Sexual script theory

Overview

Scripts are cognitive schemas that instruct individuals on how to understand and act in sexual situations, with different people in the same situation potentially enacting different roles. Sexual script theory holds that a person's subjective understanding of their own sexuality substantively determines their choice of sexual actions and the qualitative experience of those acts. The theory is rooted in social constructionism, which posits that shared beliefs within a social group derive interpretations of reality, including human behavior.

From this perspective, sexuality is learned from culturally available messages that set guidelines for sexual behavior and activities, and people learn these scripts through being raised in a particular culture. Gagnon and Simon stated that scripting occurs on three levels: cultural scenarios, which are shaped by cultural institutions and provide context for roles; interpersonal scripts, which rest on cultural scenarios and are created by adapting general guidelines; and intrapsychic scripts, which involve plans, fantasies, memories, and mental rehearsals for carrying out interpersonal scripts. Sexual scripts are shaped by societal structures such as marriage laws, vows, and laws against certain behaviors, and in most Western cultures these scripts differ markedly for males and females.

Development

Sexual script theory was developed by sociologists John H. Gagnon and William Simon in their 1973 book Sexual Conduct. It grew out of symbolic interactionism, which examines how people create and adjust meaning through social exchanges.

Gagnon and Simon created this theory as a challenge to the then-dominant psychoanalytic and biological models, which saw sexual behavior as driven by instincts or biological forces. The theory took shape during the 1960s and 1970s, a period when social constructionism was gaining ground and researchers felt that cultural shifts undermined essentialist views. Gagnon and Simon also linked sexual scripts to gender scripts, a concept that had emerged from feminist scholarship at the time.

Research

Research on sexual scripts has found that they are organized through gender, class, ethnicity, and other social vectors, and that they are gendered. In Western cultures, sexual scripts for women and men differ and often complement one another, with these differences frequently considered a double standard. Traditional gender stereotypes associate maleness with assertiveness, aggressiveness, sexual adventurism, and emotional restraint, and femaleness with docility, passivity, sexual modesty, and emotional intimacy. In heterosexual relationships, it is customary for the male to present greater initial enthusiasm for sex, as a man may fear his masculinity or sexual prowess will be questioned if he does not, while a woman may be cautious about expressing sexual enthusiasm due to social norms.

Among young men, sexual activity is goal-directed toward self-pleasure and tension release and easily divorced from the relationship, while for women it is viewed as potentially dangerous to body and reputation. Gender scripts also affect product design, such as different razors for men and women. Major cultural scenarios for sexual scripts are almost exclusively related to adolescence and early adulthood, the stages in which individuals develop and refine their interpersonal and intrapsychic scripts, with fewer scripts associated with childhood or old age.

Criticism

Writer Rictor Norton argues that sexual script theory is an inadequate tool for understanding sexuality, contending that society is not the driving force and that sexuality arises from an individual's own desires and morals. Norton describes the model as even more determinist than the biological model, which suggests erotic desire is a powerful motive force from within that can resist social forces. Legal scholar David Gurnham writes that the traditional heterosexual sexual script limits a woman's agency, as consent-giving according to that script presupposes a more passive role for women, implying that males may feel entitled to use deceptive or coercive means, rendering consent invalid or severely compromised.