The Role of close friends in African American adolescents' dating and sexual behavior.

During early and middle adolescence, youth become increasingly interested in forming dyadic romantic relationships, and by the age of 14 or 15 most adolescents have had some experience with dating (Connolly & Johnson, 1996; Furman, 1993; Sharabany, Gershoni, & Hofman, 1981). The formation of romantic relationships assists with healthy social development and provides a range of supportive functions that impact general adjustment and coping throughout adolescence (Lempers & Clark-Lempers, 1993; Shulman & Kipnis, 2001; Zimmer-Gembeck, Siebenbruner, & Collins, 2001). Romantic and dating relationships are also often a prelude to sexual activity during adolescence (Miller & Moore, 1990). Since these phenomena occur in a social context that is heavily influenced by peers, it is important to examine the role of close friends in the dating and sexual behavior of adolescents. These same-gender social networks may provide an avenue for delivering and diffusing prevention messages about safer sex to adolescents. This paper addresses dating and sex among inner-city African American adolescents and explores the role of friendships in these early sexual experiences.

FRIENDS' INFLUENCE ON DATING AND SEX

Friendships are thought to play a significant role in determining the quality of heterosexual dating experiences because adolescents spend a significant amount of time with their peers and learn about opposite-gender social relationships by observing and imitating each other (Furman, Brown, & Feiring, 1999; Leaper & Anderson, 1997). Additionally, friendship networks create a context in which romantic relationships can develop; adolescents' involvement in these networks can influence the timing, emergence, and nature of their romantic relationships. The existence of a supportive and cohesive friendship network has been associated with increased frequency of dating, as close friends may serve a number of roles including providing access to potential dating partners through peer group activities, acquiring background information about potential partners, assisting in the initiation of conversations with prospective partners, and "setting up" the actual dating circumstances (Connolly, Furman, & Konarski, 2000; Davies & Windle, 2000; Paul & White, 1990). In addition, close friends also provide initial models for romantic relationship expectations, as well as information and advice regarding the initiation and maintenance of dating relationships.

Dating during adolescence often serves as an avenue for participation in sexual activity (Miller & Moore, 1990). Adolescents who date on a more consistent basis have access to potential sexual partners, thereby increasing the likelihood that they will have sex (Davies & Windle, 2000; Longmore, Manning, & Giordano. 2001). Frequent dating at an early age has been shown to be associated with earlier sexual experience (Dorius, Heaton, & Steffen. 1993: Miller et al., 1997). Therefore, to better understand the sexual experiences of adolescents and to design effective sexual health promotion programs, it is important to examine the role that dating plays in sex. In addition, because dating and friendships are often interrelated sociodevelopmental phenomena (Furman et al., 1999). it is important to understand the role thai close friends play in the dating process.

Christopher (2001) has developed two theoretical models for understanding individual and relational influences on sexual activity for early adolescents and older adolescents/young adults that integrate empirical literature on adolescent sexuality and are guided by a theoretical framework that combines elements of symbolic interactionism and role theory. These models assume that shared meaning and roles related to sexual behavior are created and negotiated through interactions with significant others such as peers, dating partners, and parents. In dating and sexual relationships, both partners enter the relationship with learned preconceptions about the ways in which one should or should not behave in the context of the relation ship, and then create their specific dyadic roles within these parameters. Both of Christopher's models emphasize that peers are a strong socializing force in these processes and that peers are a stronger force than parents with regard to sexuality, especially for older adolescents/young adults.

Christopher's theories emphasize the importance of discussions that occur in friendship groups, because such conversations influence the social construction of the meaning attached to sexual roles and behaviors. As adolescents talk about their romantic interests and experiences with friends, they typically consider and construct sexual roles, interpret the meaning of these roles, and make decisions regarding their acceptability. Friends reward or punish dating and sex-related behaviors during these discussions, both through direct feedback or criticism given to a peer who tells the group about engaging in certain behaviors or vicariously through stories and experiences of peers. These interactions serve to influence adolescents" peer attitudes, norms, and role expectations, which ultimately impact dating and sexual behavior (Christopher, 2001).

DATING AND SEX AMONG AFRICAN AMERICAN ADOLESCENTS

Although developmental theory and research suggest that friends play a significant role in determining the quality of heterosexual dating and sexual relationships, this phenomenon has not been systematically explored among African American adolescents. African American adolescents, particularly those in low-income urban environments, have been disproportionately impacted by negative sexual health outcomes such as sexually transmitted infections and HIV (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2002a, 2002b) and unintended pregnancies (Anachebe & Sutton, 2003). Thus, it is important to explore contextual and social influences on the sexual behavior of these youth in order to design effective prevention programs. Culture specific examinations of dating and sex are essential to understanding the sexual lives of African American adolescents, since these behaviors are shaped to a large degree by sociocultural factors that vary across ethnic groups (Anderson, 1999: Leaper, 2000). In addition, some researchers have noted the relatively greater importance and influence of neighborhood friendship groups in the lives of African American youth (Anderson, 1992, 1999: Way, 1998). This may be partially due to the experience of being an ethnic minority adolescent in a racist society and the increased social support and acknowledgement that can be gained from spending time with those who can relate to experiences of oppression (Prilleltensky, 2003: Watts, Griffith, & Abdul-Adil, 1999).

Given that this study sought to better understand the role of friends in the dating and sexual relationships of inner-city African American adolescents--a phenomenon that has not received significant empirical attention and that has many cultural nuances and influences--we decided to use a qualitative investigative approach. Gilmore, DeLamater, and Wagstaff (1996) have suggested that since adolescent sexual activity involves a set of complex socially constructed phenomena, it is beneficial for researchers to give youth the opportunity to talk about their sexual experiences in their own words. Eyre & Millstein (1999) also have noted that understanding adolescents" own unique conceptualizations of sexual behavior can offer helpful insights that may improve sexual health interventions. The current study expands our understanding of the sexual lives of African American adolescents by exploring youths' conceptualization of dating and sex partners and by examining the ways in which youth talk with their close friends about dating and sex, how they involve close friends in the process of acquiring dating and sex partners, and how they manage disagreements between close friends and dating or sex partners.

