Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Social relationships of lesbian and heterosexual feminist women Henderson, Patricia 1986

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1986_A8 H47.pdf [ 3.17MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054314.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054314-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054314-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054314-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054314-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054314-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054314-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054314-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054314.ris

Full Text

SOCIAL R E L A T I O N S H I P S OF L E S B I A N AND HETEROSEXUAL F E M I N I S T WOMEN By P A T R I C I A LYNNE HENDERSON B. N u r s i n g , The U n i v e r s i t y o f M a n i t o b a , 1973  A T H E S I S SUBMITTED IN P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE S T U D I E S (Department  of C o u n s e l i n g  Psychology)  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s a s c o n f o r m i n g to the required  standard  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  Columbia  O c t o b e r , 1986 © P a t r i c i a Lynne Henderson,  1986  4>  In p r e s e n t i n g  t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the  requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make it  f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference  and study.  I further  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by t h e head o f my department o r by h i s o r h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  It is  understood t h a t copying o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain  s h a l l n o t be allowed without my  permission.  Department o f  QjG*^^±<JLc~^  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date  DE-6 (3/81)  ( r-l'O  -S^  ^Z^clu^a^  written  ii Abstract T h i s s t u d y e x p l o r e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e and f r i e n d s h i p amongst l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l respondents,  35 h e t e r o s e x u a l  f e m i n i s t women.  Seventy  a n d 35 l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women b e t w e e n t h e  a g e s o f 20 a n d 40 p a r t i c i p a t e d . R e s p o n d e n t s were i n i t i a l l y s c r e e n e d  by u s e o f t h e F e m i n i s t  I d e n t i f i c a t i o n R a t i n g S c a l e , and i n c l u d e d i n t h e s t u d y i f they themselves  a t 7 o r h i g h e r on a s c a l e o f 1 t o 10. T h e y w e r e  a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e P e r s o n a l Data Sheet ( L u s t i g , 1982), F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e (Frum, 1979),  (sexual preference)  main c o n c l u s i o n s of t h i s s t u d y  and 3.  independent were  The d a t a was a n a l y z e d by techniques.  were:  T h e r e i s no r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e q u a l i t i e s o f c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p  and s e x u a l 2.  1982).  and t w e l v e dependent v a r i a b l e s which  means o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e a n d c h i - s q u a r e  1.  The C l o s e  s t u d y w i t h one  t h e t w e l v e s u b s c a l e s on t h e i n s t r u m e n t s .  The  then  and t h e S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e ,  T h i s was an ex p o s t f a c t o c o m p a r i s o n variable  rated  preference.  T h e r e i s no r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p sexual  preference.  