The “Booty Call”: A Compromise Between Men's and Women's Ideal Mating Strategies

Abstract

Traditionally, research on romantic and sexual relationships has focused on one-night stands and monogamous pairs. However, as the result of men and women pursuing their ideal relationship types, various compromise relationships may emerge. One such compromise is explored here: the “booty call.” The results of an act-nomination and frequency study of college students provided an initial definition and exploration of this type of relationship. Booty calls tend to utilize various communication mediums to facilitate sexual contact among friends who, for men, may represent low-investment, attractive sexual partners and, for women, may represent attractive test-mates. The relationship is discussed as a compromise between men's and women's ideal mating strategies that allows men greater sexual access and women an ongoing opportunity to evaluate potential long-term mates.

This article was received, reviewed, and accepted for publication under the Editorship of John Delamater.

We thank Candice Adams, Naomi Pike, Lacey Higgins, and Jennifer Currier for help in data collection. We also thank Pamela Izzo, Laura Madson, Naomi Pike, Jaime Hughes, and Greg Webster for help preparing this manuscript. Special thanks to Bryan Koenig for help preparing the figure. Parts of the results reported here were presented at the Human Behavior Evolution Society meeting in Philadelphia, PA.

Notes

¹The term “booty” refers to the buttocks and, in this context, it is used as a derogatory term to imply that the person is being used for sex.

Note. Participants indicated how much they felt these items mattered in the acceptance of a booty call on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (a lot).

Note. Participants indicated how much they felt these items mattered in the rejection of a booty call on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (a lot).

Note. Items here are both single-item and multi-item scales.

∗p < .05.

∗∗p < .01.

Note. Items here are both single-item and multi-item scales.

∗p < .05.

∗∗p < .01.

²Although an exploratory factor analysis would be the preferred method, the relatively small sample size prohibited such a procedure.

Note. These are single-item measures.

∗p < .05.