Reviewer's report
Title:"A man's gonna do what a man wants to do": African American and
Hispanic women's perceptions about heterosexual relationships: a qualitative
study
Version: 2Date:14 January 2013
Reviewer: L. Monique L Ward
Reviewer's report:
This study presents qualitative interview data from 60 African American and
Hispanic women concerning their sexual and romantic relationships ideals,
scripts, and strategies. The goal of this study was to shed some light on
gender-related scripts that may be affecting HIV risk-related sexual behavior and
negotiations among high-risk populations. I appreciate the authors’ attention to
this important issue and think they tapped a wonderful sample and produced a
rich dataset. However, I also have many questions about the study that need to
be addressed.
MAJOR COMPULSORY REVISIONS
1. I was somewhat surprised to see that the authors chose not to use or employ
sexual script theory (Gagnon & Simon), because it does seem to fit well with their
premises and approach. They may want to either cite and dismiss it, or site the
theory and say they are building on it.
Also, some researchers have investigated more closely the role of gendered
sexual messages, acknowledging that different sexual norms and messages
exist for women and men. Combining scripting theory with feminist theory, Kim et
al. (2007) label this framework “the Heterosexual Script,” which represents the
dominant script in North America that defines what is considered culturally
appropriate relational and sexual behavior (Tolman et al., 2007). Situated in
positions of power, men are seen to enact the Heterosexual Script by actively
pursuing sexual relationships, treating women as sexual objects, rejecting
homosexual feelings or behavior, and avoiding commitment and emotional
attachment (Kim et al., 2007). Women are seen to enact the Heterosexual Script
by setting sexual limits, acting sexually passive, using their looks to attract men,
seeking emotional connections, and minimizing their own desire. This theory was
initially developed to describe portrayals in media and popular culture, but
extends to cultural scripts outside the media.
Many aspects of the responses provided by the participants seem to match the
Heterosexual Script. This includes points made on page 19 about sex being
initiated by men; points made on p. 21 about women and men holding different
relationship priorities; and points made on 21 about sexual women’s getting a
bad reputation.
2. The setup of the study is interesting, theoretically, but the authors need to
provide more framework within which to understand their findings. Right now, the
reports seem a bit random. What are the research questions and hypotheses
guiding the authors’ research? What questions did they ask the participants?
Reading the quotations and summations from the participants does not really
help me when I do not know what kinds of questions participants were asked that
produced these responses. For example, on page 14, the authors state,
“Participants indicated that sex could be withheld or offered to achieve desired
relationship outcomes.” Were they asked this directly? What questions were
participants asked they lead them to produce this response (and the others)?
MINOR ESSENTIAL REVISIONS
METHODS
3. The authors should provide a few sentences on where/how the women were
found. Were they recruited door-to-door? By random digit-dialing? Through
churches? The readers need a sense of what kind of participants these are.
4. It seems that each interview received content-based coding from each of the
first 2 authors. What was the percentage agreement between these two coders?
5. The sample was a very, very low-income sample, with 74% reporting
household incomes less than $24,000. I think the authors need to be explicit in
the text about the nature and makeup of their sample. It is likely to be a high-risk
sample, which is useful for HIV research, but does not represent a good portion
of Black and Hispanic women.
ANALYSIS
6. At the bottom of page 6, the authors state, “Presumably, expectations for how
relationships are initiated, played out, and terminated are based on prior
relationship experience, relationship insights shared by others, and relationship
depictions in literature, films, and the popular media.” I am not sure where the
authors are going with this point nor how it fits in with their larger story.
7. I did not follow the “if-then contingencies” paragraph at the bottom of page 17.
Contingencies for what? What were the questions asked to produce these
responses, and what were the guiding research questions of the researchers?
8. Were the Black and Hispanic women describing how men are or how Black
men or Hispanic men are? There seems to be some race-specific references in
the example on page 22, and I wondered how prevalent this level of specificity
was.
9. Some of the summations need more explication and context. I did not follow
several of the points in the discussion, including the following sentences on page
24:
- “Moreover, if in the social construction . . .”
- “While women’s relationship schemas acknowledged the likelihood . . .”
DISCRETIONARY REVISIONS
10. There have been some exciting qualitative papers that have investigated
intersections of gender and sexual scripts for women. It might be useful for the
authors to consider analyses from the following:
Sieg, E. (2007). ‘What you want, or what you get?’ Young women talking about
the gap between desired and lived heterosexual relationships in the 21st century.
Women’s Studies International Forum.
Holland, J., Ramanzanoglu, C., Scott, S., Shapre, S., & Thompson, R. (1990).
Sex, gender, and power: Young women’s sexuality in the shadow of AIDS.
Sociology of Health and Illnesses, 12, 336-350.
Holland, J., Ramanzanoglu, C., Sharpe, S., & Thomson, R. (1992). Risk, power,
and the possibility of pleasure: Young women and safer sex. AIDS Care, 4,
273-283.
One of my favorites, is the following book:
Phillips, Lynn (2000). Flirting with danger: Young women’s reflections on
sexuality and domination. New York: New York University Press.
11. It is not clear why the Black and Hispanic women were combined in one
study. I fear that the Hispanic women, 19 of 20 who grew up outside the U.S.,
likely have had different socialization experiences and different cultural scripts.
Were there any differences in the patterns of responses across the two groups?
Have the authors considered investigating these issues among Blacks and
Hispanics separately?
12. The population ranged in aged from 18-59. This is a very wide spread. Were
there any differences in the pattern of responses from youngest and oldest?
Also, I was concerned that having post-menopausal women in the dataset, who
no longer have to worry about pregnancy prevention, may add unnecessary
noise to the data. Can the authors justify inclusion of this age group?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.