A Comparative Study of the Couple in the Social Organization of Sexuality in France and the United States.

Comparative research has been central to the study of sexuality since the origin of the scientific approach to sexuality in the late 19th century, though that research had its roots in cross-cultural rather than cross-national or cross-societal research strategies (Bland & Doan, 1998; Vance, 1991). Cross-national or cross-societal research on the conduct of individuals has only become possible as large-scale survey research methods have become more routine. In the area of sexuality the emergence of survey studies has been part of the scientific response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic during the 1990s (Catania, Moskowitz, Ruiz, & Cleland, 1996; Giami & Dowsett, 1996). While these studies were often shaped by issues related to the HIV/AIDS epidemic in each country, the data gathered offer scientific information on sexual life that can be used for purposes of cross-society comparison of the sexual conduct of individuals. While there are differences in method among the surveys that affect the findings (e.g., instrument design and content, mode of questioning, sampling designs, and national data needs), the studies undertaken meet a reasonable standard of methodological rigor so that certain results can be compared across national boundaries (Bajos et al., 1995; Cleland & Ferry, 1995; Hubert, Bajos, & Sandfort, 1998).

The present research takes advantage of the availability of such data to examine, from a comparative perspective, the importance of social structural forces in the shaping of sexual conduct in France and the United States. Since France and the U.S. are popularly viewed as representing different models of how sexuality is managed and expressed, the availability of simultaneous national studies of sexual behavior provides an ideal opportunity to compare the social organization of sexuality. The surveys in both France and the U.S. (Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994; Spira, Bajos, & the ACSF group, 1994), the findings from which are to be considered here, include sufficient material to allow for a detailed exploration of some of the key social factors that influence sexual conduct. The present study proceeds from the perspective that sexual conduct should be treated as a social behavior that needs, itself, to be explained by the social factors that organize and condition it (DeLamater, 1987; Gagnon & Simon, 1973; Laumann & Gagnon, 1995; Vance, 1991).

THE SOCIAL AND THE SEXUAL

Survey studies of sexuality have identified a variety of social background variables that shape the sexual conduct of individuals (see Ericksen & Steffen, 1999, for data about the U.S.). Even the Kinsey studies, which were rooted theoretically in evolutionary biology, offered empirical explanations of sexual behavior which were based on social factors such as gender, age, religion, social class (as measured by education), generation, and marital status. More recent studies have increased the numbers of relevant variables (e.g., race and ethnicity) and have more precisely specified the effects of these sociological variables. Of these variables one of the most significant is the role of living in a couple as a primary regulator of the sexual behavior of individuals in western societies. Unlike other social variables which sort individuals into specific coupling networks defined, for example, by race, ethnicity, education, age, or religion, being in a coupled relationship affects participation in the sexual/affectional marketplace and is the social arrangement inside of which the majority of adult sexual activity takes place. Being in a couple affects eligibility for sexual relations (in and out of the relationship), and in all western societies the couple represents the relationship around which reproduction and consumption are organized.

An understanding of the significance of the sexual/affectional couple, as a social practice and norm organizing the sexual life of the general population, has evolved over the course of the last several decades. In the studies of Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin (1948) and Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, and Gebhard (1953) the sexual activity of the adult population was conceptualized in reference to the married couple. For Kinsey et al. (cf. 1953, p. 346) being married constituted the central site of adult sexual activity, and the sexual activity in this context influenced the structuration of family life (the "home"). Marriage functions as the situation valorized by society for the exercise of sexual activity and as the most frequent situation in the adult population for the practice of coitus. Other sexual relationships--premarital, extramarital, and postmarital--were evaluated in reference to marriage and not per se.

In the national studies of sexual and reproductive life conducted in the early 1990s, and in particular in the two studies on which this work is based, marriage and the heterosexual couple no longer constitute the normative starting point for describing and measuring sexual activity (see also the widespread study of nonmarital cohabitation in the recent demographic and family literatures: Bumpass & Sweet, 1989; Bumpass, Sweet, & Cherlin, 1989; Jones et. al., 1986). In the two studies of interest here, this concern with identifying particular sexual behaviors and specifying precisely the type of partner with whom that behavior occurs called into question the taken-for-granted status of the (heterosexual) couple and the institution of marriage as the normative social locus of sexual activity. These studies focused on the identification of the type of partner with whom the respondent was involved in terms of gender, age, and type of relation or situation. Marriage, while remaining the most prevalent type of partnership in the two countries constituted only one possible form of relation among others (Michaels & Giami, 1999). This shift in perspective also allows one to more objectively include (or differentiate) both same-gender and mixed-gender relationships.

This article aims to understand how living in a couple (i.e., forming a joint domestic unit in terms of consumption and daily life) influences the organization of sexual life for individuals both in and out of couples. In addition, to the extent that marriage is no longer the only form of coupling, we investigate whether being married has a specific influence on sexual life as compared to cohabiting with a partner without being married. Finally, we attempt to describe how not living in a couple, that is, not sharing a common domicile, influences sexual life. Since the couple constitutes the most widespread social organization of the relations between adult sexual partners, we hypothesize that the model of the couple is likely to exercise a general influence on sexual life of all adults including those who do not live in a couple.

Our analysis is based on the recognition of a wider diversity of the types of relations in which contemporary individuals are engaged. In the first part of the paper, the frequency of living situations (i.e., being married, cohabiting without marriage, and living alone) are described for both countries. In the second part of the paper the influence of these different situations on the character of sexual partnering and sexual activity (frequency of sex and sexual practices) is analyzed. This influence is studied controlling for other social factors such as gender and age.

This work focuses on mixed-gender couples and heterosexual activity for several reasons. First, we are interested in the effect of diverse forms of coupling, including the distinction between marriage and cohabitation. However, there is no easy way to reproduce this distinction for same-gender couples, since at present there is no recognition of same-gender marriage in France or the U.S. (though this may be changing). In addition, while the rates of homosexual activity are low in both countries they differ somewhat in their social organization and might therefore obscure differences that exist associated with the primary explanatory variable of relationship status. Finally, in terms of sexual practices such as oral sex, we confined our attention to mixed-gender couples to avoid possible differences in meaning and significance these acts (fellatio and cunnilingus) might have within heterosexual and homosexual partnerships. Comparative analysis of same-gender coupling and sexual activity is currently under way and will be treated in a subsequent article.

