4.4 Article

Intersexual and Intrasexual Differences in Mate Selection Preferences Among Lesbian Women, Gay Men, and Bisexual Women and Men

Journal

ARCHIVES OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10508-023-02665-9

Keywords

Partner preferences; Sexual orientation; Lesbian women; Gay men; Bisexual; Heterosexual

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined mate selection, marriage, and age preferences of lesbian women, gay men, and bisexual women and men (LGB) in an online dating survey. Results identified 11 relevant domains in the LGB sample, with sex, age, and long-term relationship orientation as predictors of differences in these domains. Gender was found to be the most important predictor of mate selection and marriage preferences, while sexual orientation and relationship orientation played a smaller role.
Sex differences in mating strategies and partner preferences are well established. However, most research solely focused on heterosexual women and men. We examined the mate selection, marriage, and age preferences of a sample of lesbian women, gay men, and bisexual women and men (LGB) who took part in an online dating survey. Additionally, we analyzed inter- and intrasexual differences in these preferences. A total of 710 participants rated the importance of 82 mate selection criteria and 10 marriage criteria, and they also indicated their age preferences and short-term and long-term relationship orientation. An exploratory factor analysis suggested 11 relevant domains of mate selection in the LGB sample, with sex, age, and long-term relationship orientation being relevant predictors of differences in these domains. We compared the LGB data with data collected from 21,245 heterosexual women and men on the same mate selection criteria. Results showed that the participants' sex was the most important predictor of differences in mate selection and marriage preferences, while intrasexual variables (sexual orientation and relationship orientation) explained only a small part of the variance. We incorporated the results into the current discussion about partner preferences and sexual orientation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available