The Economics of Sexuality
Andrew Francis develops (pdf) a model of sexual behavior where, as the cost of one sexual act rises relative to other activities people tended to substitute away from that act. Choices of sexual activity people might choose between are vaginal and oral sex, or protected and unprotected sex. Rising costs for these might include the spread of a sexualy transmitted disease.
What makes this paper very interesting is that he explores the "choice" between hetero and homosexual sex with the introduction of AIDS as the increase in cost. Knowledge of AIDS increases the cost of homosexual sex for men, and heterosexual sex for women. He finds that indeed men shifted towards heterosexual and women toward homosexual when they were more likely to know about AIDS and how it is spread.
What conclusions can we draw? This shift, while significant, occurs on the margin between homo and heterosexuality. Preferences between them in the model are assumed to be biological in nature. The vast majority of men and women do not change their sexual behavior even given the sharp increase in its cost. This suggests though, there is a middle area for both men and women whose members can possibly be influenced by cost.
As Alex points out over at MR, there seems to be a higher number of homosexual men in prisons where the cost of heterosexual sex is extremely high, if not infinite.
One thing we must consider is the implications this has toward sexual policy in this country. If you believe that homosexuality is wrong then you are right to suppose that keeping restrictions on gay marriage and other cultural factors that make it costly to be gay will reduce the population of openly homosexual people. You would be correct in saying that lessoning these barriers would result in an increase in homosexual activity.
I think I remember reading somewhere that women are more likely to report having a homosexual experience than men. This could be explained by the fact that (I think) there is less stigma attached to females having homosexual sex than males. I mean, come on. Two chicks doing it? That is hot.
Via MR.
What makes this paper very interesting is that he explores the "choice" between hetero and homosexual sex with the introduction of AIDS as the increase in cost. Knowledge of AIDS increases the cost of homosexual sex for men, and heterosexual sex for women. He finds that indeed men shifted towards heterosexual and women toward homosexual when they were more likely to know about AIDS and how it is spread.
What conclusions can we draw? This shift, while significant, occurs on the margin between homo and heterosexuality. Preferences between them in the model are assumed to be biological in nature. The vast majority of men and women do not change their sexual behavior even given the sharp increase in its cost. This suggests though, there is a middle area for both men and women whose members can possibly be influenced by cost.
As Alex points out over at MR, there seems to be a higher number of homosexual men in prisons where the cost of heterosexual sex is extremely high, if not infinite.
One thing we must consider is the implications this has toward sexual policy in this country. If you believe that homosexuality is wrong then you are right to suppose that keeping restrictions on gay marriage and other cultural factors that make it costly to be gay will reduce the population of openly homosexual people. You would be correct in saying that lessoning these barriers would result in an increase in homosexual activity.
I think I remember reading somewhere that women are more likely to report having a homosexual experience than men. This could be explained by the fact that (I think) there is less stigma attached to females having homosexual sex than males. I mean, come on. Two chicks doing it? That is hot.
Via MR.
posted by Tim at 5:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home