Perspectives on Drive & Motivation: Sexual Health & Sexual Intimacy from Publics Perspective

Last week we researched motivational theories—why is a person motivated and what causes them to be motivated, or seemingly more motivated than others? This week we are looking at an individuals current understanding of motivation related to an identified behavior [intimacy behaviors] and applicable research to social policies associated with intimacy behaviors.

When looking at Maslow’s Need Hierarchy (McLeod, 2020), how a relationship is built is fairly similar to the hierarchy. (1) When you meet someone, you need to know the bare essentials of a person’s characteristics, personality, history, family, etc.,—you need to know if you can even get along with this individual for a long period of time. (2) From this point, you move into developing trust, and a sense of security in that individual. (3) Once you have determined that you are able to trust this individual, you may find yourself starting to fall in love with them and you may form an intimate bond together. Thus, explaining why, the World Health Organization (WHO) would define sexual health as “a state of physical, emotional, mental and social well-being in relation to sexuality” (Hogben et al., 2017) and within a 2017 article titled Attitudes to Sexual Health in the United States: Results from a National Survey of Youth Aged 15-25 Years further explained that WHO specifies “sexual health is a ‘positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationships.’”

When sexual intimacy and sexual health becomes a normal part of society, what then is the sacred part of intimacy behaviors? Within this 2017 article mentioned above (Hogben et al.) there was a survey conducted between 4017 youth aged 15 to 25 years of age from the United States population. These surveys were completed through internet usage of either a computer they owned or were able to borrow. Any individual under the age of 18 received parental consent to conduct the survey prior to submitting their answers. Survey members (here out referred to as Respondents) provided basic information regarding gender, race, household information and the main focused question was as follows: “Different people have different opinions about what they value in relationships; which of the following possible aspects of relationships are important to you, either in a relationship you have or would like to have?” The options to choose from are as follows: (1) “Emotional—how your relationship helps you feel good about or happy about yourself and your life. (2) Social—how your relationship helps you feel connected to others in your world or the overall level of enjoyment you get from the relationship. (3) Spiritual—how your relationship adds to a deeper sense of meaning and purpose in life. (4) Mutual—how your relationship satisfies you on an intellectual level. (5) Physical—how your relationship meets your needs for sexual intimacy (e.g., kissing, sex) (Hogben et al., 2017).

In this 2017 survey the three main areas studied were: (1) sexual health-related discussions with sex or romantic partners; (2) sexual risk and protective behaviors; (3) health-seeking behaviors. After many calculations and considering past household statistics for race, gender and so forth, there was an analysis that was completed. Over half of the sample (51.9%) reportedly has had vaginal or anal sex at one point in their lifetime, and 75.9% of those were sexually active without a condom. Average number of intimate partners reported by Respondents were 5.73, with a median of 3.0 partners. In addition to an important part of their survey it was noted that 15-17-year-olds were more likely to take part in more risky sexual behaviors (e.g., having sex without a condom, not using birth control). When considering the above-mentioned questions, it was the Emotional option that was rated the highest at 68.1%, and pleasure following at 57.8% and mental at 49.7%. I believe this study was highly appropriate within the current society due to requiring parental consent when conducting the survey with 15–17-year-olds, it was voluntary, it was completed on a computer owned or borrowed, considerations were taken in regard to different sexual preferences and sexual identities appropriately. There appeared to be no biases from any of the individuals listed in conducting the survey.

According to U.S. News reporter Raychelle Cassanda Lohmann (2018) “40% of high school students have had sexual intercourse and 10% have had sex with four or more people.” With the high rate of emotional expectancies related to sexual health, it is no wonder that more and more youth are frequently engaging in sexual activities. Individuals want to feel connected, happy—they want their life to feel fulfilled. Without a lot of life experience, and even with life experience connecting with another individual and finding solstice in another individual can be comforting. However, what happens when you come from a religious household? Does that condemn having sex? Also, if you do not come from a religious household—would that then mean having sex young is okay, as long as you are safe?

