Andrew Smiler profiles young men’s three most common ways of thinking about dating and hooking up.
As someone who does research on young men’s sexual development and has written a book about it, I often get asked if all guys “just want sex.” The answer is no, of course. Not all guys are the same.
Nearly all guys have and want relationships, even the guys who screw around. Regardless of their sexual history or interest in having random sex, when a guy has a sweetie, that relationship is important to him, even if he’s not very good at respecting it or making it work. Dudes like knowing they have someone to talk to, someone who will be there for them, and someone who will “have their back.” Men in long term marriages receive a slew of benefits from have those relationships.
Nearly all guys have and want relationships, even the guys who screw around.
|
In order to help you figure out where you stand – or where your (potential) partner stands – here’s a field guide to guys’ approaches to dating and sex. The simplest way to know which category a guy fits in is to find out how many sexual partners he averages per year. You might not be comfortable asking that question and you might not get an honest answer, but this guide will give you other things to consider.
Casanovas (or players) live out the classic hook-up script: go to a party/bar/whatever, talk to a variety of people, find one who seems to be willing, and go home with that person. Their goal is getting laid, so they have very little interest in who their partner is (beyond available) and they have little to no intention of seeing or talking to that person again.
Because their goal is to have no-strings-attached sex, many of these guys believe it’s perfectly fine to “spit game” or lie to their potential partner(s). Rightly or wrongly, they don’t expect to have to deal with any consequences of these random sexual encounters.
Because romantic guys prefer to have some type of emotional connection with their sexual partners, they’re also the guys who might acknowledge some regret about having a random hookup.
|
By the numbers, these guys average three or more sexual partners per year.
Casanovas are different with dating partners than hookups. In an ongoing relationship, they can be just as devoted, caring, honest, and loyal as any other guy. Unfortunately, they’re also more likely to cheat on their partners than other guys.
It doesn’t make sense to me, but players are less likely than other guys to use condoms. That probably explains why they have higher rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and unplanned pregnancies than other guys. You’d think that dudes who were totally into their own pleasure and who have little apparent respect for their partners would do everything they could to make sure there are no ongoing reminders of that particular night of pleasure, but they don’t. In that way, they’re actually quite different than the real Giacomo Casanova.
In any given year, as many as twenty percent of young men – about one guy in five – might be living a player lifestyle. But only about five percent, or one guy in twenty, does this for three straight years.
Religious guys are just that: religious. They tend to come from the more conservative ends of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam and they genuinely believe that sex is for marriage. They don’t hookup and they don’t engage in premarital sex. (Or, at least, not until shortly before their wedding day with their betrothed.)
Religious guys believe that the whole purpose of dating is to find a marital partner.
|
Religious guys believe that the whole purpose of dating is to find a marital partner and some of them call it “courting” instead of dating. Whatever term is used, these are interested in finding a wife, not just dating because they like someone and want to see where the relationship goes. By the time he’s three months into a relationship, a religious guy is giving serious thought about whether or not this relationship could lead to marriage. If the answer is no, then the relationship is over.
Needless to say, religious guys are pretty much the anti-Casanovas of the world. You won’t find them at the bars/parties/whatever where the Players hang out. You’re much more likely to find them at church or synagogue or mosque, or other activities sponsored by those kinds of organizations.
Religious guys aren’t as uncommon as you might think. Estimates say they’re something like twenty percent of 18-29 year olds, or about one guy in five. If that number surprises you, it’s probably because religion plays little if any role in your life. There are lots of high schools and colleges that were created by and are (still) administered by religious organizations. Some have a clear expectation that their students will attend services regularly. And pretty much every American college has several student run religious organizations as well as nearby religious congregations that routinely serve college students, even though the organizations themselves are not affiliated with the university.
Romantics have a strong preference for dating their sexual partners. They’re not really interested in hooking up, and when they do, it’s usually with someone they know and have some sense of connection to. As college senior Derek explained to me about his one and only hookup experience, it “had more meaning to it because it was emotional although we both knew that at the same time it was just once and nothing to take too seriously.” For the record, that hookup occurred with an ex-girlfriend.
Because romantic guys prefer to have some type of emotional connection with their sexual partners, they’re also the guys who might acknowledge some regret about having a random hookup.
Romantics don’t have a lot of partners, dating or sexual. For them, it’s an average of about one per year.
There’s no one place where you’re most likely to find them, except maybe work or school. Although you’ll find them at bars/parties/etc., “meat markets” aren’t really their thing, so they might not be having a good time or they might not start a conversation with you.
Most guys are romantics. Some of them lack the confidence to ask someone out or aren’t good at reading the non-verbal signals women use to send interest instead of asking a guy out. Many of them get labeled as nice guys and compared to bad boys. As a result, these guys can easily end up in the Friendzone.