METHOD

Our analysis is based on the 3,432 U.S. adults ages 18 to 59 surveyed in the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS) of 1992 (cf. Laumann et al., 1994), and the 4,580 French adults between the ages of 18 and 59(1) from the Analyse des Comportements Sexuels en France (ACSF: Analysis of Sexual Behavior in France) also of 1992 (cf. Spira et al., 1994). While conducted independently and using somewhat different methodologies, both surveys are based on representative probability samples of the adult population of their respective countries and have many comparable questions on social and demographic variables, relationships, and sexual behaviors.

Sample Selection

In any comparative research using independently collected data sets there are always problems of comparability of methods (Spira, Bajos, Giami, & Michaels, 1998). In France, the sample was drawn from a list of telephone subscribers, which is a kind of sample of households. In order to arrive at a sample of individuals, a single adult in each household was randomly selected to answer the questionnaire (on the telephone). Prior to the ACSF, a pilot survey comparing telephone interviews with face-to-face interviews was carried out. No significant differences in the responses obtained by these two methods were found (ACSF Investigators, 1992). In addition, after about 30 mostly sociodemographic questions, a filter card was used to direct respondents to either a short or a long form of the questionnaire. The French filter card was:

   Do you fall into one of these categories, without telling me which one: You
   were born the 4th, the 17th or the 20th of any month. You have had sexual
   intercourse with at least two different people in the past 12 months. In
   the past 5 years, you have had sexual intercourse at least once with a
   person of the same sex as you. In the past 5 years, you have paid to have
   sexual intercourse at least once. In the past 12 months, you have used a
   soft drug (hashish, marijuana, etc.) or a hard drug (cocaine, heroin,
   etc.). You are a hemophiliac (Spira & al. 1994, p. 28).

The purpose of the filter was to produce a larger sample of persons considered to be at risk while maintaining a control group of persons not necessarily at risk. The short form was administered to 15,235 persons and the longer one (that also included all of the questions on the shorter form) to 4,820 persons.

The U.S. sample was also based on a sample of households and, in addition, included an oversample of Blacks and Hispanics. The U.S. survey was carried out face-to-face (including some self-administered forms), usually in the home of the selected respondent. The U.S. sample was of English speakers ages 18 to 59 living in households. All respondents received the same questionnaire.

Representative samples of the population require that each respondent have a known probability of being selected. Samples such as those used in the French and U.S. surveys are produced using complex sample designs, which result in unequal probabilities of selection. Analyses of such a sample require weighting cases to produce a posteriori the equivalent of equiprobability, which allows one to produce unbiased estimates of parameters describing the population from which the sample was drawn. Unequal probabilities of selections arise for a number of reasons. In both the French and the U.S. surveys only a single eligible member of each household was interviewed among those living there. In the French survey, persons at risk were oversampled. In the U.S. survey, Blacks and Hispanics were oversampled. All analyses use weighted cases to produce correct proportions and percentages of the population as a whole. In addition, given the complex sample designs used in each case, special procedures were necessary to compute standard errors and other components of inferential statistics.(2)

The two questionnaires were written in different languages and, as they were constructed basically independently of each other, do not necessarily have the same structure (e.g., in terms of question order, operation of skip patterns), question wording, and answer categories. For the purposes of the current analysis, only questions and answer categories that were closely comparable in both countries were used.

Tests of Significance for Comparisons of Results

Our object in this paper is not primarily to test specific hypotheses about differences between France and the United States, not the least because there was almost no basis a priori to formulate such hypotheses. Instead, our main objective is descriptive, to investigate differences along a number of dimensions and to develop a reasonably rich description of the forms these differences take. In addition, the statistical problem of comparing estimates based on two separate samples is not simple or straightforward. Still, we are dealing with estimates from surveys which were subject to various sources of random error and needed a mechanism to differentiate between apparent differences that might be due to such error. Therefore, we have opted for an approach that attaches measures of sampling error to each of the percentages presented in the paper, giving a direct measure of the precision of any given estimate. The majority of tables present percentages. In order to avoid overburdening the tables we have provided the magnitude which needs to be added and subtracted to calculate a correctly adjusted 95% confidence interval for each percentage. When comparing two percentages, confidence intervals that do not overlap are the equivalent of finding a significant difference of proportions at the 5% level. The choice of the 5% significance level is inherently arbitrary. It was chosen here not only because it is the cut off that is most commonly used in the social sciences but also because it has been used in the major European comparative research on national sexual behavior surveys (Bajos & al., 1995; Cleland & Ferry, 1995; Hubert et al., 1998). It also seems to us to represent a reasonable compromise between the dangers of making type 1 and type 2 errors (i.e., of asserting an apparent difference that does not exist in the population but is merely due to sampling variation, and the error of failing to remark a true population difference) in a comparative study that is largely descriptive.

Multivariate logistic regressions are used to investigate factors that affect high and low frequency of sexual activity and of oral sex in each country. Logistic regression is a form of multiple regression appropriate for the analysis of dichotomous dependent variables. All independent variables used are categorical. Parameters from the estimated regressions are presented in the form of odds ratios, and can be interpreted as the proportional change in odds associated with being in a given category of the independent variable as compared to the excluded or base category of the variable while simultaneously controlling for the other variables entered in the regression model. Odds ratios that do not significantly differ from 1.0 (the equivalent of no change in odds) are not presented.

RESULTS

Relationship Status

Table 1 presents the percent of the French and U.S. adult population ages 18 to 59 living in a couple, and within this segment of the population the percentage who are not married (i.e., cohabiting but not legally married).

Table 1. Percent in Given Relationship Situation

                   Living in a couple: Total

Age             France                    U.S.

