Romance as a means to marriage is, on the average, more important to girls than to boys. By marriage a woman can obtain from a man not only companionship but economic and social advantages for the rest of her life. There is, of course, a penalty for the importance of romance in the life of the girl, for a failure in this realm leaves her relatively fewer alternative sources of ego satisfaction. Given the tradition of femininity, a woman is restricted in taking the initiative in making contact with the opposite sex.
Dating is one of the first faltering steps on that path. It is not easy to move gracefully from the near and similar as represented by the immediate family to the different and distant as symbolized by potential mates. Since the mothers are more inclined than fathers to encourage sons as well as daughters, a Freudian interpretation is inadequate.
Mothers in general are romantically inclined and may identify more than fathers with dating behavior. A relatively noninstitutionalized pattern such as dating may result in confusion, misunderstanding, and complaints. One issue involves the modest, passive, supported role for females, which denies them initiative and spares them expense. Girls may want to take the initiative and may be willing to pay and yet be reluctant to seem other than sought after, Boys may be uncertain and ambivalent about their masculine role. Minnesota men attributed to their partners far more initiative and sharing of expense than women students admitted in their own behavior. The revealed differences were statistically significant.
Young people do aid each other in the initiation of dating experience, are deeply concerned with the status of individuals involved in the pairing process and probably promote an “endogamy,” in the sense of bringing together persons of similar religious, economic, educational, and age status.
A specific example of this type of control is found in the pressure exerted by fraternity and sorority groups on the college student, Pledges are encouraged to date and to date persons of appropriate groups. Not uncommonly a dating reciprocity develops between certain fraternities and certain sororities of comparable status. There may even be a black-listing of groups or individuals who violate the dating code. Naturally it reflects unfavorably upon the group to have members lacking in dating desirability. Hence an incentive to control of dating behavior.
One study which included a prestige ranking of various fraternities and sororities at Indiana University contains the following conclusions: “The higher the prestige rank of a sorority, the higher the prestige rank of the men dated, the greater the frequency of dates, and the greater the variety of dates.” It was found in regard to men that “the higher the prestige rank of the fraternity, the greater the frequency of dating.” Men students, however, as compared with women, seemed less subject to prestige control. That the coss group is a family substitute is suggested by terms such as “sorority sister,” “fraternity brother,” and “house mother.”
The concepts of prestige, prestige standards, and prestige drainage may be usefully applied to rating-dating behavior. There is prestige bargaining in the relationship between a pledge and a fraternity or sorority. The group is interested in a pledge rating so high on accepted prestige standards that prestige can be drained from the “prize pledge” to the group. The psychological mechanism, of course, is the principle of redintegration, which means that the pledge and the group are so linked together that either one arouses prestige responses in the minds of other students.
Either the individual or the group may drain prestige from the other depending upon relative standing with reference to prestige standards which count on the campus. Obviously one can conceive of negative prestige and the possibility that a low-status student can disgrace the group or a student be besmirched by a low-ranking fraternity or sorority. The same concepts apply to the dating process, for a student may win or lose prestige by virtue of dating associations. A girl can drain prestige from numerous prestige-bearing men with whom she dates and thus be sought after by other men.
Some dating-prestige standards will be suggested. Our concern is with qualities which make a person a desirable date as a prestige object rather than merely a partner in having fun on a date. Speculation is justified by lack of empirical evidence based on proper research design. No attempt will be made to rank hypothetical prestige-bearing qualities in order of relative importance.
The following list of prestige characteristics of men are especially deserving of research exploration: (1) Physical prowess, (2) money symbolism, (3) social status, (4) “conspicuous scarcity,” in the sense of being sought after by others, (5) mature intelligence, (6) pleasant qualities of person and manner, (7) appropriate age, (8) character. These terms are vague and somewhat relative to prospective female daters. Obviously, however, they do not distinguish clearly between ascribed and achieved status.
Suggestions as to the outstanding characteristics of the girl having prestige as a dating partner would include: (a) “Body appeal” (A girl having this quality would give the impression to young males that on further acquaintance she would look, sound, smell, taste, and feel good.), (b) social status, (c) conspicuous scarcity, (d) money symbolism, (e) appropriate maturity, (f) personal and social charm (partly included in a), (g) traditionally sex-typed (appropriately feminine), and (h) character. Such abstract concepts, it is admitted, are not in the minds of young people who walk arm-in-arm.
Hits: 81