♦◊♦
If you’re not sure which category you – or the guy you’re interested in – fits into and you don’t know about his sexual experiences, here are some things to think about. If the guy…
- seems very confident, cocky, or egotistical during his interactions with you-as-potential-partner, he’s a Casanova.
- is mostly focused on your looks, he’s a Casanova.
- is lying to you, he’s a Casanova.
- spontaneously and somewhat regularly mentions god or god’s will, he’s religious.
- seems moderately unsure of himself, nervous, or like he’s not sure if he’s making a good impression, he’s romantic.
- experiences moments of conversational silence, awkward or otherwise, he’s a romantic.
Good luck. I hope this short guide helps you find what you want.
—
This post is republished to Medium.
Image by pernillarydmark/flickr
Ok, so my boyfriend and I had a 3some with his baby mama with whom he has had an on again off again type of relationship over the last 10 yrs. (he and I only a couple months) Both baby mama (Fawn) and I (Renee) have known that he has been with each of us, sexually but never altogether till recently. When its 1 on 1 he has no problem getting or keeping an erection and tonight he was quite frustrated at not becoming aroused at all. What are your thoughts????
A very interesting article. I do not find the number of sexual partners of the ‘cassinova’ type to be very realistic however. These types seem like they would be much much higher. I would think more to the level of 3 per week than per year. I suspect your sample size was taken from a conservative population.
The part I find incredulous is that a Casanova sleeps with THREE partners a year? That’s not a player! That’s a normal average single person. Speaking from personal experience, young males aged 20-24 I’ve spoken to who are single are sleeping with wayyyyyy more girls than that. The last one I met, who I definitely consider a Romantic (and who told me he’s a “girlfriend-type of guy”), had slept with 15 women in the past 18 months. Another 24-year-old guy (who was more of a Casanova) told me in his sexual history he had slept with 40-60 women. I’m female… Read more »
What I learned most from this article comes from the comments: Apparently, society’s reading comprehension and critical thinking skills seem to have continued to decline. So many people can’t seem to process the concept that you are summarizing and commenting on the numerical results of a survey. How anyone can draw the conclusion that you are trying to stereotype guys, or fit them all into one of three boxes is beyond me… I personally don’t see any way I can apply this article in my personal life, so it seems mostly pointless to me. But my goodness, people. Most of… Read more »
Thanks so much. This is really interesting and really helps to overcome stereotypes about male sexual behavior.
I have a hard time grasping the idea that relationships are important to men who don’t do a good job or respecting them or lie and cheat within in them. It might be more accurate to say, that *his* place in the relationship is important to him, meaning he gets all his needs satisfied, but his actual partner may not be as important to him as his own needs and desires are to him. I actually do think this article seem rather stereotyping and limiting all around. You can certainly find religious guys at parties, Romantics and/or “Casanovas” at church.… Read more »
From what I see from myself , my brothers, and my close friends, most men I know are romantic type. I dont know why, but as an Asian guy ( who grew up and live in Asian country), the whole cassanova thing seems like a myth or just a role in Holywood movies. I dont know how it feels in United States or Europe, but I know very very very few men here who are cassanova ( mostly a political figure or celebrities ) whose goal is to get laid with every attractive women he found. I dont know, most… Read more »
I’m a romantic then. Very interesting article.
it’s insulting to men to put them into these really general and static categories
Hi Anne
If you see this as insults, then you see all science as insults.
Lets be glad we have psychologists. We need them.
Not necessarily. It’s a question of wording. As the author has already mentioned, there are men who do not fit into the categories he lists. Saying 3 major categories exist is may be true and supported by data, and a reason for him to write about them. Saying all men fit one of the three when evidence to the contrary exist is false. So that’s why scientists often sacrifice artistic quality in their writing for the sake of clarity. Whether it’s insulting or not is an emotional thing, and not a science thing. Emotions usually come from how the data… Read more »
Plenty has been written about the mythical friend zone: ‘the mythical friend zone is a situation in which a guy (or girl, but usually guy) has unstated, unrequited feelings for another person, and sticks around doing nice things (read, being a friend) under the impression that a certain number of nice things will magically open up the possibility of a sexual/romantic relationship with the object of their affection, and is pissed/affronted when they discover that no, the person still does not want to fuck them. This is closely linked to Nice Guy™ Syndrome, in which the crush-er cannot understand why… Read more »
No.
The firend zone is when someone is only seen as a friend and not a potential romantic partner. Nothing more. Everything you add on top of that is politics.
Hanging out with a guy you like and he looks at you and says your like a sister to him…. boom friend zoned.