METHODS

Participants

This study was focused on a low-income neighborhood in a large West Coast city. At the time of the study, this neighborhood had approximately 28,000 residents and 61% were African American. The median household income was $25,()00, 25% of households fell below the poverty level, and the unemployment rate was 13% (San Francisco Department of City Planning, 1990). African American adolescents living in this neighborhood have been found to have multiple lifetime sexual partners (male median = 9: female median = 3), low rates of condom use (60% inconsistent or nonuse), and the highest rates of gonorrhea and chlamydia within the surrounding city (DiClemente et al., 1996: San Francisco Department of Public Health, 1998).

We selected participants using a maximum variation sampling method wherein sexually active African American youth representing an even distribution of ages within our overall age range (14-18 years) who had close friendship networks were selected from the two primary recreation centers in the study neighborhood (N = 15:9 males, 6 females). We selected these two locations because they offer a range of services to youth and thus are heavily attended by the target population, are in two different geographic regions within the community, and attract different segments of the youth population.

Procedures

We obtained written consent from all participants, and all youth under 18 years of age obtained parental consent. The sponsoring university's internal review board approved this study. Adolescents in the study participated in individual in-depth qualitative interviews that lasted between 1 and 3 hours. Same-gender interviewers conducted the interviews in private rooms at the recreation centers, and we compensated participants for their involvement. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. In addition, after each interview the interviewer audiotaped impressions and field notes and these were also transcribed verbatim. All tapes were destroyed following transcription. Interviewers followed a semistructured interview guide but also allowed for independent expression of thoughts and ideas by participants.

The study investigators, the study interviewers, and a senior cultural anthropologist collaboratively drafted, tested, and revised the semistructed interview guide. The first draft of the interview guide was developed from research questions related to the following areas: the role of friend ship groups in the lives of African American adolescents; youths' conceptualization of dating, love, sex, and romance; conversations that youth have with close friends about dating, love, sex, and romance; and ways in which close friends are involved in dating and sexual behavior. We subjected this preliminary draft to several stages of development through a recurrent series of pilot interviews with African American adolescents from the community, reviews and discussions of the interview tapes by the research team, and multiple revisions. One of the central purposes of this iterative process is developing question language that is accessible to participants and that encourages rather than discourages expression of responses in their own terminology.

Analysis

We used an inductive analysis procedure to allow the patterns, themes, and categories of analysis to emerge from the data (Patton, 1990). This procedure allows for an exploration of indigenous concepts and typologies. Two analysts coded and analyzed the interviews in a multi-level fashion. Both analysts read all interviews at least twice before creating initial codes by consensus using an inductive coding procedure (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Patton, 1990). After creating these initial codes, the analysts reread the transcripts and collapsed some codes into broader categories, expanded others into subcategories, and created some new codes. The transcribed interviews were then entered into QSR NUD*IST Vivo software (NVivo) to assist in further coding and searching of the text and conducting cross-case and comparative analyses.

After the transcripts were coded in NVivo with the revised codes, we used pattern coding to further reduce the data and to find themes and patterned regularities (Creswell, 1998). After understanding these concepts as presented in individual interviews, we conducted cross-case and comparative analyses. To do this, we identified consistent patterns in meaning, concepts, and/or themes within the 15 interviews (cross-case) and then examined comparative differences between various subgroups of participants (Creswell, 1998: Miles & Huberman, 1994). During this phase of analysis, it became clear that gender differences were emerging in the themes. Therefore, we conducted comparative analyses across gender and explored the presence of gender-related thematic differences. At this phase, we used matrices to assist in the comparative gender-based analyses, as these physical representations of the data helped us explore the similarities and differences that occurred within each gender as well as similarities and differences across genders (Creswell, 1998; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Since qualitative inquiry seeks to identify the presence or absence of a phenomenon while quantitative inquiry seeks to demonstrate the degree to which a phenomenon is present (Kirk & Miller, 1986), the gender differences reported in this paper represent the presence or absence of a theme within a particular gender category and do not indicate statistically significant differences. We used characteristic quotes in the following section to illustrate the concepts and themes that were revealed, but we changed all names in this paper to protect the confidentiality of the respondents and their friends and partners.

RESULTS

The results section is organized to reflect the importance of peers as both socializing agents who impact how adolescents in this sample conceptualize dating and sexual behavior and active "players" and facilitators in the dating process. The first section describes the process that occurs when close friends talk about dating and sexual activity. The next section describes participants' conceptualizations of dating and sexual activity based on responses to questions regarding actual dating and sexual behavior as well as discussions with friends about dating and sexual behavior. The final section is focused on the role that close friends play in acquiring a new dating partner and the continued role they play during the dating process.

Process of Talking About Dating and Sexual Activity

This section explores the ways in which adolescents talk about dating and sexual activity with close friends. Youth revealed the greatest amount of information to close friends they trust the most, with some only telling one or two friends all the details. Both males and females tended to disclose information about their dating and sexual behavior to close friends by responding to questions. This process occurs in a relatively orderly fashion with one friend telling his or her story m response to friends' queries and, when the story is complete, turning questions to another. Participants said that friends often use joking and teasing as a way to ease into this type of sensitive conversation.

   It's like a lot of questions and we really gel into detail,
   everything basically. (Tonya)

   Yeah. it just depends on like if it's, it depends on the person.
   Like, cause, like most of them, we feel pretty comfortable. I mean,
   like telling anything. (Jasmine)

   Like, one time I was at my friend Ron's house and then somebody
   just said, like, guess who I did it to, and everybody was like,
   who, who? And he told us, and he told us what happened, and then
   somebody else will say, guess who I did it to, and then people will
   start sharing information. (Darryl)

   We would crack jokes about him. But now it don't matter. He
   could express hisself in front of us or not. (Will)

Generally, females in this study appeared initially reluctant to tell close friends about their sexual activity, and some reported a degree of embarrassment. Females often would reveal some initial details of a dating or sexual episode, and their close friends would coax them into telling the rest of the story. Some young women noted that they were more comfortable when a close friend initiated the discussion of dating or sexual activity. Once the topic was raised and an initial story about a specific experience was shared, they would then share their own story. Males, on the other hand, spoke openly about their sexual activity and did not require encouragement from peers. They often talked about sex in terms of competition for who had the most sexual conquests and bragged about the types and frequency of their sexual activity.