                              Men

18-29   37.7      ([+ or -] 2.2)   34.9      ([+ or -] 7.0)
30-39   82.2(a)   ([+ or -] 1.7)   71.3(a)   ([+ or -] 5.2)
40-49   88.7      ([+ or -] 1.8)   83.7      ([+ or -] 3.7)
50-59   86.7      ([+ or -] 2.3)   90.6      ([+ or -] 3.4)
Total   70.2      ([+ or -] 1.3)   64.9      ([+ or -] 4.1)

                             Women

18-29   45.8      ([+ or -] 2.3)   52.3      ([+ or -] 7.3)
30-39   83.4(a)   ([+ or -] 1.6)   75.5(a)   ([+ or -] 3.6)
40-49   83.3      ([+ or -] 2.0)   76.9      ([+ or -] 4.5)
50-59   82.5(a)   ([+ or -] 3.3)   70.6(a)   ([+ or -] 6.6)
Total   71.2      ([+ or -] 1.3)   68.0      ([+ or -] 3.4)

                 Living in a couple: Not married

Age             France                     U.S.

                             Men

18-29   57.3(a)   ([+ or -] 3.5)   30.3(a)   ([+ or -] 10.6)
30-39   19.7      ([+ or -] 2.2)   12.9      ([+ or -] 5.2)
40-49    6.7      ([+ or -] 1.4)    4.2      ([+ or -] 2.7)
50-59    5.3      ([+ or -] 1.8)    6.1      ([+ or -] 3.3)
Total   19.2(a)   ([+ or -] 1.3)   12.0(a)   ([+ or -] 2.9)

                             Women

18-29   45.7(a)   ([+ or -] 3.2)   26.2(a)   ([+ or -] 7.4)
30-39   14.7(a)   ([+ or -] 2.0)    7.2(a)   ([+ or -] 2.9)
40-49    8.2      ([+ or -] 2.1)    5.8      ([+ or -] 2.3)
50-59    2.2      ([+ or -] 1.5)    4.0      ([+ or -] 3.3)
Total   16.8(a)   ([+ or -] 1.2)   10.7(a)   ([+ or -] 2.5)

Note. Numbers in parentheses indicate the value to be added
and subtracted to calculate a correctly adjusted 95% confidence
interval.

(a) Indicates significant difference of proportions at the 5% level.

Living in a couple or not. In both countries about two thirds of the population ages 18 to 59 live in a couple. By a small margin, the French are more likely to be living in a couple than the U.S. population (70% of French men and 71% of French women compared to 65% of U.S. men and 68% of U.S. women).

However, important differences between the two countries appear when one controls for age and gender: While U.S. women seem more likely to be in a couple before age 30, the French rate of being in a couple exceeds that of U.S. women after that age and is particularly marked among the 30- to 39-year-olds where the percent of French women living with a sexual partner is almost 10% higher than the U.S. rate.

Women in both countries enter into coupled relations earlier than do men; 83% of French women are in couples by age 30, and this rate remains stable after this age. The prevalence of U.S. women living in a couple is stable at about 75% from ages 30 to 50. After age 50, there is a decline in the proportion of U.S. women living with a partner, which is not found among the French. Thus, one of the most striking differences between France and the U.S. is found among older women. U.S. women ages 50 to 59 are over 10% less likely to be living in couple than their French counterparts (71% as compared to 83%). In a separate, more detailed analysis of women by 5-year age groupings, this decline appears even more dramatic: While 79% of the 50- to 54-year olds are living in a couple, only 60% of the 55- to 59-year-olds are in the same situation. That is, 40% of women in the U.S. ages 55 to 59 are not living with a partner. In France, this decline is less marked, representing only a 10% change from a somewhat higher level of women living in a couple of 86% (among the 50- to 54-year-olds) to 76% (among the 55- to 59-year-olds). In addition, the rate of coupling among these U.S. women is 20% lower than the rate among U.S. men in the same age group, whereas there is no significant difference between the comparable French men and women.

French men move more rapidly into coupled relationships than U.S. men. From the age of 30, more than 80% of men in France are living in a coupled relationship. Men in the U.S. reach this level starting at age 40. It is among the 30- to 39-year-olds that the difference between French and U.S. men is most marked.

Married versus nonmarried cohabitation. Rates of married and nonmarried cohabitation differ in the two countries. Nonmarried cohabitation, while still largely confined to those under 40, is more prevalent and more persistent in France. Among the 18- to 29-year-olds in France, about one half of those living in couples are not married, while the rate in the U.S. is about 30 percent.

Sexual Partnerships During Last Year

Absence of current sexual partners. Table 2 presents the rates of absence of sexual partnership in the past year by gender, age, and relationship status in the two countries.

Table 2. Percent with No Sexual Partners in Past 12 Months

                       Living in a couple

Age             France                   U.S.

                              Men

18-29   1.8      ([+ or -] 0.9)   0.5      ([+ or -] 0.9)
30-39   2.8(a)   ([+ or -] 1.2)   0.4(a)   ([+ or -] 0.7)
40-49   3.5(a)   ([+ or -] 1.4)   0.7(a)   ([+ or -] 1.0)
50-59   6.3      ([+ or -] 3.0)   5.8      ([+ or -] 4.1)
Total   3.6      ([+ or -] 0.9)   1.7      ([+ or -] 1.1)

                             Women

18-29   2.3(a)   ([+ or -] 1.2)   0.0(a)   ([+ or -] 0.0)
30-39   1.6      ([+ or -] 0.9)   0.6      ([+ or -] 0.8)
40.49   3.3      ([+ or -] 1.3)   2.6      ([+ or -] 2.0)
50-59   1.0(a)   ([+ or -] 0.7)   6.5(a)   ([+ or -] 4.0)
Total   2.1      ([+ or -] 0.5)   2.0      ([+ or -] 1.0)

                   Not living in a couple

Age             France                  U.S.

                              Men

18-29   17.1      ([+ or -] 2.5)   18.0      ([+ or -] 6.8)
30-39   12.4      ([+ or -] 3.0)   17.3      ([+ or -] 6.8)
40-49   29.3      ([+ or -] 8.7)   27.5      ([+ or -] 8.7)
50-59   31.2      ([+ or -] 8.5)   48.0      ([+ or -] 17.3)
Total   18.6      ([+ or -] 2.1)   20.1      ([+ or -] 5.1)

                             Women

18-29   28.7      ([+ or -] 3.2)   21.2      ([+ or -] 7.9)
30-39   18.6      ([+ or -] 3.6)   25.8      ([+ or -] 6.4)
40.49   32.1      ([+ or -] 6.0)   40.9      ([+ or -] 10.5)
50-59   51.7(a)   ([+ or -] 9.8)   77.8(a)   ([+ or -] 8.1)
Total   30.1      ([+ or -] 2.4)   33.7      ([+ or -] 6.1)

                         Total sample

Age              France                  U.S.

