and teenage pregnancy among young women exposed to primal scenes might seem at

first glance to symbolize harm unequivocally, more careful examination leaves these

findings somewhat ambiguous. In the instance of of increased cases of pregnancy among

these girls, for instance, it should be noted that over half of those who reported having

become pregnant (and almost half of the guys who reported impregnating someone) rated

their experience as "good" rather than "bad." Although it's true that problems sometimes serious issues - may attend such pregnancies in U.S. society, some data

Additionally imply that these problems have been exaggerated (Furstenberg et al., 1987;

Stevens Simon and White, 1991), and may often result more from low SES than from

adolescent pregnancy itself (Trussell, 1988). Present treatment of teenage pregnancy as

intrinsically pathological may in part have generalized from an entire tendency to view

adolescent sexual behavior as problematic (see Willis, 1986, for a sharply satirical

characterization of this inclination).

Even findings of increased cases of STD transmission among the women in our study

need to be considered attentively. Symons (February 1995, private communication)

pointed out that increased cases of STDs and pregnancy among women exposed to

primal pictures might be more parsimoniously understood as decreased use of condoms

among these women. Regardless of debatable result, decreased use of condoms may

be moved by heightened want (and ability) for affair or higher levels of trust in

partners - as well as by simple lack of sexual responsibility or self-destructive tendencies.

In click should be recalled that there was a (nonsignificant) trend toward higher

levels of self acceptance and improved relationships with grownups among these women.

Interactions by sex of participant were found for several outcome measures in the

direction of favorable correlates for boys, and impartial or problematic correlates for girls.

These interactions may be interpreted in a number of means. One interpretation would be

that human males and females process sexuality-related occasions differently as the consequence of

sexually dimorphic psychological mechanisms that have evolved through natural and

Empirical evidence is consistent with

the belief of dimorphism in emotional mechanisms (cf. Buss, 1994; Ellis and

Symons, 1990). Moore (1995) has suggested the possibility that these mechanisms might

Start to appear faithfully in childhood. Some evidence is, in addition, consistent with this

Other explanations of the gender interactions are also possible. For instance, lads and

girls are socialized differently through the entire world where sexuality is concerned, with

Although these socialization

procedures may also represent expressions of sexually dimorphic mental

adaptation by natural and sexual selection, it could be argued that they instead represent

temporally unique but global sociocultural or socioeconomic forces related to

patriarchal control of female sexuality.

https://nudebeach.cc/videos/another-perfect-day-in-the-beachthis-2149.html of our results is more prosaic. These interactions by sex may be

Completely artifactual statistical noise. Really, the effect sizes are modest, and although

interactions by sex in the exact same general course were noted for a number of the consequence

measures, just one of these interactions reached significance after the Bonferonni

correction, and one of them was turned in direction - with women, but not men,

exposed to primal scenes reporting less use of certain drugs.

Furthermore, while findings of advantageous consequences are interesting, special findings are

not predicted by any theory that we understand. Thus, one is maybe left with what may turn

out to be nonreplicable valuable correlates of the predictors. As Scarr et al. (1990)

Found, nonreplicable results is the typical fate for long term regression studies,

particularly when proximate, rather than distal, predictors are being analyzed. In our

view, then, the relevance of the current investigation, aside from the suggestion of

interactions by sex, lies not so much in favorable findings as in the negative findings for

True, any one

set of negative results is not especially educational. Nevertheless, given virtually no

Signs in this or any other empirical study that the behaviors examined in the current

study are unambiguously harmful, the intriguing question becomes: Why is it so broadly

believed in the United States and certain European nations that these practices are

uniformly detrimental to the mental health of kids?

professional and public opinion.) Such beliefs, definitely where exposure to parental

nudity is concerned, are possibly better conceptualized as myths. Whereas any of these