   I just don't know how to just come out in the blue and say it, so I
   just wait til it comes up ... I just like delay il and then I just
   bring it up like when we have the conversation about that certain
   thing, it just comes out. Then I'll like say something that will
   give up that I've been doing something I ain't been telling them
   about. Then I'll tell them the whole story. (Keisha)

   ... they might feel like they might get embarrassed out, they'd be
   like, they'd let us know there is more, but they're not going to
   tell us like. And then sometimes they let us push it out of them.
   (Jasmine)

   Then we'll start talking about how many females we got. How
   many times we did it to them. We'll start having a competition.
   like who did the most girls. Who had the most sex. (Keith)

   First word would be probably, did you get some last night? Did
   you fuck her? Was it good? That's the first thing that they want to
   know. Did you get some and was it good? The conversation
   would pick up from there. (Greg)

Females and males tended to describe their dating and sexual activity in different ways. Females talked about sex in relational terms, stating for example that the couple had sex or that "they did it." There was recognition that sex occurs between two people, and the language used was focused on the dyadic nature of the union. The close friends also would question the female who was revealing information about her sexual activity about the level of enjoyment she experienced and the degree to which the male made her happy.

   I mean, they talk to me about, like. sex, and how they do it, where
   they did it. (Jasmine)

   It's like, everybody now is enjoying it. Do you enjoy being with
   him? Do he make you happy? What you all be doing? You all be
   having fun? (Jessica)

In contrast to the females, males sometimes shared information with their close friends regarding females whom the friends wanted to pursue for sex. These comments often focused on the likelihood that particular females would agree to have sex with them. They used a variety of terms when talking about sexual activity, all of which were egocentrically based and focused on the male either receiving something (e.g., "getting some ass," "get some") or doing something to a female (e.g., "hit them," "screw her"). There was no obvious acknowledgement that the sexual activity involved two people who were engaging in a mutual activity.

   I just hit [have sex with] them. Then it would be like, you just
   hit them for real? I be like, yup. (Terrance)

   We talk about how many girls we did it to. We talk about when
   the last time yell had some or whatever. Are you still a virgin or
   not? Do you want us to help you get some? (Keith)

Conceptualizations of Dating and Sexual Activity

To gain an understanding of how the youth conceptualize dating and sexual activity, we asked participants a series of questions about how they define dating or "going with" a partner, as well as how they describe the process of dating. In addition, we asked a series of questions about the conversations respondents have with their friends about dating and sexual activity. Common themes emerged across these two areas of the interview that offer insight into how participants conceptualize dating, sexual activity, and dating or sexual partners, and how they share this information with close friends. These themes included the following: (a) definition and role of the dating or sexual partner: (b) meaning of the dating process: (c) partner's expectations regarding fidelity: and (d) friends' expectations regarding condom use.

Across these four themes it appeared that males and females differed in terms of their general orientation toward dating and sexual partners. Females generally demonstrated what we have termed a gradual-dyadic relational orientation toward dating and sexual partners, as they expressed a desire to gradually develop a romantic relationship with a male through dating and typically described this process in relational terms. Males possessed what we have termed an immediate-egocentric pleasure orientation toward dating and sexual partners. They expressed a desire to engage in sexual activity with dating partners and emphasized the immediacy with which they hoped this would occur. Egocentric physical pleasure was often the focus of such conversations, and female partners were frequently described in objectifying terms.

Definition and role of the dating or sexual partner. Both males and females stated that dating partners possess special qualities or characteristics that make them "stand out" from other acquaintances or sexual partners. They offered little detail about what these special qualities were and instead talked in more general terms about the dating partner being "different" or "special." The dating partner is a person that youth put effort into learning more about, often seeking answers to questions such as, who are the mutual friends that could connect me to the partner: does this person have a boy/girlfriend; and does this person have a reputation as "clean" and "respectable"? The dating partner is defined by the amount of time spent with him or her (e.g., increased time together) and the types of recreational activities in which the pair participate together (e.g., going to movies). Finally, there is mutual respect between dating partners.

   Just put your time into it (dating relationship). Like, talk to
   her. Spend time with her. And just make it your main work.... Take
   her out somewhere. Go to the movies together. Something you
   wouldn't do with any other broad. Any other broad you just meet
   her and take her to the house and do what ya'll gotta do. (Greg)

   A boyfriend is a person you can trust and you can share a lot of
   things with ... someone you can hang with, talk on the phone with,
   go places with. (Tonya)

Females and males differed with regard to what they reported receiving from dating partners and the roles dating partners play in their lives. Males viewed the dating partner as someone who would work hard to meet their emotional and physical needs--someone who would "take care" of them. One of the males also talked about obtaining love and respect from a partner in addition to her taking care of him. Females viewed a dating partner as someone who would make them feel special or good and who would generally make them happy. Some females also described a dating partner as someone who would do something "nice" for them at times. This type of behavior was intermittent and intended to elicit a response (e.g., to make the girl happy) as opposed to a continuous and expected behavior as was described by the males.

   If we having a relationship, there is a rule. If she loves you,
   she's taking care of yon ... Thank God I got somebody to take care
   of me and who can respect me. I could talk to if I gotta problem.
   It's all good. (Carl)

   The reason why I love my boyfriend is because he stands behind
   me 100%, he makes me happy ... He can just see me after school
   or something ... he fix me something to eat and that makes me feel
   good. (Jessica)

The males' discussions about their dating and sexual partners frequently contained statements reflecting a view of dating partners as possessions or objects used to obtain sexual gratification. Some males would even "allow" their friends to have sex with their dating partners if the friends first "asked permission." If a male did not ask permission and had sex with a friend's partner, then the friend would become angry. Objectification of male partners was not found among females. For females, a close friend's boyfriend or dating partner was off limits to all other friends in the network, and the sanctity of the romantic relationship was respected by the friends.

   Unless they want to hit her [have sex with her]. I mean, as long as
   he tell me like ... like if he try to do her behind my back, I'm
   gonna hate him for that. But then, if he tell me, like man, I want
   to do your girl or whatever. Cause I don't care about that girl. I
   mean, girls cheat on niggas [males] just like niggas [males] cheat
   on girls. (Antoine)

Meaning of the dating process. Females in this sample talked more about dating than did males and would often describe to their friends where they went and what they did on a date. They offered details about the types of activities engaged in while on a date and viewed the dating process as a way to get to know the male and to enhance their emotional connectedness to him en route to a relationship. Dating partners were often described as males with whom they had a "relationship" or with whom they were "going out." The majority of the males did not offer details regarding places that they went on a date and talked about dating as a means to an end, something that must be done in order to have sex with a female.

