Romantic Love and Sexual Expression

Author(s): Melvin L. Wilkinson

Source: The Family Coordinator, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Apr., 1978), pp. 141-148
Published by: National Council on Family Relations
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/581829 .
Accessed: 29/03/2011 00:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncfr. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Family Coordinator.

http://www.jstor.org
 Romantic Love and Sexual Expression
MELVINL. WILKINSON*

The theory that there exists a relationship between romantic love and sexual
blockage was once widely accepted, but has recently been ignored. The theory is
poorly conceptualized and its implications are misunderstood. The author defines
the terms and clarifies the relationship. He then examines 24 cultures and finds a
strong correlation between the variables. Historical analysis also supports the
theory. Evidence is presented that romantic love in the U.S. is declining as permis-
siveness increases. The implications of the theory for marriage are discussed.

The idea that there exists a relationship
between romantic love and the degree of
sexual expression is an old one. Freud taught
that the feeling of romantic love resulted from
the blocking of the sex drive from its desired
object. He called love "aim-inhibited sex" and
stated further that "Wherever natural barriers
in the way of satisfaction have not sufficed,
mankind has erected conventional ones in
order to be able to enjoy love" (Freud, 1922).
Psychoanalyst Theodore Reik states that, "It
would be appropriate to characterize romantic
love as an aim-inhibited desire of conquest or
of the possessive urge" (1945, p. 102). Willard
Waller concluded that "Love is an idealized
passion which develops from the frustration
of sex" (1938, p. 189). In 1952, Robert 0.
Blood looked at four or five different cultures
and concluded that romance and premarital
sexual relations are incompatible. In 1963,
Stephens examined some cross-cultural data
and concluded that there is some support for
the idea that romantic love results from
sexual blockage, but there are also some con-
tradictions.
Since the late fifties and early sixties, the
sexual blockage theory of romantic love has
pretty much been ignored. It is not mentioned
in most of the popular courtship and marriage
textbooks. Even Blood, who tested the idea in
the fifties, omits it from his popular textbook
*Melvin L. Wilkinson is an Assistant Professor in the
Department of Home Economics, University of Northem
Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa 50613.
(1969). One exception is Udry, who does dis-
cuss the theory in his textbook. He concludes
that there is not enough evidence to support
the hypothesis, but does include it in a multi-
causal model of love (Udry, 1974).
One of the reasons for the decline of the
sexual blockage theory could be that our
society does not view the implications of the
theory favorably. The trend in our society is
toward greater permissiveness which would
result in a decline in romantic love if the
theory is correct. Yet Americans generally
value romantic love. They consider it the main
reason for marriage (Goode, 1959; Udry, 1974;
Murstein, 1974). They might not want to
believe that the loss of it is the price they have
to pay for sexual permissiveness. Two per-
sons in love also do not want to believe that
their love will disappear if they have sexual
relations. (The theory does not necessarily
predict this, but many persons believe it
does.) Obviously, the pleasantness or un-
pleasantness of a theory has nothing to do
with its validity, and a theory should not be
rejected because one does not like its
implications.
Theoretical Clarification
One of the main reasons for the decline of
the sexual blockage theory is the simplistic
way in which it is interpreted. As a
consequence, some persons have not found
any support for the theory as they have
interpreted it. Kanin and Davidson (1972) con-
cluded that a single coital experience did not