“For a generation fed a steady diet of just wait until you are married for sex, why are so many of us losing our virginity before we say I do? What is causing the growing chasm between our Christian belief and sexual purity?” the Urban Faith writer, Chanel Graham (2012) asks the internet these questions. Graham (2012) goes on to explain, “I suspect much of our early understanding of sexuality is at fault, being reduced to just saying no instead of developing a holistic view of human sexuality through a person’s entire lifespan, fully integrating it with God’s plan.”

When youth are condemned or looked at as sinners for early sexual experiences, much earlier than some others had experienced, it really could be for a lack of understanding. Graham suggests that by failing to recognize and embrace a sexual identity, she “inadvertently called evil what God had deemed good” (2012). “You see, promiscuity and abstinence can be two sides of the same coin,” Graham (2012) explains, “Both hint at an insufficient understanding of God’s intention for sex, his blessing of it in the context of marriage, and his creation of his people as sexual beings.”

With Graham’s explains on a religious front and Hogben’s survey of what youth expect from sexual experiences, it appears as if more education and opportunities to obtain sexual safety measures (e.g., condoms, birth control) should be available to youth and even the general population. In areas where Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD’s) are fairly common, you can easily find a fishbowl in a ladies restroom full of colorful and sometimes very weird looking condoms. The day after pill is relatively available to most youth, if the gender is female, to pick up and purchase for themselves—as is most birth control options.

However, Lohmann (2018) discusses the fact that “nationwide 30 percent of teens report that their parents have never spoken with them about sex.” If a teenager, or young adult is never talked to about sex are they more likely to be motivated to be promiscuous? If they are not receiving education or fulfillment from their parents, are they more likely to seek the physical and / or emotional connection from outside of their household? Maybe not, but it is possibly an explanation. According to Sarah McCammon with NPR (2017) “The average age for initiating sexual activity has remained around 17 or 18 since the early 1990s. The net effect, the report concludes, is a substantial increase in premarital sex.”

So, maybe the public issue is not youth promiscuity, but instead premarital sex. Human motivators are leading each and every human to first security, and then connection. This is a basic human necessity, and thus is a motivator for youth, elderly, and middle-aged Americans and citizens all over the world. I believe that understanding of research on this topic would lead to educating more youth and young adults about the safety precautions to take when having sex, and instead of parents informing their children of sex as a “no”—think of it as a “not yet” (Graham, 2012). Then it is not deemed evil, or unattainable, or it could save you simply from marrying the wrong person who could only want to take advantage of the youth or young adult for means of sexual experiences or other evil motivations. “Promoting abstinence until marriage as the only legitimate options for young people ‘violates medical ethics and harms young people,’” (Lohmann, 2017). Thus, with this conclusion I believe the concept of intimacy behaviors have been addressed in relation to an individual’s current understanding of motivation, and applicable research to social policies associated with intimacy behaviors was discussed and analyzed.

Resources

1. Graham, C. (2012). Why Unmarried Christians Are Having Sex. Retrieved from https://urbanfaith.com/2012/07/why-unmarried-christians-are-having-sex.html/

2. Hogben, M., Harper, C., Habel, M. A., Brookmeyer, K., & Friedman, A. (2017). Attitudes to sexual health in the united states: Results from a national survey of youth aged 15-25 years. Sexual Health (Online), 14(6), 540-547.doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1071/SH16164

3. Lohmann, R. C. (2018, July 23). Changing Teen Sex Trends. Retrieved from https://health.usnews.com/wellness/for-parents/articles/2018-07-23/changing-teen-sex-trends

4. Maslow, A. H. (1987). Motivation and personality (3rd ed.). Delhi, India: Pearson Education.

5. McCammon, S. (2017, August 23). Abstinence-Only Education Is Ineffective and Unethical, Report Argues. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/08/23/545289168/abstinence-education-is-ineffective-and-unethical-report-argues

6. McLeod, S. A. (2020, March 20). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html