I just want to say, there are a number of “Cassanovas” that are perfectly happy to be up front about looking for casual sex. This article seems to imply that by definition I must be a liar. I’ve never had any problem hooking up when I was straightforward and truthful about it, women actually like that. Maybe I’m the odd man out here. The bias I’m detecting here is that the only way to legitimately look for sex is to do it inside a monogamous relationship otherwise there must be something wrong with you. How old fashioned and rigid…
Hi Mark,
You’re the second person to say that, so I need to reread to see why it’s coming across that way. I think hooking up is just fine, as long as everyone is up front about it.
Unfortunately, the trend that comes across in published research is that the guys who have lots of partners are more likely to be manipulative (and lie) than not, like the currently viral frat boy letter.
Interesting how hooking up is just groovy as if protection is 100% foolproof and HIV and pregnancy didn’t exist.
HIV and pregnancy exist in committed relationships as well. And condom use is 99% effective against HIV transmission, and 98% effective against pregnancy, and there is this amazing thing called ‘testing’ – both partners can get tested before hooking up.
But isn’t that just a result of numbers? These so called Cassanovas are more likely to have cheated than religious guy for obvious reasons – the religious think cheating is wrong and wouldn’t report it if they had. And Cassanovas have just had more partners which inevitably bumps up the chances that they’ve cheated on someone. And more than 3 partners in a year makes a guy a Cassanova? That’s crazy surely. 3 is not that much. You could be single and looking for a partner and if you meet someone, you date for a while and then sleep together… Read more »
Men who classified as “romantic” have “only” one partner a year? That sounds like a lot when you think about it.
Hi Andrew You write: ✺”In any given year, as many as twenty percent of young men – about one guy in five – might be living a player lifestyle. But only about five percent, or one guy in twenty, does this for three straight years.”✺ Is being a Casanove a personalty trait, a personalty type? If they live this lifestyle only a few years , then it is not a personalty type, or do they mature and grow up eventually ? I am comfused. Can we say that five percent have a personalty that makes them choose this lifestyle because… Read more »
Were would someone like a swinger with a wife fit in to those boxes?
I hadn’t thought about them Anonguy. Or guys in sexually “open” relationships of any sort. By the numbers, they’d be players, I think, although it’s probably a different profile that what I’ve described.
The casanova type is very foreign to me, and I haven’t been single for a very long time, so I am by no means an expert. That being said: Are players *really* more likely to lie and cheat on their partners than the others, or is that just an assumption based on the fact they have so many partners? For one thing, we can’t assume that players are always tricking women into thinking that the men want long-term committed relationships when they really don’t. Don’t assume that a player’s partner wants a long-term relationship so therefore he must be lying… Read more »
Hi wellokaythen, The study that I referenced by Humblet, Paul & Dickson found that guys who averaged 3 or more partners per year – my Casanova group – were the most likely to tel reasearchers that they were in relationship with someone and cheated on that partner. The men in the study decided which of their experiences were relationships and which were non-relational (within some bounds set by the researchers). The conclusion that guys in this group are more likely to cheat comes directly from those questions. It doesn’t mean that all – or even most – Casanovas cheat on… Read more »
I think I was confusing “personality type” with “lifestyle,” for lack of a better word. So, a Casanova type could be in an ostensibly exclusive relationship but have a casanova approach to sex. I was thinking Casanova type meant someone who engages in casual sex with multiple partners without promising anything long-term. But, it sounds like many of that type surveyed are basically “closet” Casanovas keeping their preferences hidden from their partners.
That’s a good question Iben.
The larger profile of Casanovas indicates they’re also tend to be more power-oriented, sexist, and homophobic than other guys, and they’re more likely to see relationships as adversarial & contraception as her responsibility. That’s from group averages.
I don’t have a good profile about the guys who want to opt out in case of pregnancy, so this is pure speculation, but i have to think that the guys who really do fit the average profile would be the ones who don’t want to be responsible for that child.
Hi Andrew
This was interesting.
Now I have question. You write about Casanovas:
✺” doesn’t make sense to me, but players are less likely than other guys to use condoms. That probably explains why they have higher rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and unplanned pregnancies than other guys.”✺
Are these guys the same that wants the right to,opt out If a woman gets pregnant ?
Let me ask you; do you think it’s possible that women who are diligent about using birth control also can be pro-choice when it comes to the issue of abortion?
Hi Andrew , and thanks.
I’d just like to add something to the last 2 bullets in your list.
A guy being shy, nervous or more or less awkward doesn’t necessarily make him a “romantic”. He might just be inexperienced.
good point FlyingKal. I hadn’t thought about level of experience.