April, 1978 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR 141

adversely affect romantic love. The theory
needs to be clarified and put into more
sophisticated form.
First it must be stressed that the theory as
described in this paper deals only with ro-
mantic love. There are many types of love and
the theory only pertains to one of them. It
makes no predictions about companionship
love, or conjugal love, or love based on
mutual need meeting. It is very possible that
these types of love could increase while
romantic love is decreasing. Romantic love as
used here is characterized by (a) strong
attachment and attraction to a single person;
(b) possessiveness, expectations of sexual
loyalty and the potential for sexual jealousy;
(c) extremes of mood, elation, and, at times,
depression, and (d) idealization of the loved
one (Stephens, 1963).
This clarification removes some of the
objections that have been raised concerning
the theory. Some have said that if the sexual
blockage theory is correct, then lovers ought
never to get married for the freedom of sexual
expression in marriage will destroy their love.
The revised theory does not say this. It does
predict that romantic love will likely decrease
after marriage and many married persons
would agree that this is so. But it is very
possible that other forms of love based on
giving, sharing, and need meeting will
increase after marriage.
The hypothesis on which this paper is
based is that romantic love is positively
related to sexual blockage. Sexual blockage,
will be defined as the degree to which one is
not able to have sexual relations with some-
one as often and as intensely as desired. It is
the ratio of desire to frequency. This is a con-
tinuous variable ranging from very high sexual
blockage to very low. One could be
completely prevented from having sexual rela-
tions with one person and not feel any sexual
blockage if one had no desire to have sexual
relations with that person. On the other hand,
one could have sexual relations fairly often
with another person, but still feel a high
degree of sexual blockage if one desired to
have sexual relations much more often than
that. The revised theory does not necessarily
predict that romantic love will disappear the
first time a couple has intercourse. It does
predict that romantic love will decrease if a
142 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR
couple is having sex anytime and everytime
they want. Thus, the theory would predict
generally a lesser degree of romantic love
from couples living together as compared to
those who were steadily dating. One study
compared living together couples with going
together couples. Although they did not
directly measure romantic love, they found
that living together couples were higher on
sexual satisfaction, but lower on feelings of
need and respect (Lyness, Lipetz & Davis,
1972).
Even in marriage, a certain amount of
sexual blockage is involved, e.g., during
menstruation, before and after child birth, at
times when one partner does not feel affec-
tionate, etc. In our society married persons
are expected to, and many of them do, limit
themselves sexually and romantically to one
person. This, in itself, could perhaps be a
form of sexual blockage. The feeling of
limitation could possibly be channeled or
sublimated into the marriage and directed
toward the marriage partner. If this can be
done, then those societies which prohibit
extramarital sex and romance would have a
higher degree of romantic love in marriage
than those who do not. This might help
explain why our society has been able some-
what successfully to combine romantic love
and marriage where some other societies
have held that the two are completely incom-
patible.
It is also important to realize that there are
variables that influence romantic love other
than sexual blockage, e.g., the degree to
which a society socializes its young people to
expect to fall in love or the degree to which a
society allows its young people to associate
freely together. One function of romantic love
is to help persons feel needed, special,
unique, and important. In societies that tend
to make persons feel lonely and individually
unimportant there would be a high degree of
romantic love.
If it is true that romantic love has more than
one cause, then the sexual blockage theory
cannot be disproved by merely citing a few
exceptions. However, if sexual blockage is an
important cause of romantic love, then there
should be a high correlation between the two
when one looks at many cultures.
April, 1978
Cross Cultural Evidence
Blood examined the evidence for the sexual
blockage theory cross-culturally in 1952, but
he only examined a few cultures. A search of
more recent anthropological literature un-
covered 24 cultures which had data on the
degree of romantic love in the culture (See
Table 1). The sample is not random, but con-
sists of all of the cultures on which data could
be found. Sexual blockage was measured by
the degree of restriction of premarital sexual
relations. A Spearman-rank analysis shows a
correlation of .69 between romantic love and
premarital sexual restrictions in the sample.
This was significant at the .001 level. Three
other variables were also correlated with
romantic love. Modesty, a measure of how
much the body was covered and how much
open sexual displays were avoided, correlated
.58 with romantic love and was significant at
the .01 level. Covering genitals, a sub-scale of
the modesty scale, correlated .44 with roman-
tic love and was significant at the .05 level.
Having restrictions against adultery corre-
lated .37 with romantic love, but did not
reach the .05 level of significance.
Partial correlation was used to test for
spuriousness and to see the degree of inde-
pendence of the four variables from each
other. Premarital sexual restrictiveness
proved to be quite independent of the other
three variables. When all three of the other
variables were controlled for, there still
remained a correlation of .58 between this var-
iable and romantic love. The extent to which
genitals were covered was also fairly indepen-
dent. When the other three variables were
controlled, there still remained a .36 correla-
tion between this variable and romantic love.
From this one might speculate as to why this
variable has an influence independent of
sexual intercourse. It may be that a large
component of the sexual drive is the desire to
know. In the Bible, this is the word that is
used for sexual relations. Perhaps viewing
many uncovered genitals satisfies the desire
to know and thus reduces sexual blockage. In
knowing, one may also discover that all
genitals look pretty much alike, thus reducing
the feeling of uniqueness and irreplaceability
of the loved one which is a strong component
of romantic love. This question is currently
very relevant to our society since we have only
recently allowed complete nudity in maga-
zines, films, and plays. Might this trend result
in a decline in romantic love?

