Straight but not Narrow; Within-Gender Variation in the Gender-Specificity of Women's Sexual Response

Gender differences in the specificity of sexual response have been a primary focus in sexual psychophysiology research, however, within-gender variability suggests sexual orientation moderates category-specific responding among women; only heterosexual women show gender-nonspecific genital responses to sexual stimuli depicting men and women. But heterosexually-identified or “straight” women are heterogeneous in their sexual attractions and include women who are exclusively androphilic (sexually attracted to men) and women who are predominantly androphilic with concurrent gynephilia (sexually attracted to women). It is therefore unclear if gender-nonspecific responding is found in both exclusively and predominantly androphilic women. The current studies investigated within-gender variability in the gender-specificity of women’s sexual response. Two samples of women reporting concurrent andro/gynephilia viewed (Study 1, n = 29) or listened (Study 2, n = 30) to erotic stimuli varying by gender of sexual partner depicted while their genital and subjective sexual responses were assessed. Data were combined with larger datasets of predominantly gyne- and androphilic women (total N = 78 for both studies). In both studies, women reporting any degree of gynephilia, including those who self-identified as heterosexual, showed significantly greater genital response to female stimuli, similar to predominantly gynephilic women; gender-nonspecific genital response was observed for exclusively androphilic women only. Subjective sexual arousal patterns were more variable with respect to sexual attractions, likely reflecting stimulus intensity effects. Heterosexually-identified women are therefore not a homogenous group with respect to sexual responses to gender cues. Implications for within-gender variation in women’s sexual orientation and sexual responses are discussed.

The relationship between non-suicidal self-injury and suicidality

The overall purpose of this study was to explain the overlap and distinctiveness of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicidality from a diathesis-stress perspective. The first part of this study evaluated the third variable theory as an explanation for the high rates of lifetime co-occurrence between NSSI and suicidality. Specifically, it was hypothesized that these forms of self-harm share a common vulnerability profile comprised of five affective, cognitive and behavioural diatheses. The second part of this study tested the hypothesis that NSSI and suicidality become distinguishable on the basis of immediate, proximal stressors, namely psychache and survival and coping beliefs (SCB). Participants (N = 262) were community individuals aged 16-24 years who reported either no history of self-harm (i.e., no history of NSSI, suicidality, or both), a history of NSSI, suicidality or both, or current NSSI-only or current NSSI+suicidality. They were recruited online to complete an online battery of questionnaires. Using a set of discriminant function analyses, it was found that the vulnerability profile was unable to distinguish between the three self-harm groups, but was able to differentiate the no self-harm group from a collated self-harm group. Result patterns were also analyzed for gender differences. It was also found that a current NSSI+suicidality group exhibited significantly higher psychache and lower SCB (for women only) than a current NSSI-only group. These results suggest that NSSI and suicidality may tend to co-occur because they have similar long-term diatheses, but that they may become more distinct with respect to immediate psychological stressors.