                              Men

18-29   11.3      ([+ or 1] 1.7)   11.8      ([+ or -] 3.9)
30-39    4.5      ([+ or -] 1.1)    5.3      ([+ or -] 2.0)
40-49    6.5      ([+ or -] 1.7)    5.0      ([+ or -] 1.9)
50-59    9.6      ([+ or -] 2.9)    9.6      ([+ or -] 5.0)
Total    8.1      ([+ or -] 0.9)    8.1      ([+ or -] 1.8)

                             Women

18-29   16.6(a)   ([+ or -] 1.9)   10.0(a)   ([+ or -] 3.6)
30-39    4.4      ([+ or -] 1.0)    6.7      ([+ or -] 2.0)
40.49    8.1      ([+ or -] 1.6)   11.4      ([+ or -] 3.5)
50-59    9.8(a)   ([+ or -] 2.2)   27.2(a)   ([+ or -] 7.3)
Total   10.1      ([+ or -] 0.9)   12.0      ([+ or -] 1.9)

Note. Numbers in parentheses indicate the value to be added and
subtracted to calculate a correctly adjusted 95% confidence interval.

(a) Indicates significant difference of proportions at the 5% level.

Overall, the proportion who report not having had a sexual partner in the past year is quite similar in France and the U.S.: About 10% of adults ages 18 to 59 in both countries report no sexual partner in the past year (8% of the men, about 10% of the women). Living in a couple appears as a major predictor of the likelihood of having had a sexual partner in the past year. Persons living in a couple in both countries follow an almost identical pattern, with over 95% reporting a sexual partner in the past year with a slight drop below this rate after age 50, except in the case of French women where this drop is not found.

On the other hand, a substantial minority of persons not living in a couple report no partner in the past year, with women reporting somewhat higher rates than men. Overall, about 20% of the men and a third of the women not living in a couple report not having had a partner. This average overall rate summarizes a generally increasing absence of sexual partners with age, especially after age 40. In the U.S. this decrease in sexual partnering with age is essentially monotonic, with some decline for each older age grouping except for men ages 30 to 39 compared to the 18- to 29-year-olds who report equivalent rates. In France, this change with age is not as clearly monotonic. There is even some indication of an increase in sexual partnering among the 30- to 39-year-olds compared to the 18- to 29-year-olds, followed by a strong decrease starting at age 40 that continues after age 50 for French women while remaining stable for French men.

Women ages 50 to 59 not living in a couple are much more likely not to have had a sexual partner in the past year than any other group. This rate is dramatically higher for U.S. women than French women (over 75% of the former as compared to 52% of the latter). Both groups of women differ from men in their respective countries in reporting rates at least 20% higher of not having had a sexual partner in the past year. This difference between men and women is likely due to the difference in age between men and women in heterosexual relationships, with men somewhat older than their partners. In addition, the dramatically higher rate of absence of sexual partners in the past year among U.S. women not living in a couple contributes to the overall difference between French womenand U.S. women between ages 50 and 59 when one combines women in couples and not in couples. About 10% of all French women ages 50 to 59 report no partner in the last year, which is the same rate found among French and U.S. men in this age group as compared to 27% of U.S. women, a rate that is two and a half times greater.

One or more sexual partners in the past year. We now turn to the question of number of partners in the past year among those who had at least one partner in this time period. Table 3 presents the percentage of French and U.S. adults ages 18 to 59 who had a single partner in the past year broken down by gender, age, and whether or not they were living with a sexual partner.

Table 3. Percent of Sexually Active Men and Women With a Single
Partner in Past 12 Months

                        Living in a couple

Age             France                     U.S.

                                Men

18-29   91.8      ([+ or -] 1.1)    89.1      ([+ or -] 6.0)
30-39   91.9      ([+ or -] 0.9)    94.0      ([+ or -] 3.0)
40-49   91.1      ([+ or -] 1.1)    94.2      ([+ or -] 3.1)
50-59   93.8      ([+ or -] 1.3)    93.6      ([+ or -] 4.6)
Total   92.0      ([+ or -] 0.6)    93.1      ([+ or -] 1.9)

                               Women

18-29   95.6      ([+ or -] 0.6)    92.0      ([+ or -] 4.2)
30-39   95.6      ([+ or -] 0.6)    98.0      ([+ or -] 1.4)
40-49   95.7(a)   ([+ or -] 0.8)    98.5(a)   ([+ or -] 1.2)
50-59   97.6(a)   ([+ or -] 0.7)   100.0(a)   ([+ or -] 0.0)
Total   96.0      ([+ or -] 0.3)    97.0      ([+ or -] 1.2)

                      Not living in a couple

Age              France                       U.S.

                                Men

18-29   67.9(a)   ([+ or -] 2.3)   47.5(a)   ([+ or -] 6.7)
30-39   69.8(a)   ([+ or -] 3.6)   48.2(a)   ([+ or -] 12.4)
40-49   68.6(a)   ([+ or -] 5.5)   46.2a     ([+ or -] 12.2)
50-59   82.4      ([+ or -] 4.7)   84.1      ([+ or -] 16.2)
Total   69.2(a)   ([+ or -] 1.8)   48.4(a)   ([+ or -] 4.3)

                               Women

18-29   84.5(a)   ([+ or -] 1.6)   58.4(a)   ([+ or -] 10.7)
30-39   80.6(a)   ([+ or -] 2.7)   71.3(a)   ([+ or -] 7.7)
40-49   87.3      ([+ or -] 2.9)   81.4      ([+ or -] 10.5)
50-59   88.6      ([+ or -] 4.6)   85.3      ([+ or -] 11.3)
Total   84.5(a)   ([+ or -] 1.2)   66.5(a)   ([+ or -] 7.0)

                          Total sample

Age              France                   U.S.

