The title of this book should really be Cheat's Charter. It is a hoot, and would appeal to readers of lads' mags, if they could only ignore the ponderous sociological jargon designed to show high intellectual aims. Anderson argues that male sexual cheating is ubiquitous; that men cheat "because they love their partners" (although what he actually means is "despite loving them"); that women should understand and accept this; that western rules of fidelity and monogamy impose intolerable and irrational constraints on men's innate, lifelong, somatic need for sexual exploration and adventure; that almost all men become sexually bored with their partner roughly two years into a relationship when they decide they need more diversity and novelty; and that open sexual relationships are the only solution – for men at least.
Anderson is an American sociologist who specialises in sexuality and sport, partly because he is gay and was a distance runner as a teenager. This explains why his study of cheating behaviour and rationales relies on interviews with 120 male university students aged 18-22, but focusing on American soccer stars. These young men are athletes at their physical peak, who live in a utopian sexual marketplace, with young women often throwing themselves at them, just as some young women groupies in Britain seek to sleep with all members of top football teams. By defining cheating broadly enough to include kissing, touching and flirting, he finds that four-fifths of these young men cheat on their partners, especially when they are playing away from their home base. He claims that pretty well all young men, heterosexual and gay, will cheat sooner or later if they possibly can, and that opportunity and deniability are the primary factors.
His argument has some support in the recent national sex surveys showing that men want sex more than women do. The result is the male sex deficit, as I call it in my book Honey Money – male demand outstrips female supply, overall, in the heterosexual community. Anderson does not really have an answer to this problem, because he effectively ignores women, and relies heavily on his knowledge of gay cultures. It works for them, so why not for heterosexuals too?
Anderson sees regular casual sex with a variety of people (which he recommends) as different from affairs (involving dating and romance), which he regards as emotional betrayal. This distinction may apply among gay men, where impersonal and spontaneous sex is not uncommon, but most heterosexual wives and girlfriends would question this finesse – as even he admits in several of his anecdotes about men who were caught in the act by their enraged girlfriends.
In addition, most men in this study wanted extra casual sex and sexual adventures for themselves, but they certainly did not want their partner to have the same privilege. So they maintained the sexual double standard, and relied heavily on what can variously be described as dishonesty or discretion, to keep their partner ignorant of their adventures and flings.
Who are the young women who are so ready to fall into bed with these libidinous men? Apparently they are other students who are also enjoying the opportunity to sow their wild oats while they can in the short time before they get jobs, get married and have children. However, the book pretty well ignores women and their views on sex and fidelity. Several studies suggest that even emancipated university students are still looking for Mr Right and anticipating marriage. So young men who use women for recreational sex, pure and simple, may be cheating them as well as their regular girlfriends. Men still use (the promise of) love to obtain sex, while women offer sex in the hope of getting love and commitment.
In effect, Anderson is promoting the gay sexual credo as equally valid for heterosexuals, most of whom will have children sooner or later. He notes that many hetero men look enviously at the more lively sexual lifestyles of gay men. Although he offers little evidence, he is clear (and most studies back him up) that sexual promiscuity is widespread, even normal, within the gay community, certainly far more common than among hetero men. The model he presents is of a secure loving semi-permanent emotional relationship, with lots of casual sex on the side with diverse others for purely recreational purposes. Men should have their cake and eat it too. He knows this works for almost all libidinous young men, especially for gays. He has no idea whether this could work for everyone, for married people, for women with lively young children who are too tired for sex even with their spouse.
It is possible to write honestly about affairs, their causes and consequences, for men and women, and several recent books do this. But Anderson ducks too many obvious questions about the male-centric sexual lifestyle he eulogises. I am surprised that the book is published by Oxford University Press, because this comes across as a proselytising text rather than social science. However, young men will love his message: monogamy is unfair and irrational! Cheaters love their partners but need more sex, and why shouldn't they have it all?
Catherine Hakim is the author of Honey Money: The Power of Erotic Capital (Allen Lane).