There i s evidence  which  suggests  t h a t women t e n d t o e x p e r i e n c e  t h e i r c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s s i m i l a r l y , r e g a r d l e s s of s e x u a l The  f i n d i n g s of t h e study support  t h e f r i e n d s h i p s o f l e s b i a n women w h i c h between l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l the process of understanding  an a p p r o a c h  preference.  to understanding  f o c u s e s on t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s  women.  The s t u d y t h u s c o n t r i b u t e s t o  the lesbian experience.  Social  ill Relationships  TABLE OF CONTENTS L I S T OF TABLES  v  L I S T OF A P P E N D I C E S  vi  Chapter 1.  Introduction  1  B a c k g r o u n d and P r o b l e m Statement  1  O b j e c t i v e s of t h e Study  .  S i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e Study  2.  ...4  D e f i n i t i o n of Terms  5  Overview of t h e Study  6  Literature  8  Review.  O v e r v i ew Theories Social  8 o f H o m o s o c i a l i t y . ......  R e l a t i o n s h i p s of Lesbian  Socio-Sexual Social Social  3.  4  .....8 Women  Preference  18  Relations..  R e l a t i o n s h i p s of Lesbian  18  19 and H e t e r o s e x u a l  Women...23  Rationale f o r Instrumentation  26  Summary...........  27  M e t h o d o l o g y and R e s e a r c h D e s i g n  29  O v e r v i ew  29  Hypotheses  29  Instrumentation..... 1. The P e r s o n a l  Data Sheet  -31 31  Social 2. The C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p  Scale  32  Reliability  33  and V a l i d i t y  34  S c o r i ng  35  D e f i n i t i o n of Subscales....  35  Reliability  36  and V a l i d i t y .  Sample S e l e c t i o n  37  D e s c r i p t i o n of Respondents  37  Procedures  .....38  D e s i g n and S t a t i s t i c a l  5.  32  D e f i n i t i o n of S u b s c a l e s  3. The S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e . . . . .  4.  iv Relationships  Analysis  39  D e l i m i t a t i o n s of t h e Study  40  Results  41  D e s c r i p t i o n o f R e s p o n d e n t s and F r i e n d s  41  Results Pertaining to Hypothesis 1  48  Results  Pertaining to Hypothesis 2  50  Results Pertaining to Hypothesis 3  53  Discussion  54  and Summary  Overview  54  P r o f i l e of R e s p o n d e n t s  55  Findings  56  of t h e Study  Di s c u s s i on Methodoligal Summary. References  60 Limitations  62 64 ^  V  Social  Relationships  L I S T OF T A B L E S  TABLE  Table 1  PAGE  F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s f o r R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s ' M a r i t a l  Table 2  Status  F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s f o r C o m m i t t e d Relationships  Table 3  ...43  .  43  F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s f o r R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s ' O c c u p a t i o n s  Table 4  45  F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s f o r R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s ' I n c o m e  Table 5  -  46  F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s f o r R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s ' H i g h e s t L e v e l o f E d u c a t i o n  Table 6  47  F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s of C l o s e n e s s R a t i ngs  49  Table 7  Means and S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s  f o r CFS S u b s c a l e s  Table 8  Univariate F-tests with Six Subscales  Table 9  Means and S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s  (CFS)  f o r T o t a l and S u b s c a l e  (SPS) T a b l e 10 U n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t s W i t h S u b s c a l e s  51 51 Scores 52  (SPS)....  52  vi Social Relationships L I S T OF A P P E N D I C E S APPENDIX  PASE  A.  L e t t e r of I n i t i a l  Contact  B.  