   We talk on the phone, probably go places, get to know each other
   before we get to the boyfriend/girlfriend stage. (Tonya)

   If you just like, let's luck, that's coming at 'em disrespectful.
   So that's why we get m good with 'em. Make a relationship and then
   we handle our business [have sex]. (Keith)

A minority of the male respondents expressed alternative views of the dating process and dating partners. One viewed dating as a way to get to know a female and talked about the gradual progression of the relationship from a friendship to a sexual partnership. The other male viewed a dating partner as someone he could love and who would care for him and respect him.

   Friendship comes before love. There are a lot of things they
   [dating partners] need to know about each other before they have
   sex. (Keith)

Partners' expectations regarding fidelity. Themes also centered around issues of fidelity, and a double standard emerged. Young women were expected to show sexual fidelity to their dating partner, but males were not. One male expressed a divergent view, as he talked about the expectation of the male being sexually monogamous when in a relationship with a female who is "taking care" of him. The notion of attentional fidelity also emerged. Some young men wanted a dating partner to focus her attention exclusively on them and avoid contact with other males. Females, on the other hand, anticipated that their boyfriends would have other partners. These young women appeared to focus on maintaining their position as the "number one" or most important female partner rather than on the males' sexual fidelity.

   [interviewer] What would happen if you were going with a girl
   and you found out she was talking to another guy?
   [respondent] I ain't gonna talk to her no more. Our relationship is
   over. (Terrance)

   Like, say she messing [having sex] with me like. No, I ain't gonna
   want her to go with nobody else. (Antoine)

   To me, that makes me feel like I'm number one. And if I'm not
   the only one, I'm number one. And I just feel on top of the world.
   (Jessica)

   The only problem that bothers me is the sex part. Because I feel
   if you are my boyfriend, you shouldn't be having sex with
   nobody. I don't want him to [have sex], but I'd be expecting him
   to because of the type of person he is. (Rhonda)

Friends' expectations regarding condom use. Both females and males talked with their friends about condoms during conversations about dating and sex. The vast majority of the males reported talking openly with close friends about condoms, while females reported less frequent conversations. Often, females would question each other about whether they used a condom when having sex, and some reported that their close friends would get angry with other friends who did not use a condom because of the potential negative consequences of having unprotected sex (e.g., becoming pregnant, becoming infected with a disease). Some females even gave condoms to their close friends and encouraged them to carry condoms.

   I was upset. I was like, why did you do that [have sex without a
   condom]? Or, anything could have happened. You could have gotten
   pregnant ... We would just be mad at her. (Kim)

   Like Rochelle, I tell her she's to carry some [condoms] with
   her ... I go yeah, that's why you need to carry them with you all
   the time. I'm giving her some of mines. And Katrina. she's like our
   supplier. (Tonya)

All of the males in our sample reported that they encourage friends to use condoms and warn them about the negative effects of unprotected sexual activity (e.g., getting their partners pregnant, acquiring a sexually transmitted infection). Several of the males reported that their close friends generally tease males who talk about having unprotected sex, and that joking is a regular part of conversations about condoms and condom use.

   Like, say a nigga [friend] didn't use a condom. We'd be teasing
   him. You're going to get AIDS or something. You're going to
   have a baby. You gonna get mad. (Antoine)

   Before you do this, make sure you know what you're doing. Use
   a condom to protect yourself, to not catch nothing. Don't be
   nervous. (Keith)

Role of Close Friends in Acquiring a New Dating Partner

Females and males reported that their close friends play a significant role in the process of acquiring new dating partners (see Figure 1). Although some gender differences emerged, reliance on the peer group for assistance when first interested in dating someone and also during the active pursuit of a desired partner was common. All of the females and the majority of the males reported that they tell close friends about their interest in a specific male or female. However, some males did report hiding romantic interests from their friends because of embarrassment or fear that their close friends would then compete for the same potential partner.

   I would be like ... I would tell Tioni like, you know, I really
   like him or whatever. He seem like a cool person to kick it with.
   We're going to be kicking it for a while. That's going to be my
   dude for a while. (Kim)

   I wouldn't even tell them. They are probably already trying
   to get at her anyway. (Carl)

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Timing of the disclosure of interest in a potential partner differed among females. Some young women would announce their interest alter seeing or meeting the young man, whereas others would wait until they knew that he was not currently in a dating relationship. For both genders, telling their close friends about interest in a potential partner serves as an invitation for their close friends to become involved in the process of attempting to acquire the dating partner. With females, this announcement also opens the individual up to gently joking about her attraction in general or specifically about the potential dating partner. Both genders reported that once friends have been "invited" to participate in the process of acquiring a partner, members of the close friend network gather information about the potential dating partner, with females using indirect mechanisms (e.g., asking questions of people who know the potential partner) and males using more direct methods (e.g., talking directly with the potential partner).

   That's mainly what happens or either we like try to find out if he
   got a girlfriend, you know. What school she go to if she don't go
   to our school, or you know, different things like that. (Jasmine)

   They'll go talk to her. If we see the girl more often than he do,
   we'll hook him up with her, telling her he want to highlight her or
   something. Other than that, he'll go talk to her. (Will)

This task is usually relegated to the close friend who knows the potential partner the best or who has connections with the potential partner's friends and/or family members. Both females and males reported that they typically do not approach the potential partner or his/her friends without first asking permission of the friend who is interested in the potential partner.

As the partner acquisition process continues, gender differences emerge. For males, the initial contact is meant to serve as a direct means of connecting the close friend with the potential partner and the goal is to have this contact result in an agreement for the two to "hook up." Among females, the information gatherer reports the availability and the level of interest to the inquiring female following initial contact. Several females reported that if the male expresses a lack of interest, they do not report this to the friend and instead tell her that he is "unavailable."

   If I see her first, I probably tell her, like, try to hook her up
   with him. I know so-and-so likes you. (Marcus)

   Then if they like get back a good report, then they'll tell you
   they did it. If he's like, nah, I'm cool or either I'm messing with
   somebody already, then they just won't say nothing. Be like, Oh I
   heard he got a girlfriend. It'll be like that. (Jasmine)

After the initial report has been made, the various members of the close friend network offer to assist the female in further communications with the potential partner through passing notes or approaching the potential partner directly.