                                Men

18-29   77.8(a)   ([+ or -] 1.4)   64.4(a)   ([+ or -] 6.7)
30-39   88.3(a)   ([+ or -] 1.0)   82.8(a)   ([+ or -] 3.8)
40-49   89.2      ([+ or -] 1.2)   88.4      ([+ or -] 3.1)
50-59   92.6      ([+ or -] 1.3)   93.2      ([+ or -] 4.5)
Total   86.0(a)   ([+ or -] 0.6)   79.9(a)   ([+ or -] 2.9)

                               Women

18-29   90.5(a)   ([+ or -] 0.8)   77.9(a)   ([+ or -] 7.5)
30-39   93.5      ([+ or -] 0.6)   92.7      ([+ or -] 2.2)
40-49   94.7      ([+ or -] 0.8)   95.9      ([+ or -] 1.6)
50-59   96.7(a)   ([+ or -] 0.7)   98.8(a)   ([+ or -] 0.9)
Total   93.5(a)   ([+ or -] 0.4)   89.7(a)   ([+ or -] 2.9)

Note. Numbers in parentheses indicate the value to be added and
subtracted to calculate a correctly adjusted 95% confidence interval.

(a) Indicates significant difference of proportions at the 5% level.

Among those living in a couple in both countries, the vast majority (over 90%) were monogamous during the past year. There is hardly any difference between France and the U.S. in this regard. However, there is a slight but generally consistent tendency for the rate of monogamy in the past year among those in couples to be higher in the U.S. than in France after age 30. Among women over 40 this difference, while quite small (on the order of 2%), is statistically significant. And this same pattern, while not statistically significant, is found for men between the ages of 30 and 49. Among the youngest age group, the 18- to 29-year-olds, there appears to be an opposite tendency, with the French reporting higher rates of monogamy in the past year. Still, what is most striking is that living in a couple is associated with extremely high rates of reported monogamy in both countries and for both genders in all age groupings.

It is among those not living in a couple that one of the largest differences between France and the United States appears. Overall rates of monogamy during the past year are much lower than among those living in couples. However, the French rates of monogamy among those not in couples are generally about 20% higher than the comparable U.S. rates. This is true overall for both men and women not living in a couple: Over two thirds of French men (69%) compared to less than half of U.S. men (48%) report a single partner in the past year, and about 85% of French women had a single partner in the year as opposed to two thirds of U.S. women. Among men this pattern is stable and consistent in the three youngest age groupings. Among the oldest group of men, the percent reporting a single partner in the year rises to close to 85% and is basically the same in both countries. The differences between French and U.S. women not living in a couple are more concentrated among the younger age groupings. Among the 18- to 29-years-olds there is a 30% difference between French and U.S. women and a 10% difference among the 30- to 39-year-olds. After age 39, while French women not living in a couple are still more likely to report a single partner than U.S. women, the difference in rates is much smaller and no longer statistically significant.

This table, which presents the percentages for those who had one sexual partner in the past year, can also be interpreted inversely as indicating the percentage of persons who had more than one partner in the past year. That is to say, about one third of French men and over half of U.S. men who were not living in a couple had more than one partner in the past year, and one third of the U.S. women and 15% of French women not in couples had more than one partner.

In sum, differences found between these two studies in terms of numbers of sexual partners in the past year arise from differences between those who are not living in a couple. People living in France, even when they do not live in a couple, are much more likely to have had a single partner in the past year than people in this situation in the U.S. In addition, in the U.S., people not living in a couple who had at least two partners in the past year are more likely to have had three or more partners than their French equivalents.

Numbers of Partners Across the Life Course

The greater number of partners in the past year among sexually active individuals in the U.S. (as evidenced by the higher percentage reporting more than one partner) implies that they have a greater number of partners over their lifetime. In order to confirm this the median and mean number of other gender partners reported in the two surveys are presented in Table 4. In this case, all adults ages 18 to 59 are included in the calculation, including those who reported no other-gender partners.

Table 4. Number of Other-Gender Sexual Partners in Lifetime

                       Female partners        Male partners
                       reported by men      reported by women

                      France      U.S.      France      U.S.

Mean                    13.02      15.80       4.05       5.55
Standard deviation      34.97      42.34       6.95      18.42
Median                   6          7          2          3
N                    2,615      1,499      2,161      1,910

U.S. men and women report a greater number of other-gender partners in the lifetime than do the French. U.S. men report, on average, almost 16 sexual partners ever as compared to 13 for French men (i.e., on average U.S. men have had almost three more partners than their French counterparts). As the mean is sensitive to the extremes, in this case especially persons reporting a high number of partners, we also present the median number of partners reported. The median of 7 partners reported by the U.S. men implies that half had this number of partners or less ever, and that half had this number or more. The median number of partners ever reported by French men is 6. A similar pattern is found among women in both countries.(3) U.S. women report on average between one and two more partners than French women (5.6 vs. 4.1) and a median of three partners versus a median of only two for the French. It is also noteworthy that the variation in the mean number of partners for women as measured by the standard deviation of the mean is over two times greater among U.S. women than among French women.

Length of Relationship

The lower numbers of partners per year and in the lifetime, especially among those not living with a partner, suggests that people in France remain in a longer term committed relationships than do people in the U.S. Table 5 presents data on the length of relationships in years by gender, age, and type of relationship for the (other gender) sexual partner with whom the respondent had sex most recently in the past year.