Advertisement  C.  Feminist Identification Rating Scale  D.  Ethical  E.  Personal Data Sheet  F.  Close Friendship Scale  G.  Social Provisions Scale  72  f o r Volunteer Respondents  74 7&  Assurances....  •  78 80 ........83  •  .....89  Social  1 Relationships  CHAPTER ONE  INTRODUCTION  Background and P r o b l e m S t a t e m e n t Same-sex r e l a t i o n s h i p s , a l t h o u g h p e r v a s i v e ,  occupy l i t t l e  the a n n a l s of h i s t o r y and l i t e r a t u r e , and have r e c e i v e d scientific scrutiny. considerable friendships Lionel  not  little  has emerged however, and a  body of l i t e r a t u r e has e v o l v e d d e a l i n g  with  Tiger  (1970) s p a r k e d t h e r e c e n t e x p l o r a t i o n h i scontroversial  claim  of same-sex  t h a t men's t e n d e n c y t o f o r m  g r o u p s a r o s e o u t o f a " b o n d i n g i n s t i n c t " p r e s e n t i n men b u t  i n women.  H i s work a r o u s e d i n t e r e s t i n t h e t o p i c , and soon a f t e r  Lipman-Blumen (1976) and B e r n a r d  (1976,1981) spearheaded  t h e o r e t i c a l work on s a m e - s e x s o c i a l i t y , o r  e s s e n t i a l l y supported Tiger's t h a n women's.  have r e s u l t e d  claim which t i e d t h i s  h o w e v e r , and s a i d i n s t e a d  that  i n t h e weak t i e s b e t w e e n women.  s p e c i f i c a l l y , Lipman-Blumen ' s theory d i s c u s s e s s t r a t i f i c a t i o n i n w h i c h men a r e c o n s i s t e n t l y v a l u e t o s o c i e t y and a r e p l a c e d  which  men's s a m e - s e x b o n d s a r e  She q u e s t i o n e d T i g e r ' s  to b i o l o g i c p r e d i s p o s i t i o n influences  thesis that  further  "homosociality".  Lipman-Blumen (1976) d e v e l o p e d a t h e o r y of sex r o l e s  stronger  same-sex  o f men a n d women.  r e l a t i o n s h i p s with all-male  A new t r e n d  space i n  cultural More  t h e p r o c e s s of r a n k e d a s b e i n g o f more  i n more v a l u e d r o l e s t h a n women.  Social Women, a s a l e s s v a l u e d access  to resources  Relationships  g r o u p , h a v e d e r i v e d much o f t h e i r s t a t u s a n d  through  r e l a t i o n s h i p s with males.  They h a v e b e e n  s e e n a s l e s s u s e f u l t o men a n d t o e a c h o t h e r b e c a u s e o f t h e i r perceived  (and a c t u a l ) l a c k of access  that social  to resources.  suggests  t i e s b e t w e e n women h a v e n o t b e e n h i g h l y v a l u e d , n o r h a v e  t h e y been s t r o n g and e n d u r i n g .  Her v i e w was t h a t women's b o n d s w e r e  i n an i n f a n c y s t a g e a n d w o u l d be f u r t h e r d e v e l o p e d cultural  This  o n l y when women's  p o s i t i o n changed i n s o c i e t y .  Bernard  (1976, 1981) d i s a g r e e d  w i t h L i p m a n - B l u m e n ' s t h e s i s , and by  t r a c i n g women's r e l a t i o n s h i p s h i s t o r i c a l l y , f o u n d s t r o n g and e n d u r i n g  evidence  t o suggest  t i e s b e t w e e n women i n t h e 1 8 t h and 1 9 t h c e n t u r i e s .  T h e s e h a v e w e a k e n e d a s a r e s u l t o f an i n c r e a s e d v a l u e p l a c e d on t h e heterosexual  bond a s t h e l o c u s o f i n t i m a c y f o r b o t h men and women i n  the 20th c e n t u r y . men i n t h i s c e n t u r y support  The s h i f t t o w a r d s women d e p e n d i n g e m o t i o n a l l y on l e d t o a c r u c i a l decrease  f r o m o t h e r women.  