Table 1.
Romance and Premarital Sexual Restrictiveness
Culture Romantic Love PremaritalSexual Restrictiveness
Truk Often' Ineffective Restrictions1, 4
Alor Sometimes2 Ineffective Restrictions4
Gusii Sometimes2 Ineffective Restrictions4
Jamaica Sometimes2 Ineffective Restrictions2
Siwai Sometimes2 Ineffective Restrictions2
Trobrianders Seldom2' 5 2 No Restrictions4'5 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Muria Seldom2' 3, 6 No Restrictions3' 4t6
Taitou Seldom2' 7,-
9Effective Restrictions4' 9
4 - 2,
Murngin Seldom2 No Restrictions2
Jamaica
Naoztl SometimS2
Seldom2 Ineffective Restrictions
Ineffective Restrictions
Arapesh Seldom2' 7Ineffective Restrictions'7
Ifugao Absent2 2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2
No Restrictions2
Kaingang Absent2 No Restrictions
Lepcha Absent2 No Restrictions4
Manus Absent2 Ineffective Restrictions4
Siriono Absent2 No Restrictions 4
Samoans Absent2' INoRestrictions2' 8
Goulbourn Absent4 No Restrictions4
Kamano Absent4 No Restrictions4
Marquesas Absent2' 4 No Restrictions4
Mohave Absent4 No Restrictions4
Baiga Absent2' No Restrictions4
Tahiti Absent3'4 No Restrictions3
'Goodenough, 1949 2Stephens, 1963 3Denis, 1967 4Stephens, 1971 5Malinowski, 1929 6 Elwin, 1947
7Mead, 1935 8Mead, 1928 9Yang, 1945

