Ok, so I like to use the old philosopy of science joke about the cop who finds a drunk guy on his hands and knees under a street lamp, looking for his car keys. The cop asks where the keys were lost and the drunk says “way down the block.” The cop says “then why are you searching here” and the drunk says “because the light’s better over here.” Waka-waka-waka. I actually love that joke because it applies to so much of what we know about society in general and sexuality in particular.
Earlier I had a cranky post about unseemly sexism in Will Saletan’s article on differential ages of consent in Slate.com. I have kind of a love-hate relationship as a Saletan reader because he finds great information but I’m so often disappointed in his conclusions.
Now I happen also to have posted another cranky missal about how little is known — or at least paid attention to — about sex and gender as we age. In particular I grouse about how often sex and sexuality research has been conducted on college campuses where a) researchers congregate, b) research assistants tend to hang out, c) where it’s assumed the college-aged will be more forthcoming, and, finally, d) where the young people conducting the studies won’t have to think about sex between old wrinkly people in their 80s.
And yet… and yet… a question that’s left unasked might be “what makes anyone think college-age people might be more likely to answer questions about sex than their elders. Well, while the question might be left unasked, we might now glean an answer from Saletan’s not-so-questionable data. (Remember I like his data, I just worry about his analysis.)
So check this out (emphasis mine.)
Consent implies competence, and 12-year-olds don’t really have that. In a forthcoming review of studies, Laurence Steinberg of Temple University observes that at ages 12 to 13, only 11 percent of kids score at an average (50th percentile) adult level on tests of intellectual ability. By ages 14 to 15, the percentage has doubled to 21. By ages 16 to 17, it has doubled again to 42. After that, it levels off.
By that standard, the age of consent should be 16. But competence isn’t just cognitive. It’s emotional, too. Steinberg reports that on tests of psychosocial maturity, kids are much slower to develop. From ages 10 to 21, only one of every four young people scores at an average adult level. By ages 22 to 25, one in three reaches that level. By ages 26 to 30, it’s up to two in three.
Got that? We draw conclusions about gender and sexuality from research conducted under “street lamps” where the light might be better, yes, but also where on averag less than half the research cohort have reached psychosocial maturity! And yet we assume what we learn about ourselves in our street-light-lit aggregate 20s is every bit as true of our 30, 50 or 75 year old selves.
Now here’s the tricky thing. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with people in their teens or 20s. “Emotional maturity” is a biased term so I’m not saying “nothing’s wrong” just to be nice. I mean nothing’s wrong! But! I think making assumptions about what “must” be true about sex and gender in general based on more conveniently collected responses and recollections in our college years might be as incomplete as basing them on grade-school years.
I’m just sayin’




Submitted by 1640 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-09-28 05:48.
I've been a psych major and later a researcher at a big university, so I understand *why* most of the studies are done on college kids: you can force all your intro psych students to participate in studies. Recruiting outside that convenient pool is expensive and difficult.
The good news is that (like most medical research that was done only on white men and then generalized to the rest of the population- I'm looking at you, Physician's Health Study) the field is moving in a more inclusive direction. It takes time, but fields like geriatric psychology (not that everyone over 40 is geriatric...) are making enormous strides.
["Recruiting outside that convenient pool is expensive and difficult." That's why I've always loved that streetlamp metaphor (which I heard in a now-out-of-print book called "The Game of Science" that at the time was a standard seminar assignment for science students at my school. Thanks, Myid. --fl]
Submitted by 1640 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-09-28 06:26.
I've been watching Tell Me You Love Me on HBO (I think it's HBO...). A couple of weeks ago a male coworker of mine, who is in his mid 40s brought up the show so we talked. He said he was horrified to see the sex scene between the 2 characters who appear to be in their 60s. The sex scene was no such thing, it was a kissing scene and the preludes to a sex scene. However, the show portrays this scene using the same visual cues as for 20-year-olds having sex. The kissing is deep not just a peck on the lips and the engagement of the two is complete. I'm guessing after decades of only seeing old folk pecking each other on the lips having to admit that everybody has sex is kinda though on some. It goes hand in hand with how skewed our views on sexuality are in this country (through the eye of the media). Parents pretending their kids don't have or want to have sex, the government putting millions of dollars on failing abstinence only programs, and the FCC banning every hint of sexuality from TV (did you read the new study on how there are fewer portrayals of gays on TV but more on cable than a few years ago?). So yeah, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I agree with you :)
[Well put, Mana. Thank you! --fl]
Submitted by 1640 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-09-28 03:57.
I agree with your conclusion... Life still exists for elderly women, but nobody is paying attention... I can't wait to see if I will only find a partner to have sex in my 80,s... Hummm... scary thought...
[Go find Pepper Schwartz's book "Prime," there's a link in the sidebar. Anyway, she's 62 now and actually has some pretty optimistic things to say. Thanks, SeaRabbit. --fl]
Submitted by 1640 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-09-28 01:07.
Just as I hit Post I thought of something else - whereas people conducting research on young people will go out of their way to use researchers who are as near as possible in age, I've never seen the reverse happen.
[I clearly don't know as much about the nuts and bolts of research, but I think it might be we have this tendency to lump "over 25 and under 70" into one, or maybe two big categories, as opposed to the far more intricate "degrees of development" we've created for adult. So yeah, I can see how there could be less rigor based on the assumption that it couldn't possibly matter once you're "old." Thanks, A. --fl]
Submitted by 1640 (not verified) on Fri, 2007-09-28 01:02.
How true. Studies looking at what may affect quality of life for cancer patients found that sexuality rated very highly and because of the nature of the cancers studied, the populations were not young. The young researchers were a little surprised.
[Oh yeah. But then I remember when I was maybe 15 thinking that 22-year-olds were so old and wrinkly. Good thing I didn't stop then. :-) Thanks, A. --fl]