i n women's s o c i a l  In c o n t r a s t t o T i g e r ' s b i o l o g i c a l l y based  t h e o r y and L i p m a n - B l u m e n ' s s o c i o l o g i c a l l y based t h e o r y which i m p l i e d s u p e r i o r b o n d i n g b e t w e e n men, B e r n a r d  maintained  t h a t women's  t i e s w i t h o t h e r women h a v e h i s t o r i c a l l y b e e n w e l 1 - d e v e l o p e d , and  both  strong  satisfying. S i n c e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e s e t h e o r i e s , a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f  r e s e a r c h h a s b e e n d o n e i n t h e a r e a o f women's s a m e - s e x b o n d s . research  has tended  t o v a l i d a t e Bernard's  h a v e b e e n shown t o be e n d u r i n g and 1973,  hypothesis.  This  Women's b o n d s  (Faderman, 1981; L u s t i g , 1983; Seiden  B a r t , 1975) and a f f e c t i v e l y open and i n t i m a t e ( B e l l , 1981; R u b i n , 1985; Wright,  1902).  T h e y a l s o p l a y an i m p o r t a n t  role in  Social Relationships women's s o c i a l s u p p o r t Davidson  and P a c k a r d ,  and mental  health (Bernard,  1981; Lopata  and M a i r i e s ,  1976, 1981;  1981).  The s t u d y o f women's s a m e - s e x r e l a t i o n s h i p s h a s l e d n a t u r a l l y i n t o a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f l e s b i a n women's s a m e - s e x s o c i a l t i e s .  Do l e s b i a n  women's s a m e - s e x s o c i a l b o n d s d i f f e r f r o m t h o s e o f h e t e r o s e x u a l and  i f s o , how?  Lipman-Blumen' s theory suggests  that social  b e t w e e n women a r e weak b e c a u s e o f t h e i r d i s a d v a n t a g e d position.  ties  or m i n o r i t y  One m i g h t p r e d i c t f r o m t h i s t h a t s o c i a l t i e s b e t w e e n  l e s b i a n women may be e v e n w e a k e r d u e t o t h e i r p o s i t i o n , b e i n g b o t h women a n d h o m o s e x u a l . suggests  women,  that although  devalued  "double  Bernard's  minority" theory  however,  and p e r h a p s d i m i n i s h e d i n t h e 20th  c e n t u r y , women's b o n d s a r e a n d h a v e b e e n r i c h a n d s t r o n g .  Lesbian  women l i v e i n a m i l i e u w h e r e t h e i r p r i m a r y c o m m i t m e n t i s t o o t h e r women.  I t m i g h t be p r e d i c t e d t h e n , t h a t t h e i r s o c i a l b o n d s w i t h o n e  another  w o u l d be e v e n s t r o n g e r t h a n h e t e r o s e x u a l  women's b o n d s .  This  s t u d y t e s t e d b o t h t h e s e p r e d i c t i o n s w i t h t w o g r o u p s o f f e m i n i s t women. In a d d i t i o n t o w h e t h e r l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women's s o c i a l b o n d s a r e s t r o n g e r or weaker than h e t e r o s e x u a l complexity introduced i n t o homosocial s o c i a l and s e x u a l a s p e c t s of bonding. p o t e n t i a l of sexual involvement bonds.  f e m i n i s t women's, t h e r e i s a t h e o r y by t h e o v e r l a p o f t h e I t i s possible that the  may e x e r t an i n f l u e n c e on f r i e n d s h i p  The n a t u r e o f t h e i n f l u e n c e o f s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e on  h o m o s o c i a l i t y i s u n c l e a r and h a s n o t been a d d r e s s e d  i n the literature.  T h i s s t u d y e x p l o r e d t h e e f f e c t s o f t h i s v s r i s b l e among women.  4 Social Objectives  Relationships  of t h e Study  The p r e s e n t s t u d y h a d a s i t s o v e r a l l o b j e c t i v e t h e c l a r i f i c a t i o n of b o t h h o m o s o c i a l i t y  and l e s b i a n t h e o r y  women's s a m e - s e x f r i e n d s h i p s . answer t h e f o l l o w i n g  S p e c i f i c a l l y , the study attempted t o  questions:  1. Do l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l and  as they p e r t a i n t o f e m i n i s t  feminist  women's f r i e n d s h i p s  differ,  i f s o , how?  2. W h i c h o f t h e t w o m a j o r t h e o r i e s o f h o m o s o c i a l i t y c l o s e l y with  a g r e e s more  f e m i n i s t women's s e l f - r e p o r t o f t h e i r a c t u a l  friendship  experience?  