April,1976 THEFAMILY
COORDINATOR 143
 If the four variables correlated with roman-
tic love are entered in a step-wise multiple
regression equation, premarital sexual re-
strictiveness is entered first and covering of
genitals is second. The other two do not add
any significant amount of variance. Together
the two have a multiple R of .77 and account
for .59 of the variance in romantic love.
The analysis of data from the 24 cultures in
our sample gives strong support to the sexual
blockage theory on the societal level. It does
not necessarily support the theory on the
individual level. While this support does not
prove causality, it does indicate a strong
relation between the two variables.
A look at those societies that do not fit the
hypothesis in Table 1 helps clarify the
limitations of the theory. The Taitou, for
example, have high sexual restrictiveness,
but are low on romantic love. They are lacking
in some of the other variables that lead to
romantic love such as free association of
young people. The reason that their restric-
tions are effective is that they do not allow
young people the opportunity (Yang, 1945).
Among the 24 cultures studied, there are sex-
ually restrictive societies that are not high on
romantic love, but there are no sexually per-
missive societies that are high on romantic
love. This gives some support for the idea that
sexual blockage is a necessary, but not a suf-
ficient cause of romantic love. In support of
this, Stephens (1971) says, "In the cases of
maximal freedom, sexuality apparently tends
to be a simple genital type, with little
aestheticism or interest in the body's
beauty. . . . There is only slight development
of the erotic arts, and weak connection
between sex and love, and rather little
possessiveness or sexual jealousy ( p. 443)."
On the Island of Truk one finds a high
degree of romantic love but not very high
sexual restrictions. However, since there is a
shortage of females on this island, sexual
blockage probably results from many males
competing for few females (Blood, 1952).
Confirmation of the theory is strengthened
when one goes beyond the statistics and
looks more closely at the details of the lives
of people in these societies. For example, the
Muria of India have the most complete and
highly organized system of premaritalpromis-
cuity in the world. From the age of six or
144 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR
seven until they marry, all children live
together in the "ghotul." This is a dormitory
type arrangement run by the young people
themselves. The ghotul is very orderly and
rules are carefully enforced. The rules forbid
steady relationships and encourage promis-
cuity. There is a rotation system and no
couple is allowed to sleep together for longer
than three nights in succession. Their leader
is supposed to see that the unattractive
person has just as many opportunities for
sexual expression as the attractive person.
One of the purposes of the changing partners
is to avoid jealousy. But the main point of all
this according to the famous anthropologist
Verrier Elwin is to "cure people of love." It
makes certain that the young Muria will
accept the person they had been betrothed to
since childhood. Elwin states that the system
works quite well (Denis, 1967).
The Tahitians sleep with whom they please,
and there is absolutely no sense of guilt asso-
ciated with sex. Jealousy is rarely a problem
and coitus is valued purely for the pleasure it
brings. According to one author, "Tahiti, for
all of the romantic words that have been
written about it in the past, is really one of the
least romantic places on earth. Tahitians have
no word to describe romantic love and the
nineteenth century ideal of romance, based as
it is on self-denial, suffering, and the exclu-
sive union of two souls rather than two
bodies, would strike a Tahitian as utterly
ridiculous" (Denis, 1967, p. 189).
When some societies have been exposed to
more romantic cultures they may adopt the
language of love without the behavior. Samoa
is a good example of this. The Samoan talks
very romantically, but neither he nor his
partner believes it. "The Samoans laugh at
stories of romantic love, scoff at fidelity to a
long absent wife or mistress, believe explicit-
ly that one love will quickly cure another .
(Mead, 1928).
Historical Evidence
One can also look at history to see if there
is support for the sexual blockage theory. The
Greeks began their civilization as monog-
amous and sexually restrictive and were quite
romantic in their culture (Unwin, 1934). Later
they became quite permissive. The language
