Study suggests the war on drugs might really be a war on sex

SGHteller

SGHteller

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
364
Location
NorCal
Study suggests the war on drugs might really be a war on sex
by Kate Melville
16 June 2010

Why is there so much heated argument about whether the use of recreational drugs is morally wrong? A new University of Pennsylvania study suggests that the debate about drugs might really be about sex.

Published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, the new study compared two competing theories about illicit drugs. Traditional theory holds that drug attitudes stem primarily from people's political ideology, level of religious commitment, and personality; for example, their openness to experience. The new theory, proposed by the researchers and driven by ideas from evolutionary psychology, holds that drug attitudes are really driven by people's reproductive strategies.

When the Penn researchers questioned almost 1,000 people in two subject populations (undergraduate students and Internet users) a clear winner emerged between the competing theories: differences in reproductive strategies are driving individuals' different views on recreational drugs.

Researcher Robert Kurzban said that while many factors predict to some extent whether people are opposed to recreational drugs, the most closely related predictors are people's views on sexual promiscuity. "This provides evidence that views on sex and views on drugs are very closely related," he explained. "If you were to measure people's political ideology, religiosity and personality characteristics, you can predict to some degree how people feel about recreational drugs. But if, instead, you just measure how people feel about casual sex, and ignore the abstract items, the predictions about people's views on drugs in fact become quite a bit better."

Somewhat controversially, the study also concludes that considering morality from the standpoint of strategic reproductive interests is a potentially useful way to understand why humans care about third-party behavior.

According to the researchers' evolutionary model, people develop complex differences in their sexual and reproductive strategies. One key difference that creates strategic conflict arises in people's orientations towards casual sexual activity. The relationships of people following a more committed, monogamous reproductive strategy are put at greater risk when casual sex is prevalent. On the other hand, people pursuing a less committed lifestyle seek to avoid having their choices moralized, forbidden and punished.

The researchers cite previous studies showing that recreational drug usage is often associated with promiscuity. This, they say, implies that attitudes against recreational drugs are part of a larger attempt to advance the cause of committed, monogamous reproductive strategies.

"Condemnation of drug usage might be best understood in the context of strategic dynamics, with individuals influencing moral rules in a way that favors their own competitive reproductive strategies," Kurzban said. "We expect that this relationship between sexual strategy and moral stances will occur in other areas as well, such as attitudes toward prostitution, sexual education or abortion."

Source: University of Pennsylvania


Study suggests the war on drugs might really be a war on sex
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This article is just ridiculous....More junk science crap....

The studies they quoted that said that supposedly recreation drug use is linked to promiscuity is also misleading becuz many people who are addicted to drugs or have problems with abusing them do shit that they normally wouldnt do, and sexually end up fuckin around all kind of ways that is influenced by them bein so fucked up and out of it. we all know that when addicts or problem drug users are mad fucked up and out of it, sometimes they do shit like start fights , have random sex, break shit, drive when they shouldnt, etc. And as a ex addict i sure as hell aint saying 'Addicts have casual sex." Na, not at all. Just sayin that I think we all seen that friend, relative, or who ever, wasted as fuck, starting a stupid ass fight, or banging some nasty ass guy/broad that they never otherwise would, or w/ever, u feel me?

So i dont believe the "link" is really that people who use drugs just have mad casual uncommitted sex, but that the population of drug users with a problem who do all kind of fucked up careless risky shit while fucked up, probably skews that data a little bit...

I know for one that I aint wit it--I aint about no casual sex. Shit aint my style. the guy Im with now, who i been with for (almost all of) the past 7 years (aside from when we broke up for about 6 mos a few yrs back) it took me over a year to finally have sex cuz I just dont get open with someone like that so quick. And i know I aint the only person like me--I done my share of drugs, more than just recreational, i been addicted to dope and oxys, shootin up drugs in bathrooms all up and down the new jersey highways but I never been loose on my ideas of sex, u feel me.

I know there is lots of "normal" people, people in monogamous relationships that uses drugs, it aint nothing to do with your sex preferences. I feel like the idea is kind of ridiculous. Yea, sure, a person who is super close minded in general is prolly gonna be close minded about sex, drugs, or w/ever. But it more about how open or close minded you are than a direct link between bein down with casual sex meaning you also down with ddrug use.

Also they didnt say whether it was peoples attitudes about their OWN sex, or OTHER PPL's sex. That also makes a difference--was it that people who dont mind other people having casual sex, and say "live and let live" are more cool with the idea of other people using drugs? Was it that people who have casual sex are more likely to say that the idea of using drugs in general is OK? Was it that people who are conservative about their own sex life were against using drugs them selfs, or against OTHER people using drugs?

None of these questions is answered in this article....its just a bunch of BS half-ass shit that they threw together to try to make a interesting story but it would be more interesting if there was any kind of actual facts behind it:|
 
War on Drugs = War on Sex?

article

Published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, the new study compared two competing theories about illicit drugs. Traditional theory holds that drug attitudes stem primarily from people's political ideology, level of religious commitment, and personality; for example, their openness to experience. The new theory, proposed by the researchers and driven by ideas from evolutionary psychology, holds that drug attitudes are really driven by people's reproductive strategies.