S i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e Study Homosociality undifferentiated.  theories  h a v e t e n d e d t o be v a g u e a n d  The t w o m a j o r t h e o r i s t s a p p r o a c h women's s a m e - s e x  ties i n highly constrasting  ways, and r e a c h o p p o s i n g  conclusions.  L i p m a n - B l u m e n s u g g e s t s t h a t b o n d s b e t w e e n women a r e weak a n d u n d e v e l o p e d a n d B e r n a r d s u g g e s t s t h a t women's b o n d s w i t h e a c h are strong theories  and r i c h .  C l a r i f i c a t i o n i s needed i n a p p l y i n g  t o women's a c t u a l  friendship experience, clarifying  and i n so d o i n g ,  This  women's a c t u a l  continues  study  same-sex  t h e p r o c e s s of  theory.  L i t t l e i s known o r w r i t t e n r e g a r d i n g exerted  these  same-sex f r i e n d s h i p e x p e r i e n c e .  adds t o a g r o w i n g body of l i t e r a t u r e r e v e a l i n g  other  the possible  on women's s a m e - s e x f r i e n d s h i p s b y s e x u a l  c l a r i f i c a t i o n of i t s r o l e i s u s e f u l  influence  preference.  Some  i n f u r t h e r i n g an o v e r a l l  u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f women's r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  More s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h i s s t u d y  Social Relationships adds t o t h e growing experience.  b o d y o f k n o w l e d g e a b o u t l e s b i a n women's l i f e  T h i s h a s f o r many y e a r s b e e n s h r o u d e d  c l o a k of s e c r e c y "  (Ponse,  1979),  in a "protective  a n d h a s o n l y r e c e n t l y b e g u n t o be  i11umi nated.  D e f i n i t i o n of Terms  Homosoci a l i t y H o m o s o c i a l i t y has been b r o a d l y d e f i n e d as t h e s o c i a l bonds t h a t women a n d men h a v e w i t h t h e i r own s e x ( B e r n a r d , 1 9 7 6 ; L i p m a n - B l u m e n , 1976;  Woolsey, i n p r e s s ) .  colleagues, neighbors,  The d e f i n i t i o n i n c l u d e s b o n d s w i t h f r i e n d s ,  extended  f a m i l y , and o t h e r s .  This study uses a  d e f i n i t i o n o f h o m o s o c i a l i t y f o c u s i n g on o n e p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t f r i e n d s h i p b o n d s b e t w e e n women. hence, h o m o s o c i a l i t y doesn't although  This concept  necessarily involve erotic  i t may u n d e r c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s  That i s , h o m o s o c i a l i t y i s not h o m o s e x u a l i t y , heterosexual  Sexual  persons  concerns  have homosocial  social  bonds,  interaction,  (Lipman-Blumen,  1976).  b u t both homosexual and  bonds.  Preference  A person's  s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e may be a c h o i c e o f s e x u a l p a r t n e r o f  a p a r t i c u l a r gender, or a p o l i t i c a l a c t e d upon.  Heterosexual  c h o i c e which  may o r may n o t be  women ( b y d e f i n i t i o n ) c h o o s e o p p o s i t e s e x  p a r t n e r s a n d l e s b i a n women ( b y d e f i n i t i o n ) c h o o s e s a m e - s e x p a r t n e r s . In t h i s s t u d y , t h e r e s p o n d e n t s or h e t e r o s e x u a l  (Lustig,  1982).  i d e n t i f i e d themselves  as e i t h e r l e s b i a n  Social  6 Relationships  Lesbianism Traditionally, been s e x u a l 1979).  the critical  o r i e n t a t i o n (Gagnon a n d S i m o n , 1 9 7 3 ; M a s t e r s a n d J o h n s o n ,  T h e r e a r e a g r o w i n g number o f r e s e a r c h e r s ,  t h i s inadequate (Brooks, 1976;  -feature i n d e f i n i n g l e s b i a n i s m has  Wolff,  1981; Caplan,  h o w e v e r , whD f i n d  1981; E t t o r r e , 1980; F a r a d a y ,  1 9 7 1 ) a n d d e f i n e t h e l e s b i a n woman i n t e r m s o f i d e n t i t y .  