Table 5. Duration of Sexual Relationship with Most Recent Partner
(in Years)

                             Mean            Median         N of Obs

Relationship       Age    U.S.   France   U.S.   France   U.S.   France
type

                                        Men

Married           18-29    4.8     6.6     4.1     5.9     128    113
                  30-39   10.9    12.2    11.3    12.0     251    274
                  40-49   17.9    19.4    20.3    20.0     211    215
                  50-59   27.3    29.3    28.8    29.3     148    104

Cohabiting
(not married)     18-29    2.4     3.4     1.8     2.3      73    225
                  30-39    3.7     7.0     2.6     5.9      42    117
                  40-59    7.3    10.1     3.9     7.9      27     47

Not living in a
couple            18-29    1.2     1.4     0.8     0.7     207    691
                  30-39    2.2     2.2     0.8     1.0     100    225
                  40-59    3.1     5.8     1.0     2.0      84    203

                                       Women

Married           18-29    6.0     6.7     5.6     5.9     220    145
                  30-39   12.2    13.3    12.6    13.0     360    253
                  40-49   20.0    21.8    21.8    22.3     264    174
                  50-59   29.7    30.1    32.0    30.6     170     78

Cohabiting
(not married)     18-29    2.9     3.6     1.8     2.5     101    189
                  30-39    6.5     7.5     4.4     5.0      58     67
                  40-59    5.3     7.9     2.6     6.9      42     27

Not living in a
couple            18-29    1.4     1.7     0.8     0.8     178    519
                  30-39    2.1     4.3     0.8     1.5     112    192
                  40-59    4.7     6.5     3.0     3.5      89    147

Note. Duration of sexual relationship is measured by length of time in
years between first sex and most recent sex.

We find practically no difference in the length of marriages in France and in the U.S. However, for both nonmarried cohabitants and persons not living with their partner, on average (whether measured by the mean or median) the French have been in a sexual relationship with their partner for a longer period of time than their U.S. counterparts. This is true at all ages for cohabitational partners ranging from a difference of about 1 year for the 20- to 29-year-olds to about 3 to 4 years for the oldest age group. Due to the relatively small number of such partners among the older age groups, we have grouped the 40- to 49-year-olds and the 50- to 59-year-olds for the cohabitants and those not living with their partner.

Among those not living with their most recent partner, the greater average length of time between first and most recent sexual encounter of the French does not clearly appear for men until the age of 40, with an average difference of almost 3 years and a median that is 1 year more than the median in the U.S. For French women the difference is already apparent among the 30- to 39-year-olds (mean difference of about 2 years, and difference between medians of almost 1 year) and is found as well among the 40- to 59-year-olds (a similar magnitude for the means of almost 2 years and a difference of about 6 months between the medians).

Sexual Activity, Age, and Couple Status

We now turn to the question of the effect of these national differences in the forms of coupling and number of partners on sexual activity itself, in terms of frequency of sex and sexual practices such as oral sex. Table 6 presents the frequency of sex in the last year for the sexually active in the two countries.(4)

Table 6. Frequency of Sex

         once a week   2 or 3 times   4 or more
          or less        a week       per week
Men

France     35.0            54.6         10.4
U.S.       57.7            33.3          9.0

Women

France     41.1            48.7         10.2
U.S.       61.2            31.3          7.5

Frequency of sex. The frequency of sex seems to be markedly higher in France than in the U.S. About 60% of U.S. men and women report having sex once a week or less, whereas this is the case for about one third of French men and women. On the other hand, over one half of French men and almost one half of French women report sex about two or three times per week, compared to one third of U.S. men and women. The percentages reporting sex four or more times per week is quite similar in the two countries. It is interesting to note that in contrast to the marked differences in numbers of partners by men and women, there are minimal differences in the reporting of frequency of sex by men and women within each country.

Frequency of sex is likely to be related to a number of variables including age, relationship status, number of partners, and education. The question arises of whether these several factors operate in the same way in both countries. We performed a series of logistic regressions to estimate the net effect of each of a set of independent variables on the frequency of sexual activity in the two countries. Because logistic regression requires a dichotomous dependent variable, we performed the same analysis for low frequency of sex (once a week or less) and high frequency of sex (four times per week or more). The results of these regressions are presented in Table 7.

Table 7. Odds Ratios from Logistic Regressions on Frequency of Sex

                                        Men               Women

                                  France    U.S.    France     U.S.

Dependent variable: Low
frequency of sex, once
a week or less

Age
  18-29 years old(a)
  30-39 years old                          1.6(b)   0.7(b)    1.3(c)
  40-49 years old                          2.2(b)             2.3(b)
  50-59 years old                 2.5(b)   3.8(b)   3.09(b)   3.8(b)

Married/cohabiting
  Married(a)
  Cohabiting                                        0.7(b)
  Neither married or cohabiting   4.0(b)   2.3 b    2.9(b)    1.9(b)

Number of partners
  One partner(a)
  2 partners or more

Education
  Low level of education                            1.7(b)
  Middle level of education(a)
  High level of education                  1.3(c)   1.4(c)

Dependent variable:
High frequency of sex,
4 times per week or more

Age
  18-29 years old(a)
  30-39 years old                          0.6(b)             0.5(b)
  40-49 years old                          0.4(b)             0.5(b)
  50-59 years old                 0.4(b)   0.2(b)   0.1(b)    0.3(b)

Married/cohabiting
  Married(a)
  Cohabiting                      2.0(b)            2.2(b)    1.9(b)
  Neither married or cohabiting   0.5(b)   0.5(c)

Number of partners
  One partner(a)
  2 partners or more              2.0(b)

Education
  Low level of education          1.5(c)
  Middle level of education(a)
  High level of education

(a) Base category from which odds ratios for other categories are
calculated.

(b) Significant at the 5% level.

(c) Significant at the 10% level.

Age. In both countries, the frequency of sex decreases with age. In the U.S. there is a progressive and continuous decline with age. On the one hand the likelihood of having sex once a week or less increases for each successive age group, and on the other hand the likelihood of having a high frequency of sexual activity decreases. In France, frequency of sexual activity is stable until age 49 (i.e., there is no significant difference between the frequency of sex between 18- to 29-year-olds and 30- to 39-year-olds or 40- to 49-year-olds). After age 49, the frequency of sex for the French decreases significantly. Interestingly, in addition, one finds a relative decline in low frequency of sexual activity among French women between ages 30 to 39 compared to the younger age group which is consistent with the fact (as found above in Table 3) that French women under 30 are more likely to have had no sexual partner than women over 30.

Relationship status. In both countries, living in a couple (as opposed to not living in a couple) is related to a higher frequency of sexual activity. This appears clearly and consistently for men and women in both countries in the regression on low frequency of sexual intercourse as an increase of two to four times in the odds of low levels of sexual activity for those not in a couple. For men, but not women, in both countries there is also a decrease in the likelihood of a high frequency of sex for those not in couples. Moreover, in both countries cohabiting, as opposed to being married, increases the odds of a high frequency of sexual intercourse (except for U.S. men).