of love remained, but there is some evidence
April, 1978
that the feeling declined. Hunt had this to say expression that was still illegal and had some
about Greek love: "'A plague is Love, a risk involved in it (Hunt, 1959).
plague' groaned a hundred poets, but strange Most scholars believe that the roots of the
to say, they seemed to have no fever: the modern concept of romantic love began in the
plague had not really infected them" (Hunt, twelfth century idea of courtly love. A knight
1959, p. 50). But even if the feeling was not would dedicate his whole life to the service of
strong, what romantic feeling there was left some noble lady and perform wonderful
was directed mostly toward well-educated, deeds for her. The idealization was so
high-priced prostitutes. This would initially extreme that the knight considered her almost
seem to contradict the sexual blockage theory a divine being. A single smile from her was
but one must examine the behavior of these enough to send him into raptures of delight
high-priced prostitutes or "hetaera" more and the touch of her hand was worth more
closely. Socrates gave this advice to one of than all of the other women put together. But
them, "You will charm them to the best if you the object of this adoration was never the
never surrender except when they are sharp- knight's wife or even his mistress. It was in
set . . . Create a hunger before you bring on most cases the wife of some nobleman. A
the banquet . . . Seem not to wish to yield. knight would sometimes serve for many years
Fly from them and fly again until they feel the for the bestowal of a single kiss. If he was
keen pang of hunger" (Hunt, 1959, p. 37). really fortunate, his lady would let him un-
Hunt says of the hetaera, "They held court, dress her, caress her, and put her to bed but
sparred verbally with their suitors, played sexual relations were strictly forbidden. Thus,
hard to get, teased, tormented, and frustrated our modern concept of romantic love had its
their admirers . . ." (159, p. 38). An additional origins in one of the highest states of sexual
source of sexual frustration was that the frustration imaginable (Hunt, 1959).
hetaera were generally not sexually faithful to European and American cultures are greatly
any one man. They were still, afterall, influenced by the traditions of courtly love
prostitutes. Complete separation of love and along with the traditions of Christianity which
marriage in Greece eventually resulted in a encourage sexual restrictions. All of these
declining marriage rate and birth rate. Laws nations are somewhat romantic today, but
were passed to encourage marriage, but these some more than others. The United States is
had little effect (Murstein, 1974). probably one of the most romantic, and it has
Rome also began its history as monog- been traditionally one of the most sexually
amous and sexually very restrictive, but later conservative. The Scandinavian countries are
became very permissive (Queen & Habenstein, probably the most permissive, and would
1974). Their concept of romantic love was appear to be low on romance (Christensen,
somewhat different from our own today. Hunt 1970; Luckey & Nass, 1969). One author who
says, "Love in Rome was lusty, exuberant, lived in Scandinavia for some time had this to
and unclouded by a sense of sin, but it was say on the subject, "The Scandinavians are
strangely blended with obscenity, and hatred; very little touched by the traditions of roman-
it burned brightest between lovers who tic love that have influenced the West for over
quarreled, tormented each other, and were a thousand years. There is for instance, no
flagrantly unfaithful" (Hunt, 1959, p. 55). The developed vocabulary for courtship; they do
idealization component seemed to be com- without it, and come directly to the true end
pletely missing. But even so, love seemed to of 'love' without any of the diversions"
be associated with playing hard to get, being (Elliott, 1970, p. 228).
unavailable, or not being able to completely
The Decline of Romantic Love In the U.S.
possess a person because of their unfaithful-
ness. Love became completely disassociated Even though the U.S. is relatively sexually
from that partner who was most easily avail- restrictive compared to many other nations, It
able, the marriage partner, and became is becoming sexually more permissive. There
attached to the spouse of someone else. The is a tremendous change in the openness with
most popular form of love was adultery. This which sex is discussed and depicted in all
happened to be about the only form of sexual forms of the media. There has also been a