   If they tell me, well, can you give him this note or go tell him
   this, then that's when I'll do it. Other than that, I could just
   give advice basically. I wouldn't go to that person ... So I went
   and aks her [about talking to a potential partner], it was like,
   Yeah, but don't tell him in front of me. So I'm like, okay. So I
   talked to him for her and I talked to her for him until they can
   talk to each other. (Tonya)

There appeared to be gender differences related to competition between close friends in acquiring a new dating partner. Females generally agreed that they would not compete with each other if two or more friends were interested in the same male. For the males, however, competition between close friends for a dating partner was socially acceptable and was viewed as part of the normal process of acquiring a dating partner. Males indicated that if two friends are interested in the same girl, she is viewed as the "prize" that one of them catches.

   And they both like him, or whatever. But, you know, they couldn't
   ... if Shea went out with him, then Tioni would be upset. Or if
   Tioni went out with him. then Shea would be upset. So that's
   when we decided that we would never let any guy get between us.
   (Kim)

   Whoever can get her can get her. Nobody get mad. You can't be
   mad because I got her first. (Jamal)

Role of Close Friends in the Dating Relationship

In addition to friends being important in the partner acquisition process, youth revealed that close friends also play a significant role during the course of the dating relationship (see Figure 1). This was explored from two different perspectives: the impact on the dating relationship and the friendship network when close friends disapprove of dating partners, and the impact on the friendship network and the dating relationship when dating partners disapprove of close friends.

Close friends' view of dating partner. The youth in this study appeared to have strong opinions about who their close friends are dating. Both males and females reported that they talk with their close friends when they disapprove of a friend's dating partner. If close friends do not like another's dating partner, this situation is manageable and does not have an impact on their friendship. When this disapproval is more intense or is at a level that could potentially have a negative impact on the group of close friends, then the dating partner is eliminated.

   I didn't like some of my friends' girlfriends. But now, it was cool
   though. That didn't affect the clique though. (Terrance)

   If I like him, then I like him. What can she say about it? All she
   could do is tell me. If I chose to listen to her or listen to him,
   then it's on me. (Kim)

Males and females expressed different reasons for disliking a particular adolescent's dating partner. For females, close friends generally expressed disapproval of a dating partner when they felt that the male partner was not treating their friend with care and respect. This disapproval had a protective function and focused on the friend's safety and happiness. However, when a female just did not like her close friend's partner for personal reasons, she would either try to like the partner or avoid him. Several females stated that they understood that their friends are always "looking out" for them; if friends expressed concern about a dating partner this was most likely in response to a fear that he would treat her disrespectfully.

   If she don't like him it's only going co be because if he was
   treating me a certain way and she didn't approve of it ... she
   would just be like, you know, Kim, I don't feel you should be with
   him because he treating you this way or this way. (Kim)

   Personally me, if I don't like one of they boyfriends or something,
   I just ignore him. Or I stay away from him. It's like. you stay in
   your place. I'll stay in mine. Just keep her happy. And other than
   that, ya'll could be together If she's happy with you, then let her
   be. (Jessica)

   So when my friends tell me that [about their disapproval of a
   dating partner], then l just take their advice. Cause evidently
   they're seeing something I'm not seeing. And we re all close, so
   they usually know how I would feel or whatever. They're usually
   right and they tell me then. (Tonya)

The males' reactions to a dating partner of one of their friends was more focused on their own personal feelings toward the dating partner and had little to do with concerns about the close friend's safety or happiness. The manner in which the males talked about their disapproval of a close friend's dating partner was generally egocentric, and none of them mentioned concerns regarding their close friend's feelings. Males' comments were always directed at characteristics of the dating partner that they did not like or ways in which she had interacted with them personally (not the close friend who is dating the female) in a negative way.

   Just don't like her. I'd be like, I don't like your girlfriend. She
   got an attitude, or she ugly. I just don't like the way she talk
   to me. It'd just be like that. Cause if you don't like her, you
   just don't like her. (Jamal)

   There's a few girls that Donnie or Michael was messin with and I
   didn't get along with her or like her just period.... But now
   that's just how I felt about her. (Will)

Dating partner's view of close friends. Just as friends have opinions about dating partners, the partners also have opinions about the close friends. Both males and females reported that if their dating partners disapproved of one of their close friends, this would not disrupt the larger group of close friends. If a dating partner voiced concerns regarding the adolescent spending time with his or her friends or did not like or approve of the adolescent's friends, then the relationship with the dating partner would be terminated. Thus, the relationship among the friends appeared to be paramount to the relationship with the dating partner. The loss of a dating partner was not as significant as a potential loss of a friend: dating partners were viewed as dispensable. The importance of the connection with the close friends was so strong that one male even reported that he would tolerate violence toward his girlfriend from a friend, and that this would not impact his relationship with that male friend.

   But if it got to a point where if we was dating, like, and she
   tried to tell me I got to stay away from them or something, I got
   to quit messin with her because we too tight for that ... to let a
   girl come between us. So we just won't be messin with each other no
   more. (Will)

   No we're too tight to be ... I mean, males, it's like ... we look
   at it like this--it's too many fish in the sea. All you gotta do is
   take that fishing pole and start to drag another one out, and let
   the other one lumps back in the sea. Our bond is tighter than that.
   It's like, we crazy glue together, and we ain't never going
   nowhere. (Jessica)

DISCUSSION

The findings from this study suggest that close friends play a critical role in the dating and sexual behaviors of inner-city African American adolescents, supporting previous developmental and sex-related theory and research that has been conducted with different populations of youth (e.g., Christopher, 2001: Connolly et al., 2000: Davies & Windle, 2000: Furman et al., 1999). Close friends appear to serve as socializing agents who impact how adolescents conceptualize and socially construct dating and sexual roles and behaviors, as suggested in Christopher's (2001) theories of adolescent sexuality. In addition, for youth in this sample, close friends often play a significant role in acquiring new dating and sexual partners and an important role in the course of dating and sexual relationships.

Talking About Dating and Sexual Activity

Youth in our study talked with their close friends about dating and sex and revealed the greatest amount of information to the most trusted friends. These discussions typically occurred through a series of questions posed to different members of the group. The finding that youth talk with their close friends about dating and sex is in keeping with other work with ethnic minority youth that emphasizes the importance of friends for sharing intimate information (Anderson, 1992, 1999: Ascencio, 1999). Our findings also support Christopher's (2001) assertion of the importance of friends' discussions in the social construction of sexual roles and behaviors. Although both males and females talked with their close friends about dating and sex, they approached the topics in different ways. While females were more embarrassed and reluctant to talk in detail about sexual experiences and tended to focus more on dating, some did discuss the enjoyment experienced during sexual activity. In contrast, males spoke freely and often boastfully about their experiences, with a primary focus on sex and pleasure. Reports of sexual episodes also appeared to increase the males' social status within the friendship group.

