Heterosexism and the Study of Women's Romantic and Friend Relationships

Journal of Social Issues, Summer, 2000 by Suzanna Rose

Intimacy is idealized as the driving force behind romantic relationships; love is portrayed as legitimizing the selection of a marriage partner and as the rationale for continuing the relationship. Sexuality is scripted to parallel deeper emotional commitment, with premarital intercourse being widely accepted when it occurs in the context of love (Reiss, 1967). Contradictory views exist concerning the role of power in the romance script. Peer marriage, defined as a relationship between equals, appears to be the contemporary ideal for romantic relationships (Peplau, 1979; Schwartz, 1994). Competing with this view are numerous religious, legal, and social traditions that hold male dominance and female submissiveness to be the romantic ideal (e.g., Low & Sherrard, 1999).

Gender roles undergird the romantic relationship script. For women, maintaining a relationship is supposed to supersede self-interest, whereas for men, achievement and personal goals are supposed to supersede romantic relationships (e.g., Schlenker, Caron, & Halteman, 1998). Women are expected to do more relationship maintenance in terms of understanding their partner and to strategically bring up issues that need to be resolved (Prusank, Duran, & DeLillo, 1993). It also is a widely held belief that women desire more intimacy in romantic relationships than men and that men are more sexually motivated and less interested in commitment than women (Duran & Prusank, 1997). The right to initiate sex and the right to refuse it are strongly anchored as male and female behaviors, respectively (Blumstein & Schwartz, 1983; Schwartz, 1994).

The extent to which lesbians conform to the heterosexual romance model is open to speculation. Lesbians are subjected to gender role socialization and more closely resemble heterosexual women in their ways of relating than they do men (Peplau, 1991). Many dimensions of lesbian romance scripts parallel those for heterosexual women (Rose, 1996; Rose, Zand, & Cini, 1993). On the other hand, lesbians highly value equality in their relationships and are more likely than heterosexuals to achieve it (e.g., Blumstein & Schwartz, 1983). Furthermore, when (and if) lesbians adopt gender roles in their relationships, gender roles and power are not necessarily organized in the same way as within heterosexual relations (i.e., Nestle, 1992). For instance, some lesbians adopt a traditional feminine reactive role in dating in terms of waiting to be asked out and being courted but reject the role of sexual limit setter (Rose & Zand, in press). Findings such as these suggest that lesbians might create their own modes of relati ng that may not parallel heterosexual roles.

Sexuality and Romantic Relationships

One area of research that appears to be particularly limited in terms of describing lesbians pertains to the study of sexuality. Sex research to a high degree has tended to focus on elements of behavior that reflect the dominant cultural script for romantic heterosexual relationships. The script holds three steps as essential in heterosexual interactions: preparation for penetration ("foreplay"), intercourse, and male orgasm (Maines, 1999). A high moral value is assigned to the last two steps in this sequence. These elements must be present for the act to be regarded as "the real thing." Additionally, this action sequence is regarded as "good," "normal," "natural," and even "blessed," particularly if it occurs between married, monogamous women and men for the purpose of reproduction (Rubin, 1984). Other behaviors such as female orgasm, oral sex, anal sex, masturbation, and relations between the same sex are not part of the script and generally are regarded as being of lower status (Rubin, 1984).