Terms such a s " h o m o e m o t i o n a l " and " s o c i o - s e x u a l " have been used t o impress t h e idea that i t i s e m o t i o n a l i t y r a t h e r than i s a t t h e h e a r t o f women's l o v e f o r e a c h o t h e r . definition  of t h e l e s b i a n p o p u l a t i o n  s e x u a l i t y which  Brooks concludes  that  i s somewhat a r b i t r a r y a n d  u l t i m a t e l y n e e d s t o r e l y on s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n  (1981).  In t h i s  study,  B r o o k s ' p o s i t i o n was f o l l o w e d a n d s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n was t h e m e t h o d u s e d t o i d e n t i f y l e s b i a n women.  Femi n i s t A f e m i n i s t i s an i n d i v i d u a l and  men s h o u l d  realms.  have equal  In t h i s s t u d y ,  access  who e s p o u s e s a p h i l o s o p h y  t h a t women  i n e c o n o m i c , p o l i t i c a l , and s o c i a l  a s c a l e was u s e d f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f  s e l f - i d e n t i f i c a t i o n by women a s t o t h e i r  l e v e l of f e m i n i s t  i d e n t i f i c a t i on.  Overview of t h e Study This report i s organized r a t i o n a l e f o r t h i s study explored  into five chapters.  has been p r e s e n t e d  An i n t r o d u c t i o n a n d  i n C h a p t e r One.  same-sex s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s of l e s b i a n and  The s t u d y  heterosexual  Social women.  The  conceptual  l i t e r a t u r e review  -framework f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h  of C h a p t e r Two.  The  two  7 Relationships  i s provided  m a j o r t h e o r i e s of  h o m o s o c i a l i t y as w e l l as r e l e v a n t s u p p o r t i n g  research are  discussed,  C h a p t e r T h r e e p r o v i d e s t h e i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n , m e t h o d o l o g y , and d e s i g n of t h e s t u d y .  C h a p t e r s F o u r and  i n the  research  Five follow with a  p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e r e s u l t s , a d i s c u s s i o n of t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of f i n d i n g s , and  suggestions  for future  research.  the  Social  8 Relationships  CHAPTER TWO  L I T E R A T U R E REVIEW  Overview of O r g a n i z a t i o n The  l i t e r a t u r e review  b a s i c a l l y address  i n three s e c t i o n s which  t h e three hypotheses of t h i s study.  of h o m o s o c i a l i t y w i l l theory regarding  i s organized  be r e v i e w e d .  Following this will  l e s b i a n women a n d t h e i r f r i e n d s h i p s .  r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e s e two s u b j e c t a r e a s w i l l A rationale f o r the instrumentation  Theories  First,  theories  be a r e v i e w o f The  t h e n be c o n s i d e r e d .  u s e d a n d a summary w i l l  follow.  of H o m o s o c i a l i t y  The  f i r s t hypothesis  homosocial Bernard,  concerns  opposing  theory regarding  women's  r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The t w o m a j o r t h e o r i e s o f L i p m a n - B l u m e n a n d as well as r e l a t e d research w i l l  be  presented.  As was m e n t i o n e d a b o v e , t h e r e c e n t d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e s o c i a l b o n d i n g o f men a n d women b e g a n w i t h t h e a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l work o f L i o n e l Tiger  ( 1 9 7 0 ) i n w h i c h he t a l k e d a b o u t t h e " m y s t i q u e "  Males were p r e s e n t e d having  as having  of t h e male bond.  s t r o n g and s t a b l e bonds and f e m a l e s  n e i t h e r the c a p a c i t y nor the p r o p e n s i t y f o r bonding.  