The effects of numbers of partners and education are not found across the board. However, French men with two or more partners in the past year are more likely to have a high frequency of sex, and French women with low levels of education report a higher likelihood of low frequency of sex.

Sexual Practices in Mixed-gender Couples

The vast majority of the population (over 95%), for both genders and in both countries report vaginal intercourse during the last sexual event. Overall, men and women in France appear more likely than men and women in the U.S. to engage in less common sexual practices, such as oral or anal sex. These overall differences between countries are not very large for oral sex. About 40% of French men as compared to 35% of U.S. men report oral sex (either fellatio or cunnilingus or both) during the last sexual event as do 34% of French women as compared to 26% of U.S. women. In both countries a somewhat smaller proportion of women report any oral sex (in the last sexual event) than men, but this difference is the most marked when comparing U.S. men and women. While anal sex in the last sexual event is quite rare in both countries, the French rates are higher than the U.S. rate. Among French men 4.2% report having anal sex in the most recent sexual event as do 3.7% of French women. In the U.S. only 2.2% of U.S. men and 1.1% of U.S. women report anal sex during the last event. Here again, the difference between U.S. men and women is more marked than that found in France.

To explore the effect of various social factors on sexual practice, we performed a similar set of logistic regressions on oral sex in the last sexual event as used to analyze frequency of sex.(5) The results are quite similar to those found for frequency of sex, especially the regression on high frequency of sex. Instead of burdening the text with another table, we summarize the major findings.

Age. A similar pattern emerges for age and oral sex as was seen with frequency of sex. The U.S. pattern points to a decline with age, though in this case it begins only at age 40 for women and not until age 50 for men. Before those ages there is no apparent difference from the youngest group. The French pattern is u-shaped, indicating an increase in oral sex for the 30- to 39-years-olds compared to the youngest group and a decline with older age, clear and significant after 49. This is clearly significant for women, but there is an indication of the same, if only marginally significant, pattern for men.

Relationship status. Cohabitation (as compared to marriage) increases the likelihood of having oral sex for both genders in both countries. In addition, in France not living in a couple (as compared to being married) also increases the likelihood of having oral sex. This effect is not found in the U.S. This seems to indicate that in France, marriage is differentiated from both nonmarital cohabitation and living alone in being associated with lower rates of oral sex, whereas in the U.S. it is nonmarital cohabitation that is differentiated from both marriage and living alone leading to higher rates of oral sex.

Multiple partners. In both countries, men and women with multiple sexual partners in the last year were more likely to have oral sex in the last event (independent of relationship to partner) as compared to persons who were monogamous in the past year.

Education. The overall pattern in both countries and for both genders points to an association between higher levels of education with an increased likelihood of oral sex. U.S. men and French women with low levels of education are less likely to engage in oral sex than those with a moderate level of education (as is also marginally the case for U.S. women). French men with a high level of education are more likely to engage in oral sex than those with only a moderate level of education.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to common stereotypes of sexuality in the United States and France--one a mythic bastion of sexual Puritanism, the other the most sexually celebrated of Western cultures--we found quite similar patterns of sexual conduct over the life course from young adulthood to late middle age. In both societies the primary governing structural influences on sexual life are coupled status, gender, and age. Overall, adults in France and in the U.S. are remarkably alike in their sexual behavior. The couple is central to sexual expression influencing the rate of turnover of couples, numbers of partners, frequency of sex, and types of sexual practices in both societies.

There are, of course, differences between the two societies, primarily around patterns of couple formation and gender. People in France form monogamous sexual partnerships earlier and appear to remain in them longer (and participate in them with greater frequency) than people in the U.S. This results in fewer sexual partners in a lifetime and higher frequencies of sexual activity. The differences in the two societies are more dramatic for women than for men. Early in the life course, French women enter into sexual relationships more slowly, while later in life they remain more sexually active both in and out of couples than U.S. women. Living in a couple, the case for the majority of adults, produces comparable structural effects on sexual activity in France and the U.S., notably high rates of monogamy and higher rates of sexual activity.

On the other hand, the results of the comparative analyses presented here indicate that not living in a couple has quite different consequences for patterns of sexual behavior in the two countries, especially for women. Uncoupled younger women in France are much more likely not to have had a sexual partner in the last year and, in addition, those who have a sexual partner are less likely to have had multiple sexual partners in a given year than women in the U.S. The pattern of partner selection appears to be different in France than in the U.S., with young French women having a slower and more stable pattern of partner selection than women in the U.S.

The difference among women later in the life course is even more dramatic. While there are declines in rates of sexual activity with age, both in frequency and partnering, both coupled and uncoupled women over 50 in the U.S. report a remarkable decline in sexual partnerships in contrast to French women. By age 45 uncoupled women from both countries show sharp reductions in having had a sexual partner in the last year. By age 50 this rises to 78% of women in the U.S. The rates for French women are about 25% lower in this age group. In addition, women living in a couple in the U.S. after age 50 report declines in sexual activity with partners, with about 6% reporting no sexual activity even though they have a partner with whom they are living. It appears as if older women in the U.S. are less desirable sexually or are themselves less interested in sexual activity than French women of a comparable age.

The patterns of sexual activity of those not living in a couple are quite different in France and in the U.S. for both women and men. Among noncohabiting sexually active persons in France, having a single sexual partner in the last year is widespread for both women (85%) and men (70%). Sexually active men and women in the U.S. not living with a partner are more likely than the French to have two or more partners (the case for about a third of U.S. women and half of U.S. men).

People in France appear from these data to enter into longer term noncohabitational relationships when they are not already living in a couple. This accounts in large part for the smaller numbers of sexual partners accumulated by the French across a lifetime. In France, a relationship that has a sexual component appears to involve a higher degree of Commitment than in the U.S. This implies that the period between relationships is quite different in the U.S. and France, with both women and men in the U.S. more likely to have a series of short relationships before settling down with a stable partner.

In France the model of the long-term monogamous couple is more widespread than in the U.S.: Individuals are more frequently either married, cohabiting without being married, or committed to a noncohabiting partner. In the U.S., there is a greater disparity in modes of sexual life opposing those living in a couple (married or not) and those not living in a couple who frequently have no sexual activity or have many partners.