The social status associated with increased sexual exploits for males found in the current study is commensurate with previous research with ethnic minority youth (Eyre, Auerswald, Hoffman, & Millstein, 1998; Pleck, Sonenstein, & Ku, 1993: Zelnik & Shah, 1983). The females in our study did not indicate a loss in social status associated with sexual activity, contrary to some previous studies suggesting that adolescent females who are sexually assertive or who have sex outside of a committed relationship are often labeled "sluts" (e.g., Loxley, 1996: Pipher, 1994). The females' discussions of sex in relational terms and their expressions of sexual enjoyment are reflective of recent research that suggests some changes in norms regarding female adolescent sexuality and a recognition that female adolescents experience sexual desire (e.g., Asencio, 1999: Tolman, 1994, 2000). Further exploration of the social consequences of sex among adolescents is critical, since social reputations and opinions of friends are important during adolescence (e.g., Brown, Dolcini, & Levanthal, 1997). Additionally, gender divergent social consequences for sex place males and females in conflict with each other and may influence communication about sexual histories and safer sex practices.

Social Construction of Dating and Sexual Activity: Gender Divergence

Youth in this study revealed various aspects of how they socially construct the phenomena of dating and sexual activity and how these constructions along with expectations regarding sexual roles are maintained through discussions with friends. This study was unique because we explored these issues by examining the process and content of discussions with close friends. Our analyses revealed that the process by which participants talked with their friends about dating and sex was generally different across genders. Gender divergence was also noted with regard to the shared social constructions of dating and sexual roles and expectations as well as perceptions regarding the meaning of dating. The direction of these differences echoes those found in prior research in which adolescent females reported being emotionally connected or "in love" with their sexual partners while males tended to be more focused on physical aspects of sex (e.g., Cassell, 1984; Zelnik & Shah, 1983). They also parallel general reviews suggesting males and females enter relationships with different and sometimes competing role constructions and expectations about sex and relationships (DeLamater, 1987: Hyde, 1996).

Based on these findings, we suggest that the majority of the females in our sample expressed a gradual-dyadic relational orientation toward dating and sexual partners, whereas males expressed an immediate-egocentric pleasure orientation. It is important to note that a small minority of males partially deviated from this orientation: One expressed a more gradual approach to dating and sex. and another voiced a more emotional view of his dating partner as someone he could love. Our findings advance the understanding of gender-specific orientations to sexual relationships by demonstrating that these differential roles and expectations exist in a sample of African American youth and that they are discussed and heavily reinforced in these adolescents' friendship networks (cf. Christopher, 2001). The generalizability of these gender-specific orientations will need to be explored in further quantitative studies.

The meaning that adolescents attach to dating and sexual behavior based on their individual and peer group construction of these phenomena will likely influence their willingness to engage in preventive practices. If males view dating as a process used to obtain sex and are less invested in forming a relationship, they may hold decision-making power over females who desire a relationship (Blumstein & Schwartz, 1983). This may translate into participation in risky sexual behaviors, particularly among males who may objectify their partners and view coercion as a reasonable strategy for obtaining sex (Eyre, Read, & Milstein, 1997: Harper. 2001). Since decisions related to condom use are more often made by males (Amaro, 1995: Rhodes, Stimson, & Quirk, 1996), this may greatly impact whether or not a couple uses protection.

Social Construction of Dating and Sexual Activity: Gender Convergence

Two areas where both genders expressed similar expectations regarding roles and behaviors were sexual fidelity and condom use. Although expectations regarding fidelity in a relationship demonstrated a double standard in which females were expected to show both sexual and attentional fidelity and sexual infidelity was expected of males, both genders reported this same expectation. Even though this double standard often places a female in a position of accepting her partner's infidelity and striving to become his most important partner, both genders have constructed these roles in a similar manner and view this as normative behavior. Convergence also appeared in expectations regarding condom use, as both genders expressed the same behavioral expectation of using a condom during sex. Thus, although females and males may enter dating and sexual relationships with different expectations regarding the process and outcome of relationships, they have similar expectations with regard to factors that impact sexual health outcomes--namely sexual activity with multiple partners (i.e., infidelity) and condom use.

The double standard with regard to sexual fidelity revealed in this study also has been found in other samples of African American youth (Anderson, 1992: 1999: Eyre et al., 1998). Sexual fidelity is expected only in "number one" or main relationships, and it is expected only from females. Females strive for being treated as important in other ways (e.g., attention, presents). The double standard around fidelity presents challenges related to establishing monogamous relationships and to negotiation of preventive practices. Despite this, the behavioral expectation regarding condom use was encouraging, especially since most sexual risk-reduction programs for adolescents promote condom use as a primary protective behavior. In addition, theoretical models that have been applied to the reduction of sexual risk emphasize the importance of having a positive attitude toward condom use (e.g., Catania, Kegeles, & Coates, 1990: Fishbein, Middlestadt, & Hitchcock, 1994: Janz, Champion, & Strecher, 2002).

Role of Close Friends in Dating and Sex

Close friends not only contribute to adolescents' social constructions of dating and sexual activity but also play a practical and significant role in acquiring new dating and sex partners. In addition, they often influence the course of relationships. This finding supports prior work by Anderson (1992, 1999) and Way (1998), which suggests that neighborhood friendships play an influential role in the lives of African American youth. We found that the roles played by friends of both females and males in the acquisition of new dating partners reflected the general approaches to dating and sex described earlier. That is, females detailed a longer and more careful sequence of steps that involved friends in the dating process, whereas males described a process that resulted in a more immediate contact with a desired partner.

Friends appear to continue to play an important role over the course of a dating or sexual relationship. Allegiance to close friends generally supercedes allegiance to a current dating partner. If there is conflict, dating or sexual relationships are seen as dispensable. Although both males and females expressed views consistent with a stronger allegiance to friends, the causes of discord related to dating or sexual partners differed across genders. For example, when females expressed concerns about their friends' dating partners, they focused on bow their friends were being mistreated or disrespected by a male. In contrast, males' disapproval was related to the dating partner treating the participant himself in a negative way.

