art of gift giving drives the gift exchange system (I give you something, you give me something and vice versa until someone tells us to stop).  Furthermore, the obligation may arise because the giver has a knowledge of the personality of the recipient and the nature of the relationship (Clarke, 2007), so that they may feel that they have to give their girlfriend flowers every week, or buy her shoes whenever she has a bad day.    And then the type of personality has an important role in giving gifts.  Secure people (think Rabbit from Winnie the Pooh) enjoy giving gifts just for the pleasure of giving.  Both of us are secure type people, and it shows as we both get our managers/lawyers/people above us gifts without expecting or needing something in return - we do it because we enjoy getting them gifts.  On the other hand, anxious people (think Piglet) will find that gift giving is an obligation and may perhaps have a panic attack just thinking of trying to find the 'right' gift for that special person.  Finally, avoidant people (think Eeyore) will try to avoid giving gifts period and if they do, it is such an obligation for them to do it  (Nguyen & Munch, 2011). Finally, there is always the debacle of giving a gift because you want to make the recipient happy (altruistic) or give a gift to feel good about oneself (agnostic) (Beatty, S.E., Kahle, L.R. & Homer, P. (1991). Personal values and gift-giving behaviors:  A study across cultures, Journal of Business Research, 22, 149-157).


So once a person decides (either out of obligation or personality) to get a gift, the next question is what type of gift to give - do you go expensive or thoughtful?  Can a person see both in a gift or just one or the other?  The first thing that a person should take into account when getting a gift for a person is who the person is, what they like, what they value and the reason for the gift.  Understanding gift behaviors revolves around the concepts of exchange, reciprocity and the establishment, maintenance, growth or termination of a relationship (Parsons, A.G.; Ballantie, P.W. & Kennedy, A. (2011). Gift exchange: benefits sought by the recipient, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 31(7/8), 411-423).  Our view is that if the giver is giving a gift because they feel obligated to and don't put that much thought into the gift, it is better to not receive a gift at all.  One example was when being a waitress; a table had left a tip in the amount of, oh around, $2.someoddchange, all in pennies, nickles and dimes.  The waitress casually picked up the change, followed the patrons out to the lobby and kindly gave the money back, stating that nothing would have been better than what they left.  Another example is a friend gave another friend a super uber ugly purse just to give that person a gift and maybe it would have been better to give nothing that something super useless.  Gifts, in our eyes as well as Clarke (2007) think that gifts are valued more for their symbolism than for the transfer of material benefits.   


When it comes to expensive v. thoughtful gifts, it was found that people often struggle to take account of others' perspectives (Flynn, F.J & Adams, G. S. (2009)Money can't buy love: Asymmetic beliefs about gift price and feelings of appreciation, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 404-409) and it seems that, from research perspective, that people tend to lean towards getting the expensive gift as it is easier to go buy something popular and out there rather than think about something that will be sentimental and meaningful.  So when buying the expensive gift, it also seems that the givers think that what they like will be something the recipient will like and that if it is something that everyone is getting, then the recipient will like it.  Most of the time, givers will think that bigger, more expensive gifts will portray stronger signals of thoughtfulness and consideration than gifts that are smaller or emotional.  Flynn (2009) also found that givers who give such extravagant gifts expect more appreciation for their gift.  However, this can be flipped around.  If the recipient is expecting/hoping for an expensive gift and gets something cheaper, they can be disappointed.  So then what makes the thoughtful gift?  To us, it is something that has a meaning between the giver and the recipient.  Something that the giver put some thought into and actually took into consideration what the recipient would like.  And something that the giver gave because they wanted to, not because they had to.  Clarke (2007) found the same thing when he realized what makes a perfect gift : show donor sacrifice, donors sole wish should be recipient pleasure, gift is a luxury, gift is uniquely appropriate to the recipient, surprise and gift succeeds in pleasing the recipient. 

Alrighty, so where does this leave us, what was the purpose of this posting?  That is a good question.  With Christmas now ending (it took some time writing this posting), and people talking about what they got, we got to looking at our respective scenerios.  In the one family, we do not do gifts as when the whole family is together, that is a gift in and of itself, so we have stopped giving gifts.  In the other family, gifts are still given, but just for the sake of giving them, so it may be better just to stop altogether.  The simpliest of gifts can mean the most of people; a single flower, a book, a cd with music on it or, and this is the greatest in our perspectives, hugs.  So when it comes time to giving gifts, look at the reason why you are giving it, to whom you are giving it to, and the gift itself.  And when in doubt, give hugs - A hug is a great gift as one size fits all and it's easy to exchange.