April, 1978 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR 145

change in behavior, although this change is
not nearly as great as most persons believe.
The double standard is disappearing and it is
considered more legitimate to have relations
with the girl one is going to marry (Reiss,
1976). Since the loved one is more sexually
available now than in the past, sexual block-
age ought to be reduced. Thus, we would
expect romantic love to decline in the United
States providing none of the other variables
affecting romantic love counteract the decline
in sexual blockage.
Measuring the decline of romantic love in a
society as large and as complex as the United
States is a difficult task. One quantitative
measure is a count of the percentage of
popular songs that are about romantic love.
Horton in 1957 found that 87% of the popular
music of that time was about romantic love.
This had dropped to about 70% in 1966
(Carey, 1969). A survey of the top twenty in
Billboard for various months of 1976 shows
the percentages ranging between 50 and 60
percent. A rough qualitative analysis involved
content analysis of popular songs. Wilkinson
(1976) studied two hundred songs popular
from 1954 to 1968. In one part of his study, he
counted how often adjectives such as
"heavenly" or "angel" appeared in these
songs. This frequency was then compared
with newer songs. A survey of 128 songs in
Song Hits of the Super 70's shows that these
words or similar words show up only half as
often (Anderson, 1976). This seems to indi-
cate a decline in idealizing of the loved one
over this time period.
In the United States there are no powerful
economic forces which compel one to marry.
There are certainly social forces on the single
to get married, but even so we do not expect
someone to marry someone they do not love.
If romantic love is indeed declining in the
United States, we would also expect the rate
of marriage to decline. Recent census data
show that for the first time in many years the
marriage rate in the U.S. is declining.
The increasing popularity of living together
on college campuses might also be an
indicator of the decline of romantic love. The
pragmatic, temporary, and trial-like nature of
this life style does not seem compatible with
the romantic tradition (Macklin, 1974). In
romantic love, the lovers do not worry much
146 THE FAMILY COORDINATOR
about social and sexual compatibility and
they do not enter a relationship with the idea
that it will probably be temporary.
Summary and Conclusions
There is persuasive evidence that a
relationship between romantic love and
sexual blockage does exist. The cross-cultural
sample shows a strong, independent relation-
ship between the two variables. Historically,
even in sexually very permissive times,
romantic love was attached to those who
played hard to get or it flourished only where
there were still legal or practical barriers in
the way of complete sexual satisfaction. The
mnodernconcept of romantic love arose in the
twelfth century out of conditions of extreme
sexual frustration. In modern times, there is
evidence that romantic love in the United
States is decreasing as society becomes more
permissive. None of this evidence proves a
causal relationship between sexual blockage
and romantic love. Most of the evidence is at
the societal level and not at the individual
level. It does not measure or control for
sexual desire as would be necessary to com-
pletely test the theory. But there appears to
be enough evidence to seriously reconsider a
theory that has been largely ignored for the
last ten years.
The paper takes no stand on the value of
romantic love. Some would argue that its
decline is beneficial and that mate selection
would be much more logical if there were less
romance in our society. There are others who
claim that our system of mate selection based
on romantic love works as well as any other
(Udry, 1974). Spanier (1972) found a slight
positive correlation between romanticism in
marriage and marital adjustment. One might
expect a significant decline in the marriage
rate in the United States if romantic love were
to disappear. This is apparently what hap-
pened in Greece and Rome where the marriage
rate dropped sharply when romantic love
became separated from marriage (Hunt, 1959;
Murstein, 1974).
The average American probably values
romantic love enough to be upset at the idea
that sexual expression in marriage reduces
romantic love. This does not appear to be an
inevitable consequence of the theory if certain
conditions are met.
April, 1978
 First, it seems possible that the feeling of
romantic love could become conditioned in a
person much as Pavlov conditioned his dogs.
The feeling of romantic love is at first elicited
by interacting with a desired person under
conditions of sexual blockage. This feeling of
love becomes associated with the appearance
of that person, their voice, touch, smell,
personality, and so on. If the feeling of
romantic love and this person become
associated together often enough over a long
period of time, then the person could eventu-
ally become a conditioned stimulus for the
feeling of romantic love by himself even
though the sexual blockage is missing. So if
two persons interact for some time under
conditions of sexual blockage, then the feel-
ing of romantic love could become associated
with that person. Then when sexual blockage
is lessened as in marriage, the romantic love
will still be aroused by the loved one. Inter-
mittent periods of sexual blockage such as
pregnancy or separation would keep the con-
ditioning from being extinguished. If this
argument is correct, then the permanence of
romantic love in marriage would depend
partly on having a period of dating and court-
ship under conditions of sexual blockage.
Kirkendall (1961) found that having inter-
course at the beginning of a relationship was
associated with a weakened relationship. This
is consistent with the theory. He suggested
that a period of sexual restraint might be
necessary to form an affectionate relation-
ship.
Secondly, a monogamous marriage by its
very nature has its own sexual blockage built
in. This is particularly true if the culture
restricts both romantic love and sexual rela-
tions to marriage. In the twelfth century,
sexual relations were restricted to marriage,
but it was proper to fall in love outside of mar-
riage. Consequently, there seemed to be little
romantic love in marriage. In Rome, they were
