The oldest profession: older then we thought

Last week’s film about sex and evolution raised questions about the similarities and differences between money, ape, and human sexuality. The issue has been in the news of late, too. According to news reports, a recent study suggests that male macaques pay for sex with grooming:

Selling sex is said to be humankind’s oldest profession but it may have deep evolutionary roots, according to a study into our primate cousins which found that male macaques pay for intercourse by using grooming as a currency.

Michael Gumert of Nanyang Technological University in Singapore made the discovery in a 20-month investigation into 50 long-tailed macaques in Kalimantan Tengah, Indonesia, New Scientist reports on Saturday.

On average, females had sex 1.5 times per hour.

But this rate jumped to 3.5 times per hour immediately after the female had been groomed by a male — and her partner of choice was likely to be the hunky monkey that did the grooming.

The report also suggests that the cost of obtaining sex varied with supply and demand. If females were abundant, males could woo a potential mate with just eight minutes of grooming. But if no other females were in the area, the male would have to spend twice as long grooming.

This example highlights one of the points of last week’s film—the importance of competition for mates in the evolutionary process. For more, see excerpts of the film on sexual selection in peacocks, polyandry in jacanas, and sex and social organization among chimps and bonobos.

Student sex work is on the rise

In France, more and more young women are selling their bodies to pay for their education, according to two new books featured today in The Guardian, a British newspaper.

One of the books is a memoir written by a 19-year-old student who turned to prostitution because her other part-time job didn’t cover the cost of living. The second book is a study of student prostitution based on interviews with young female “escorts” and their clients. The study suggests that the Internet has helped to expand the market for student sex-workers who cater to older, wealthier men.

It is difficult to know just how many French students engage in sex work, and estimates range widely. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, a French student union claims that up to 40,000 university students work as prostitutes, but police officials put the figure at 15,000 to 20,000 students. Whatever the exact number, the new books have apparently sparked public debate over the adequacy of financial aid for French university students.

As The Chronicle point out, this story isn’t the first we’ve heard about students working in sex-related jobs. In 2006, a study at Kingston University in London reported a 50 percent increase in the number of students who worked in the sex industry over a six year period. And more than 10 years ago, the book Ivy League Stripper made a splash with its account of a Brown University student who financed her education by working as a stripper.

Do these stories resonate with your experience? How common do you think sex work is among university students today?

Why research methods matter

This week we’ve been talking about the development of sexuality research and the importance of scientific research methods for avoiding the errors of everyday reasoning. We also discussed how subtle differences in methods could produce drastically different results. On Tuesday, the Well blog at the New York Times gave a good example of the second point.

Tara Parker-Hope writes about the discrepancy between recent studies on whether men who had prostate cancer surgery were able to have sex again:

For men having prostate cancer surgery, one of the biggest fears is that they will be left impotent. Unfortunately, the research that might help address that question is likely only to confuse.

A notable study in 2005 showed that a year after surgery, 97 percent of patients were able to achieve an erection adequate for intercourse. But last month, researchers from George Washington University and New York University reviewed interim data from their own study showing that fewer than half of the men who had surgery felt their sex lives had returned to normal within a year.

So which of the studies is right? Surprisingly, they both are.

Parker-Hope explains that the different conclusions are primarily a result of methodological differences between studies, including who participated, how often they had sex before surgery, and how researchers defined potency. For example, did researchers ask whether a man was ever able to have sex following surgery? Or did they ask whether men could have sex regularly—without Viagra?

These details about methods don’t often make the headlines when research about sexuality gets reported in the media. That’s why it’s important to think critically about the assumptions and evidence that scientists, journalists, or others use to support their conclusions.

Political context of sexuality research

Because of computer woes in class today, I wasn’t able to show you the political attack ad from Paul Nelson’s 2006 bid to unseat U.S. Representative Ron Kind from the Third Congressional District in Wisconsin. Thanks to YouTube, here it is:

Ads like this one were run in several other congressional races in 2006. For more on what’s misleading about such ads, go to factcheck.org. These ads are a testament to the political forces that oppose contemporary sexuality research in the United States, a topic addressed in Chapter 2 of your textbook.

And while you’re at YouTube, check out one person’s view of what Thomas Jefferson’s re-election campaign would have looked like if sexuality were a political issue in 1804.

Breaking sex taboos on Nepali radio

Sex education is a controversial topic in the United States, but according to Reuters news, it may be even more so in Nepal.

Traditionally, conservative attitudes about sexuality in the South Asian country of Nepal have made it taboo to talk openly about sex in public. But a new Nepali radio program has broken that taboo to raise awareness about HIV/AIDS and to promote more open dialogue about sexual health. According to the Reuters story, after initial controversy, the radio program now reaches young people throughout Nepal:

“Initially we got letters complaining against the discussions on use of condoms, sex or sexual organs,” Binayak Aryal, a producer for the program, said.

He said social attitudes had now changed since the program began in 2001 and it is now aired through 35 hugely popular FM stations as well as the state-run Radio Nepal.

“Now there is a change. Even parents and school teachers advise the young people to listen to the program about sexual health.”

The radio program, “Chatting with My Best Friend,” is sponsored by UNICEF, which says that nearly six million young Nepalese tune in every week.

This example adds a useful cross-cultural perspective to the ongoing debate over comprehensive versus abstinence-only sex education in the United States. We’ll talk more about that debate later in the semester. But in the meantime, what role do you think schools should play in providing information about sexuality? How would you evaluate the quality of sex ed you received in school? And what radio or TV programs in the U.S. do you think might be analogous to the Nepali show?

Sex and Campus Comedy

What do college students find funny? Apparently, sex. At least that’s the impression you get from last month’s New Jersey Comedy Festival, which gets a spotlight in today’s issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education.

About 20 students from colleges across New Jersey participated in the event, and sex figured into a lot of the acts. Students joked about their bodies, about the stigma of being a virgin in college, about nude models in an art class, and about spending their days “banging” their mates instead of going to class.

But according to the Chronicle, the most common jokes were about something that’s not a laughing matter: rape.

The competition’s most popular topic was, believe it or not, rape. The first comic told two rape jokes. Another said he could never be a rapist because he likes to sleep after sex. Yet another said he would call his victim the next morning because he’s such a nice guy.

Er, ha.

Later one of the competitors began his act by promising the audience that he wouldn’t tell any rape jokes. He broke that promise two minutes later with a one-liner about using “ropes and formaldehyde” to solve his romantic problems.

Ha again.

The women in the competition (there were five) mostly steered clear of forced-sexual-intercourse humor, though one did sing a ditty about not wanting to be raped.

What do you make of all the rape jokes? Is that fair game for campus comedy, or does joking about rape minimize the suffering endured by victims of sexual violence? What does it say that most of the rape jokes were made by men, rather than women?

← Previous Page