When the Penn researchers questioned almost 1,000 people in two subject populations (undergraduate students and Internet users) a clear winner emerged between the competing theories: differences in reproductive strategies are driving individuals' different views on recreational drugs.

Researcher Robert Kurzban said that while many factors predict to some extent whether people are opposed to recreational drugs, the most closely related predictors are people's views on sexual promiscuity. "This provides evidence that views on sex and views on drugs are very closely related," he explained. "If you were to measure people's political ideology, religiosity and personality characteristics, you can predict to some degree how people feel about recreational drugs. But if, instead, you just measure how people feel about casual sex, and ignore the abstract items, the predictions about people's views on drugs in fact become quite a bit better."

Somewhat controversially, the study also concludes that considering morality from the standpoint of strategic reproductive interests is a potentially useful way to understand why humans care about third-party behavior.

According to the researchers' evolutionary model, people develop complex differences in their sexual and reproductive strategies. One key difference that creates strategic conflict arises in people's orientations towards casual sexual activity. The relationships of people following a more committed, monogamous reproductive strategy are put at greater risk when casual sex is prevalent. On the other hand, people pursuing a less committed lifestyle seek to avoid having their choices moralized, forbidden and punished.
Click to expand...

hm, i kind of would have figured...
 
I actually got to know Robert Kurzban, the researcher who did this study, because he was my major adviser while I was an undergrad at UPenn (I majored in psychology). He knows his shit, so I'm not so ready to toss these results out. For one thing, the results seem totally intuitive to me. I think there is a strong link between sex and drugs, and that people who are conservative with regards to one are the most likely to be conservative with regards to the other. Personally I think it's just because sex and drugs both connect someone to their own body, and historically speaking, mainstream western philosophy and spirituality has tended over the past 2000-3000 years to go farther and farther in denouncing "the flesh" in favor of either "the spirit" or "pure reason." Drugs are physical objects, sex is a physical action, and they both have powerful effects on the mind and spirit. This means that indulging in either of them, or rather, taking them seriously as important elements of PHYSICAL reality, is defying the traditional way of thinking that has defined Western culture since the days of early Greek philosophy.

I expect a lot of people just think I'm babbling at this point but I see a HUGE connection between sex and drugs, and it goes back a LONG way, and so I think it makes perfect sense that the war on drugs is, in its heart of hearts, a war on sex. Not because drug users have more sex, but rather because the extent to which someone is comfortable with drugs OR sex is dependent on the same factor, specifically, the extent to which they have bought into the ideals of "body<mind/spirit" that have informed Western society for millenia.
 
But really it aint necessarily yo....If u read the post I made earlier, i got alot of questions about this.

They did not say specifically enough information to even make it clear the link between this. It aint how comfortable with "sex" someone is--theres more to it. How comfortable they are with sex them self, with other peoples sex, etc?

Its too big of a idea to simplify like that. Peoples views on "sex" goes much deeper than "Comfortable" or "not comfortable" with it.

the study mentioned casual sex. I dont think that 'casual sex' is as good of a link as peoples actual attitudes towards their own sexuality and whether they see sex as "bad" or "good", etc. millionso f people have casual sex and dont do drugs. To say there is a link between actually bein promiscuous, again wat did they use as their definition of this, is kind of mis leading to me. I think that peoples attitudes of open ness towards their SEXUALITY, not "SEX" in general, is a better thing to connect to people ideas of openness towards drug use, but like i said this study is waaaaaayyy too vague to mean anything to me.

like i said before, is it peoples views on their own drug use, peoples views on others using drugs? Is it their views on casual sex in general, or their views on having casual sex them selfs, or is it their views on other people having casual sex? (also how do they define casual sex for the purpose of the study) and so on...
 
Yeah, it's way too complex to state in just one paper. Shit like this is too abstract for that. I think it's kind of interesting that this study was able to come up with any way to "demonstrate" the connection at all, honestly. What I say comes from my experiences, the books that I've read, my intuition, etc. ... there's no way I could come up with the same thoughts just by asking a bunch of people a lot of simple, vague questions. But that's why psychology isn't an exact science. We don't have the tools yet to really delve into this kind of stuff without turning into philosophers and historians at the same time.

All I'm saying is, the connection makes sense to me. I think it's reasonable to say that overall, people tend to fear drugs for the same broad, vague, unconscious reasons as they tend to fear non-traditional sexuality ... but any given individual is not going to demonstrate this unless you look into their mind REALLY hard, and even then it might not show you anything. In the sense of broad cultural trends, though, I think this study is on point.
 
I was just about to post this...


Seems to me that the underlying issues is risk taking, and therefore being less "conservative." Drug users, especially "hard" drug users, tend to be involved in riskier behavior, one of them often times being promiscuity. When you're injecting drugs or smoking crack, sex doesn't really mean much to you. You're saying to yourself "Hell, I'm already smoking crack, what's the risk in having sex with this person?"

Also, this seems to miss biological variables. Sex and drugs tend to work on the same reward systems...
 