These findings advance our understanding of adolescent dating and sexual activity by highlighting the critical role that friends play in the process of obtaining new dating or sexual partners and in determining the course of these relationships. Although dating is typically viewed as a dyadic phenomenon, it appears that for adolescents in our sample close friends are a third entity that continually exerts its influence in varying ways throughout the course of dating and sexual relationships. This is supported by Christopher's (2001) characterization of both peers and dating partners as "potent socializing agents" (p. 69). Our data also suggest that bonds between close friends are usually stronger than those developed with dating or sexual partners; thus, the influence that adolescents have on the actions and behaviors of their friends who are dating may be substantial. Our findings are based on a sample of inner-city African American youth, and issues of friendship meaning and strength may be somewhat specific to this population.

Close Friends as an Avenue for Sexual Health Promotion

This study demonstrates that African American adolescents talk with their close friends about their sexual experiences and that these friends play an important role in the acquisition of new dating and sexual partners. These findings suggest that sexual health promotion approaches that use the power of adolescent peer networks to promote sexually healthy behaviors will be tapping into an influential resource, since friendship groups provide critical feedback regarding the acceptability of various dating and sexual behaviors. Friendship groups also may be effective vehicles for the dissemination of information and norms to youth who do not have direct contact with an intervention program, since adolescents talk openly with their friends about sex-related information and have the potential to socially construct more healthy sexual roles and expectations. These friends can convey health-protective information in a manner that is culturally, developmentally, and linguistically appropriate for different groups of youth because they are active players in the process of constructing sexual roles, interpreting the meaning of these roles, and making decisions regarding their acceptability (Christopher, 2001).

If prevention programs work with friendship groups to modify their social constructions of dating and sexual activity to be more focused on sexual health, the impact of such programs may be more sustainable over time than individual-level interventions primarily focused on changing immediate behaviors. Friendship-based interventions also may address critical flaws in individual-level approaches as they can more appropriately incorporate contextual influences in the adolescents" environment (DiClemente, 2000) and the creation of social norms that are supportive of risk reduction behaviors (Kelly, Kalichman, Sikkema, & Murphy, 1993).

African American Adolescent Sexual Health: Future Directions

Further ethnic-specific study of African American adolescent sexuality is needed to extend the exploration of sexual roles among this population of youth. Since the current study was a qualitative investigation conducted in a single neighborhood, it will be important to replicate and extend this work with African American youth living in other communities using both qualitative and quantitative methods. There is particular urgency for culturally relevant studies of sexuality for African American youth because of the high rates of negative sexual health outcomes in this population (Anachebe & Sutton, 2003; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2002a, 2002b) and the need for appropriate interventions to address these problems.

Further qualitative work should also be conducted to better understand the sexual lives of African American adolescents, as well as other groups of young people. Such work should address the potential impact of friends on the sexual roles and behaviors of adolescents within various contexts. Although general ethnic differences in sexual activity and friendships have been examined in prior research, much less is known about the influence of environmental factors (such as living in poverty or in violent neighborhoods) or societal factors (such as experiencing racism or other forms of discrimination). Since such factors can influence an adolescent's sense of self and identity, it is likely that they will then influence her or his roles and expectations in dyadic dating and sexual relationships. Future research should also explore the influence of friends on sexual activity among adolescents who participate in same-gender sexual activity, since sparse research has been conducted on the range of factors that influence dating and sexual activity within this population.

REFERENCES

Amaro, H. (1995). Love, sex, and power: Considering women's realities in HIV prevention. American Psychologist, 50(6), 437-447.

Anachebe, N. E, & Sutton, M. Y. (2003). Racial disparities in reproductive health outcomes. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 188(4), $37-$42.

Anderson, E. (1992). Streetwise: Race, class, and change in an urban community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence and the moral life of the inner city. New York: Norton & Company, Inc.

Asencio, M. W. (1999). Machos and sluts: Gender, sexuality, and violence among a cohort of Puerto Rican adolescents. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 13(1), 107-126.

Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1983). American couples. New York: William Morrow and Company.

Brown, B. B., Dolcini, M. M., & Levanthal, A. (1997). Transformations in peer relationships at adolescence: Implications for health-related behavior. In J. Schulenberg, J. L. Maggs, & K. Hurrelmann (Eds.), Health risks and developmental transitions during adolescence (pp. 161-189). London: Cambridge University Press.

Cassell, C. (1984). Swept away: Why women fear their own sexuality. New York: Simon & Shuster.

Catania, J. A., Kegeles, S. M., & Coates, T. J. (1990). Towards an understanding of risk behavior: An AIDS Risk Reduction Model (ARRM). Health Education Quarterly, 17(1), 53-72.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002a). Sexually transmitted disease surveillance. Atlanta, GA: U. S. Department of Health and Human Service.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002b). U.S. HIV and AIDS cases reported through December 2001 year-end edition. HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, 13(2), 1-44.

Christopher, F. S. (2001). To dance the dance: A symbolic interactional exploration of premarital sexuality. Tempe, AZ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Connolly, J., Furman, W., & Konarski, R. (2000). The role of peers in the emergence of heterosexual romantic relationships in adolescence. Child Development, 71(5), 1395-1408.

Connolly, J. A., & Johnson, A. M. (1996). Adolescents' romantic relationships and the structure and quality of their interpersonal ties. Personal Relationships, 3, 185-195.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Davies, P., & Windle, M. T. (2000). Middle adolescents' dating pathways and psychosocial adjustment. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46(1), 90-118.

DeLamater, J. (1987). Gender differences in sexual scenarios. In K. Kelley (Ed.), Females, males, and sexuality: Theories and research (pp. 127-137). Albany: State University of New York Press.

DiClemente, R. J. (2000). Looking forward: Future directions for HIV prevention research. In J. L. Peterson & R. J. DiClemente (Eds.), Handbook of HIV prevention (pp. 103-127). New York: Kluwer Academics/Plenum Publishers.

DiClemente, R. J., Lodico, M., Grinstead, O. A., Harper, G. W., Rickman, R. L., Evans, P., et al. (1996). African-American adolescents residing in high-risk urban environments do use condoms: Correlates and predictors of condom use among adolescents in public housing developments. Pediatrics, 98, 269-278.

Dorius, G. L., Heaton, T. B., & Steffen, P. (1993). Adolescent life events and their association with the onset of sexual intercourse. Youth and Society, 25(1), 3-23.