unsuccessful in restricting sexual relations to
marriage, and romantic love soon left
marriage also. Our society attempts with
some success to restrict both romantic love
and sexual relations to marriage. It is possi-
ble that these blocked sexual and romantic
desires are channeled into marriage and
thereby increase romantic love for the
marriage partner.
April, 1978 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR
Thirdly, in our culture we are taught that
romantic love, sex, and marriage belong to-
gether. We expect to feel romantic love
towards our marriage partner and to a certain
extent this helps us actually to feel this way.
Fourthly, sexual blockage is relative and
depends on the ratio of desire to fulfillment.
This means that romantic love in marriage
might be increased by increasing the sexual
desire of the spouses for each other. This
would increase the sexual blockage in mar-
riage without decreasing the amount of sex-
ual expression.
In conclusion, the sexual blockage theory
as described in this paper does not predict
that romantic love and marriage are incom-
patible. It does predict that romantic love in
marriage will be maximized in those cultures
where (a) there is a long period of dating and
courtship where young people are allowed to
associate freely, but there are restrictions on
sexual relations; (b) the society restricts mar-
ried persons from sexual relations and roman-
tic involvement outside of marriage; and
(c) the society socializes its members to
believe that romantic love, marriage, and sex-
ual relations belong together. Finally, individ-
uals might increase romantic love in their
marriage by increasing mutual sexual desire.
The United States as a culture has tradition-
ally met the first three conditions and has
been able to combine romantic love with
marriage somewhat successfully. Most cul-
tures of the past have not been able to do this.
There are currently trends in our society to re-
move restrictions on sexual relations during
dating, and to encourage extramarital sexual
relations and romantic involvements. The sex-
ual blockage theory predicts that, if these
trends continue, romance in marriage will
decline. Time and further testing of the theory
will be required to see if this prediction is
accurate.
REFERENCES
Anderson, W. Song hits of the super 70's. Connecticut:
Charlton, 1976.
Blood, R. Romance and premarital Intercourse-Incompat-
ibles? Marriage and Family Living, 1952, 14, 105-108.
Blood, R. Marriage. New York: Free Press, 1969.
Carey, J. Changing courtship patterns In the popular song.
American Journal of Sociology, 1969, 74, 720-731.
147
Christensen, H. T. & Gregg, C. F. Changing sex norms in
America and Scandinavia. Joumal of Marriage and the
Family, 1970, 32, 616427.
Denis, A. Taboo. New York: Putnam, 1967.
Elliott, N. Sensuality in Scandinavia. New York:Weybright
& Talley, 1970.
Elwin, V. The muria and their ghotul. Bombay: Oxford,
1947.
Freud, S. Group psychology and the analysis of the ego.
London: Hogarth, 1922.
Goode, W. J. The theoretical importance of love. American
Sociological Review, 1959, 24, 39-47.
Goodenough, W. Premarital freedom on Truk: Theory and
practice. The American Anthropologist, 1949, 51, 615-
620.
Horton, D. The dialogue of courtship in popular songs.
American Journal of Sociology, 1957, 62, 569-578.
Hunt, M. The natural history of love. New York: Knopf,
1959.
Kanin, E. J. & Davidson, K. R. Some evidence on the aim-
inhibition hypothesis of love. The Sociological Quarterly,
1972, 13, 210-216.
Kirkendall, L. Premarital intercourse and interpersonal re-
lationships. New York: Gramercy, 1961.
Luckey, E. B. & Nass, G. D. A comparison of sexual atti-
tudes and behavior in an international sample. Joumal of
Marriage and the Family, 1969, 31, 364-379.
Lyness, J. L., Lipetz, M. E., & Davis, K. E. Living together:
An alternative to marriage. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 1972, 34, 305-311.
Macklin, E. Cohabitation in college: Going very steady.
Psychology Today, November, 1974.
Malinowski, B. The sexual life of savages In Northwest
Melanesia. London: Routledge, 1929.
Mead, M. Coming of age In Samoa. New York: Morrow,
1928.
Mead, M. Sex and temperament In three primitive societies.
New York: Morrow, 1935.
Murstein, B. Love, sex, and marriage through the ages.
New York: Springer, 1974.
Queen, S., & Habenstein, R. The family In various cultures.
Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1974.
Reik, T. Psychology of sex relations. Toronto: Farrarand
Rinehart, 1945.
Reiss, J. Family systems In America. Hinsdale, Illinois:
Dryden, 1976.
Spanier, G. Romanticism and marital adjustment. Joumal
of Marriage and the Family, 1972, 34, 481-487.
Stephens, W. The family in cross-cultural perspective. New
York: Holt, 1963.
Stephens, W. A cross-cuitural study of modesty and ob-
scenity. In Technical Report of the Commission on
Obscenity and Pomography. Vol. ix, U.S. Government
Printing Office, 1971, Y3.0b7:10.
Udry, J. The social context of marriage. Phiiadelphia:
Lippincott, 1974.
Unwin, J. D. Sex and culture. London: Oxford, 1934.
Waller, W. The family: A dynamic Interpretation. New York:
Cordon, 1938.
Wilkinson, M. Romantic iove: The great equalizer? Sexism
in popular music. The Family Coordinator, 1976, 25, 161-
166.
Yang, M. C. A Chinese village: Taltou, Shantung Province.
New York: Columbia U., 1945.

First of its kin(i: EQUALOGtmCONTRACT

for Marrying, Married, or Cohabiting Adults
by Janette and Paschal Baute
LIVINGTOGETHERinvolves many agreements & contractual arrangements, often arrived at by a hit-or-miss
fashion, sexual politics, and hidden agendas each brings. A non-sexist promptbook, EQUALOG CONTRACT,
is a Do-It-Yourself guide for making living together an open negotiation process with both partners equal.
Sample agreements suggested for basic areas. Legal precedents for feminist principles noted. Includes in-
structions for use & humanistic guidelines for separation/divorce. Developed and tested by two therapists
from their personal & professional experiences. USEFUL for cohabiting couples, those approaching marriage,
divorce or remarriage, or as a tool for marriage review or re-negotiation. 12 pp. Copy $2.00 (add $.45
postage). QuantHty rates for schools, professionals, agencies. OTHERFORMS & CHECKLISTS FOR
DEVELOPINGAWARENESS & COMMUNICATIONSKILLS AVAILABLE.

INSTITUTEFOR HUMAN RESPONSIVENESS, INC.

Dept. J, 6200 Winchester Rd, Lexington, KY 40511

148 THE FAMILYCOORDINATOR April, 1978