looked to genetic determination co-operating  He  a s w e l l a s t h e e a r l y h i s t o r y o f men  f o r s u r v i v a l as h u n t e r s  and w a r r i o r s as t h e b a s i s f o r  as  Social this.  The d i s c u s s i o n c o n t i n u e d  evolved  9 Relationships  by s t a t i n g t h a t b o n d s b e t w e e n men  a s t h e y -formed power s t r u c t u r e s - p o l i t i c a l , e c o n o m i c , s o c i a l  - t o w h i c h a c c e s s b y women was p r o h i b i t e d .  These a c t i o n s were  r a t i o n a l i s e d by t h e n o t i o n o f b i o l o g i c d e t e r m i n i s m  w h i c h made c h a n g e  p r a c t i c a l l y i m p o s s i b l e and l e g i t i m i z e d t h e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and oppression  o f women.  T i g e r ' s work s t i m u l a t e d b o t h c o n t r o v e r s y which f a i l e d t o support  and f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n  h i s p r o p o s i t i o n s (Bernard,  1972;  Booth, Gibbs,  A u e r b a c h , and F o x , 1980; G i b b s ,  1981;  Lipman-Blumen, 1976; T r o l l  1976, 1981; Booth, 1979; H a c k e r ,  and S t u h l , 1980; W r i g h t ,  1982).  In  f a c t , r e s e a r c h e r s c o n s i s t e n t l y p o i n t e d t o women's r e l a t i o n s h i p s a s b e i n g e m o t i o n a l l y r i c h , s e l f - d i s c 1 o s i n g , s e r v i n g of f u n c t i o n s such a s i n t i m a c y and a s s i s t a n c e , and as h a v i n g Research  therapeutic  value.  i n t o h o m o s o c i a l i t y was f u r t h e r e d g r e a t l y by t h e m a j o r  c o n t r i b u t i o n s of Lipman-Blumen (1976) and B e r n a r d  (1976).  p a r t i c u l a r , a c k n o w l e d g e d and l e g i t i m i z e d same-sex f e m a l e  Bernard i n bonding,  w h i l e L i p m a n - B l u m e n v i e w e d b o n d i n g b e t w e e n women a s b e i n g o n l y i n t h e beginning  stages.  Lipman-Blumen, i n her homosocial  theory of sex r o l e s , d e f i n e d  h o m o s o c i a l i t y as " t h e s e e k i n g , enjoyment, and/or p r e f e r e n c e c o m p a n y o f t h e same s e x " ( 1976,  p.16).  f o r the  H e r t h e o r y i s b a s e d on t h e  p r e m i s e t h a t men a r e a t t r a c t e d t o , s t i m u l a t e d b y , a n d i n t e r e s t e d i n , o t h e r men.  This r e s u l t s from a process  e n c o u r a g e d by s o c i a l  begun e a r l y i n c h i l d h o o d and  i n s t i t u t i o n s - the f a m i l y , the labour  a t h l e t i c s , the j u d i c i a r y system, the p o l i t i c a l  market,  system, s e x u a l i t y -  w h i c h " a l l a c t i n an i n t e g r a t e d a n d r e i n f o r c i n g way t o m a i n t a i n  a male  10 Relationships  Social homosocial world the v a r i o u s  i n w h i c h o n l y men a r e i n c l u d e d  r e s o u r c e s of a s o c i e t y "  and a l l o w e d  (1976, p.24).  access t o r e s o u r c e s leads males t o recognise  This i n e q u a l i t y of  t h e power h e l d  male p e e r s and t o -find one a n o t h e r e x c i t i n g , p r o d u c t i v e , in t h e i r a b i l i t y t o contribute another's l i v e s  and i m p o r t a n t  t o v i r t u a l l y a l l a s p e c t s of one  Lipman-Blumen suggested a r e l a t i o n s h i p between  b o n d i n g a n d power s u c h t h a t t h e p e r c e p t i o n  Kroft  by t h e i r  (1976).  In h e r t h e o r y ,  contributes  access to  o f power i n a n o t h e r  p o s i t i v e l y t o s a m e - s e x b o n d i n g among m a l e s .  