Eyre, S. L., Auerswald, C., Hoffman, V., & Millstein, S. G. (1998). Fidelity management: African-American adolescents' attempts to control the sexual behavior of their partners. Journal of Health Psychology, 3(3), 393-406.

Eyre, S. L., & Millstein, S. G. (1999). What leads to sex? Adolescent-preferred partners and reasons for sex. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 9(3), 277-307.

Eyre, S. L., Read, N. W., & Milstein, S. G. (1997). Adolescent sexual strategies. Journal of Adolescent Health, 20(4), 286-293.

Fishbein, M., Middlestadt, S. E., & Hitchcock, P. J. (1994). Using information to change sexually transmitted disease-related behaviors: An analysis based on the theory of reasoned action. In R. J. DiClemente & J. L. Peterson (Eds.), Preventing AIDS: Theories and methods of behavioral interventions (pp. 61-69). New York: Plenum Press.

Furman, W. (1993). Theory is not a four-letter word: Needed directions in the study of adolescent friendships. In B. Laursen (Ed.), Close friendships in adolescence (pp. 89-103). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Furman, W., Brown, B. B., & Feiring, C. (Eds.). (1999). The development of romantic relationships in adolescence. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gilmore, S., DeLamater, J., & Wagstaff, D. (1996). Sexual decision making by inner city Black adolescent males: A focus group study. The Journal of Sex Research, 33, 363-371.

Harper, G. W. (2001). Contextual factors that perpetuate statutory rape: The influence of gender roles, sexual socialization, and sociocultural factors. DePaul Law Review, 50, 301-322.

Hyde, J. S. (1996). Where are the gender differences? Where are the gender similarities? In D. M. Buss & N. M. Malamuth (Eds.), Sex, power, conflict (pp. 107-118). New York: Oxford University Press.

Janz, N. K., Champion, V. L., & Strecher, V. J. (2002). The health belief model. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer, & F. M. Lewis (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 45-66). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kelly, J. A., Kalichman, S. C., Sikkema, K. J., & Murphy, D. A. (1993). Psychological interventions are urgently needed to prevent HIV infection: New priorities for behavioral research in the second decade of AIDS. American Psychologist, 48, 1023-1034.

Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Leaper, C. (2000). The social construction and socialization of gender during development. Toward a feminist developmental psychology (pp. 127-152). Florence, KY: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.

Leaper, C., & Anderson, K. J. (1997). Gender development and heterosexual romantic relationships during adolescence. In S. Shulman & W. A. Collins (Eds.), Romantic relationships in adolescence: Developmental perspectives. New directions in child development (No. 78, pp. 85-103). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lempers, J. D., & Clark-Lempers, D. S. (1993). A functional comparison of same-sex and opposite-sex friendships during adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Research, 8, 89-108.

Longmore, M. A., Manning, W. D., & Giordano, P. C. (2001). Preadolescent parenting strategies and teens' dating and sexual initiation: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Marriage & the Family 63(2), 322-335.

Loxley, W. (1996). "Sluts" or "sleazy little animals"? Young people's difficulties with carrying and using condoms. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 6(4), 293-298.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Miller, B. C., & Moore, K. A. (1990). Adolescent sexual behavior, pregnancy, and parenting: Research through the 1980s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 1025-1044.

Miller, B. C., Norton, M. C., Curtis, T., Hill, E. J., Schvaneveldt, E, & Young, M. H. (1997). The timing of sexual intercourse among adolescents: Family, peer, and other antecedents. Youth and Society, 29(1), 55-83.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Paul, E. L., & White, K. M. (1990). The development of intimate relationships in late adolescence. Adolescence, 25, 375-399.

Pipher, M. (1994). Reviving ophelia: Saving the selves of adolescents girls. New York: Ballantine Books.

Pleck, J. H., Sonenstein, F. L., & Ku, L. C. (1993). Masculinity ideology: Its impact on adolescent males' heterosexual relationships. Journal of Social Issues, 49(3), 11-29.

Prilleltensky, I. (2003). Understanding, resisting, and overcoming oppression: Toward psychopolitical validity. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31(1/2), 195-201.

Rhodes, T., Stimson, G. V., & Quirk, A. (1996). Sex, drugs, intervention, and research: From the individual to the social. Substance Use & Misuse, 31(3), 375--407.

San Francisco Department of City Planning. (1990). 1990 census of population and housing. San Francisco: Author.

San Francisco Department of Public Health. (1998). San Francisco sexually transmitted disease annual summary, 1997. San Francisco: Author.

Sharabany, R., Gershoni, R., & Hofman, J. E. (1981). Girlfriend, boyfriend: Age and sex differences in intimate friendship. Developmental Psychology, 17, 800-808.

Shulman, S., & Kipnis, O. (2001). Adolescent romantic relationships: A look from the future. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 327-341.

Tolman, D. L. (1994). Doing desire: Adolescent girls' struggles for/with sexuality. Gender & Society, 8(3), 324--342.

Tolman, D. L. (2000). Object lessons: Romance, violation, and female adolescent sexuality. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 25(1), 70-79.

Watts, R. J., Griffith, D. M., & Abdul-Adil, J. (1999). Sociopolitical development as an antidote for oppression: Theory and action. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(2), 255-271.

Way, N. (1998). Everyday courage: The lives and stories of urban teenagers. New York: New York University Press.

Zelnik, M., & Shah, F. (1983). First intercourse among young americans. Family Planning Perspectives, 15(2), 64-70.

Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J., Siebenbruner, J., & Collins, W. A. (2001). Diverse aspects of dating: Associations with psychosocial functioning from early to middle adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 313-336.

Manuscript accepted April 13, 2004

Gary W. Harper

DePaul University

Christine Gannon

National-Louis University

Susan E. Watson, Joseph A. Catania, and M. Margaret Dolcini

University of California, San Francisco

Susan Watson is now at State of California Department of Health Services, STD Control Branch.

This research was supported in part by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (ROI MH57234) granted to the last author. The authors thank Linda Mitteness for her assistance in developing the interview guide, Meredith Miller for her assistance in conducting interviews, and Leah Neubauer for her technical assistance in preparing the article.

Address correspondence to Gary W. Harper, Department of Psychology, DePaul University, 2219 N. Kenmore Ave., Chicago, IL 60614; e-mail: [e-mail].