Our comparison of two advanced western societies points to the important role of the definition and meaning of the coupled relationship on the sexual activity of heterosexual partners. In comparing three situations--marriage, cohabiting with a partner without being married, and not living with a sexual partner--we have found a great deal of similarity between cohabiting couples in France and in the U.S. In France especially we find evidence of the emergence of the longer-term noncohabiting couple in the 1990s as an alternative to cohabiting relationships (married or not). This represents a major change from the 1960s when attention and concern were focused on the emergence of the unmarried cohabiting couple, designated as juvenile cohabitation in France (Leridon & Villeneuve-Gokalp, 1994). Over time, heterosexual sexual relations tend to be less defined in reference to marriage and, more recently, to cohabitation. We are now far from the world of Kinsey, where heterosexual activity was defined in terms of marital intercourse and all other heterosexual relations were defined in reference to this norm as premarital and extramarital (Michaels & Giami, 1999). Whether this new model will develop and whether it will facilitate the access of older women to sexual partnership, as appears to be the case in France, will have to await further study.

(1) The French survey was based on a sample of adults 18 to 69. For the purposes of this comparative analysis, we excluded individuals over 59.

(2) This was done for the French survey data using SUDAAN (Survey Data Analysis Software) release 6.34 and for the U.S. data using Stata release 5.

(3) The higher average number of partners of the other sex reported by men than women is a consistent artifact in surveys of sexual behavior (Smith, 1992). Logically, to the extent that partners are selected from the population surveyed this is impossible. This difference increases as the length of the time period covered increases. Recent research argues male/female differences in the method of recall and estimation account for this difference especially in the number of lifetime partners (Brown & Sinclair, 1999).

(4) The question on frequency of sex was asked differently in the two countries. The question in the French survey sought a specific number in response to the question: "Overall, how many times did you have sex in the last four weeks?" The U.S. survey asked "About how often did you have sex during the past twelve months?" and provided the following possible response categories: not at all, once or twice, about once a month, two or three times a month, about once a week, two or three time a week, four or more time a week. Both questions were only asked of respondents who were sexually active in the past year.

(5) Due to the very low rates of anal sex in the last sexual event logistic regression analyses were not performed for this activity.

REFERENCES

ACSF Investigators. (1992). Analysis of sexual behaviour in France: A comparison between two modes of investigation: Telephone survey and face-to-face survey. AIDS, 6, 315-323.

Bajos, N., Wadsworth, J., Ducot, B., Johnson, A., Le Pont, E, Wellings, K., Spira, A., & Field, J. (1995). Sexual behaviour and HIV epidemiology: Comparative analysis in France and Britain. AIDS, 9, 735-743.

Bland, L., & Doan, L. (1998). Sexology uncensored: The documents of sexual science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Brown, N. R., & Sinclair, R. C. (1999). Estimating numbers of lifetime sexual partners: Men and women do it differently. The Journal of Sex Research, 36, 292-297.

Bumpass, L. L., & Sweet, J. A. (1989). National estimates of cohabitation. Demography, 26, 615-625.

Bumpass, L. L., Sweet, J. A., & Cherlin, A. J. (1989). The role of cohabitation in declining rates of marriage. The Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 913-927.

Catania, J., Moskowitz, J. T., Ruiz, M., & Cleland, J. (1996). A review of national AIDS-related behavioral surveys. AIDS, 10 (Suppl. A), S183-S190.

Cleland, J., & Ferry, B. (Eds.). (1995). Sexual behaviour and AIDS in the developing world. London: Taylor & Francis.

Delamater, J. (1987). A sociological approach. In J. H. Geer & W. T. O'Donoghue (Eds.), Theories of human sexuality (pp. 237-255). New York: Plenum.

Ericksen, J., & Steffen, S. (1999). Kiss and tell: Surveying sex in the twentieth century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social origins of human sexuality. Chicago: Aldine.

Giami, A., & Dowsett, G. (1996). Social research on sexuality: Contextual and interpersonal approaches. AIDS, 10 (Suppl. A), S191-196.

Hubert, M., Bajos, N., & Sandfort, T. (Eds.). (1998). Sexual behaviour and AIDS in Europe. London: UCL Press.

Jones, E. E, Forrest, J. D., Goldman, N., Henshaw, S., Lincoln, R., Rosoff, J. I., Westoff, C. F., & Wulf, D. (1986). Teenage pregnancy in industrialized countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W., & Martin, C. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: Saunders.

Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W., Martin, C., & Gebhard, P. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: Saunders.

Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Laumann, 15. O., & Gagnon, J. H. (1995). A sociological perspective on sexual action. In R. Parker & J. H. Gagnon (Eds.), Conceiving sexuality: Approaches to sex research in a post-modern world (pp. 183-213). New York: Routledge.

Leridon, H., & Villeneuve-Gokalp, C. (1994). Constance et inconstances de la famille: Biographies familiales des couples et des enfants [Permanence and change in the family: Family biographies of couples and children]. Paris: INED-PUF.

Michaels, S., & Giami, A. (1999). Sexual acts and sexual relationships: Asking about sex in surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 385-404.

Smith, T. W. (1992). Discrepancies between men and women in reporting number of sexual partners: A summary from four countries. Social Biology, 39, 203-211.

Spira, A., Bajos N., & the ACSF Group. (1994). Sexual behaviour and AIDS. Aldershot, England: Avebury.

Spira, A., Bajos, N., Giami, A., & Michaels, S. (1998). Cross-national comparisons of sexual behavior surveys: Methodological difficulties and lessons for prevention. American Journal of Public Health, 88, 730-731.

Vance, C. S. (1991). Anthropology rediscovers sexuality: A theoretical comment. Social Science and Medicine, 33, 875-884.

Manuscript accepted September 14, 2000

John H. Gagnon State University of New York, Stony Brook

Alain Giami Stuart Michaels Patrick de Colomby INSERM U. 292, Paris

Correspondence to: Alain Giami, INSERM, U. 292, 82, rue du General Leclerc, 94276 Le Kremlin-Bicetre Cedex, France, e-mail: [e-mail].