^^Thats true I guess, but its a common idea that really aint true with everyone....When I was doin all that shit, I was never just havin loose sex....I always been , Iunno, just not somebody to trust that easy, and that didnt go away when i was a drug addict doin all type of risky fucked up shit with drugs, shooting up , smokin crack, speedballin a handful of times, sleepin in cars, etc and so on forever....But I never had that "Oh, its just sex" attitude....Even at my lowest times the worst of the worst when I am sure the offer would have been very easy to get, i never had sex or did nothing sexual for drugs, explicitly or in a less direct way (a girl stays with her man just becuz he keep her supplied with dope, etc)....That wasnt my style and even in that totally lost world of addiction, sex was still a serious thing---addiction in some ways brings out total lies that aint yourself at all, but it also brings out true colors in a way i think.

Anyways....I do agree that the idea of risk takin behavior is the general idea here. thats the point i was makin in my post, its how open minded you are towards risk , not sex or drugs specifically.
 
Its all a big triangle, why try to relate one to the other wen they're all connected. political ideology, level of religious commitment, and personality could also strongly influence how one feels about casual sex whether they do drugs or not. just as it could influence ones drug use regardless of their sex life. This study is painfully pointless
 
lacey k said:
^^Thats true I guess, but its a common idea that really aint true with everyone....When I was doin all that shit, I was never just havin loose sex....I always been , Iunno, just not somebody to trust that easy, and that didnt go away when i was a drug addict doin all type of risky fucked up shit with drugs, shooting up , smokin crack, speedballin a handful of times, sleepin in cars, etc and so on forever....But I never had that "Oh, its just sex" attitude....Even at my lowest times the worst of the worst when I am sure the offer would have been very easy to get, i never had sex or did nothing sexual for drugs, explicitly or in a less direct way (a girl stays with her man just becuz he keep her supplied with dope, etc)....That wasnt my style and even in that totally lost world of addiction, sex was still a serious thing---addiction in some ways brings out total lies that aint yourself at all, but it also brings out true colors in a way i think.

Anyways....I do agree that the idea of risk takin behavior is the general idea here. thats the point i was makin in my post, its how open minded you are towards risk , not sex or drugs specifically.
Click to expand...
Yeah, no doubt. People have different standards and values. Even addicts. I was just painting with broad strokes. :)
 
Boy do I hate evolutionary psychology. Way to confuse correlation with causation, dudes -- one of the simplest logical fallacies to see through.

I love me some chemical fun, but I have always been a relationship guy, who in the end much prefers the stability and strong emotional support of a faithful committed relationship over the perks of being a swinger. And although I support another person's right to be sexually promiscuous as long as they don't have to lie to or exploit anyone to get their nookie, I don't relate to that set of values, and don't tend to become close with people who make this lifestyle choice.

Reading SL&R, I think a lot of this website is living proof that promiscuous sex and drug use don't necessarily go hand in hand across the land. The attitude there tends to be quite pro-relationship, anti-cheating, and very much skeptical of high-risk sexual activity like unprotected sex with strangers. The fact that we have many married and long term committed couples on this site, whose drug use has not ceased after their shacking up, argues against this being a trend.

I do agree that in the eyes and imaginations of social conservatives, drug use and promiscuous sex often get lumped together, for the ease of co-condemnation. But in reality, just because someone is willing to break one major rule of traditional society, doesn't mean they're willing to break any others. Hence why most swingers' parties and fight clubs frown upon drugs, and why many raves don't condone partygoers treating it as a meat market.
 
Just based upon what is stated in the article it really almost seems that the tone of the whole thing is intentionally meant to be demeaning to those who disagree with either of the issues by saying "If you're an individual that disagrees with drug use, then you most likely disagree with promiscuity, and if you disagree with promiscuity then it means you only do so because you wish to glean a reproductive advantage; thus, your beliefs are in fact instinctual, animalistic and selfish.", and the idea of being animalistic or heavily swayed by primal evolutionary instincts is an idea from which many conservative individuals very actively attempt to distance themselves. Conservative individuals would be much more likely to practice condemnation of either practice as animalistic and selfish. In that way it seems almost more like a counter argument on the idea that conservative belief structure is any less evolutionarily driven than a more liberal one. This in my mind brings bias into an article and begins to hurt credibility. That seems to be the case especially in this article because although I'm a bio major and tend to view things very evolutionarily, I still think that the connection they made starting at acceptance of drug use and somehow ending at reproductive advantages is a completely invented connection and is ridiculous.

I think the issue is much more simply put as "It is much easier to predict how likely an individual is to engage in activities that are possibly detrimental to either their self respect or health based upon their likelyhood to engage in similarly self-detrimental activities in other facet of their life than any other attributes the individual may present."

Basically, the idea this has anything to do with reproduction is likely bogus, their comparing two relatively similar activities that go on the same principle of how much someone values immediate pleasure over the possibility of long term self-harm. I believe there would also likely be a correlation over the type of drug, severity/rate of usage and disregard for safety in administration and the likelyhood for an individual to engage in more promiscuous activity and how often they do so unprotected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top