As n o t e d by  ( 1 9 8 6 ) , L i p m a n - B l u m e n ' s c o n c e p t o f power seems t o p e r t a i n t o  p o s i t i o n , i n f l u e n c e , s t a t u s , access t o or c o n t r o l of a c t u a l in a society.  resources  Women h a v e l i t t l e o f t h i s k i n d o f p o w e r , a n d s o i n  Lipman-Blumen' s f o r m u l a t i o n ,  they a r e e x c l u d e d from t h e male  world,  f o u n d l e s s u s e f u l a n d i n t e r e s t i n g , a n d a c k n o w l e d g e d most o f t e n i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n t o males. Lipman-Blumen's theory  pertains  women's b o n d s w i t h e a c h o t h e r world  t o male h o m o s o c i a l bonds and  are implied  i n r e l a t i o n to these.  The  o f women's r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h o n e a n o t h e r w h i c h h a s b e e n  attested  t o by numerous a u t h o r s ,  ( C o t t , 1979; Faderman, 1981; Lenz and  M y e r h o f f , 1985; S m i t h - R o s e n b e r g , 1 9 7 5 ) , r e m a i n s hazy and u n d e r v a l u e d i n her  discussion.  The s t r e n g t h  accuracy i n describing challenging instead  Tiger's  o f h e r work l i e s i n h e r c l a r i t y a n d  r e a l i t y i n t h i s s o c i e t y as w e l l as i n  notion  of b i o l o g i c a l determinism.  She s u b s t i t u t e d  t h e idea of c u l t u r a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t as e x p l a i n i n g  men a n d ( h e r p e r c e p t i o n  bonds between  o f ) t h e l a c k o f b o n d s b e t w e e n women.  i m p o r t a n t l i m i t a t i o n of Lipman-Blumen' s work, i n t h i s w r i t e r ' s  An  Social  11 Relationships  o p i n i o n , l i e s i n h e r c o n t i n u a t i o n o f a c u l t u r a l d e v a l u a t i o n o f women and  t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s a s w e l l a s a c e r t a i n s e n s e o f women's b o n d s  o c c u r r i n g through "powerful"  d e f a u l t and a s a r e s u l t o f e x c l u s i o n f r o m t h e  male w o r l d .  our u n d e r s t a n d i n g  As a r e s u l t , h e r work i s u s e f u l i n f u r t h e r i n g  of male bonding,  but of l i m i t e d value i n  e n l i g h t e n i n g u s a b o u t women's a c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e Caplan  (1981) a n a l y z e d  of same-sex  bonding.  t h e e f f e c t o f p a t r i a r c h i a l d e v a l u a t i o n on  r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n women, a n d i n d o i n g  so c a r r i e d one step f u r t h e r  L i p m a n - B l u m e n 's i d e a s r e l a t i n g t o s e x u a l  stratification.  She began  w i t h t h e p r e m i s e t h a t o u r s i s a s o c i e t y w h i c h " s e t s women up a g a i n s t each o t h e r and e n c o u r a g e s p e o p l e inferior"  (1981,  r e s u l t e d such  p.125).  of both  s e x e s t o r e g a r d women a s  A number o f b a r r i e r s b e t w e e n women h a v e  a s t h e e x p e c t a t i o n o f more n u r t u r a n c e  and p a t i e n c e  from  o t h e r women, i n c r e a s e d v a l u e a t t r i b u t e d t o men's a p p r o v a l a n d a t t e n t i o n , f e a r o f b e i n g e m o t i o n a l l y d r a i n e d by o t h e r women. Caplan  r e l a t e d t h e e x p e c t a t i o n o f more n u r t u r a n c e  f r o m women t o p o s s i b l e e a r l y c h i l d h o o d e x p e r i e n c e s . t h e t a s k by s o c i e t y Df t e a c h i n g d a u g h t e r s s e l f - s a c r i f i c i n g as they themselves an o u t g r o w t h o f t h i s , d a u g h t e r s needs.  and p a t i e n c e Mothers a r e given  t o be n u r t u r a n t a n d  were (and a r e ) supposed t o be.  a r e taught  t o meet t h e i r  mother's  I n s o f a r as t h e daughter meets t h e s e needs, t o t h a t  c o u l d h e r own n e e d s f o r n u r t u r a n c e  go unmet.  i d e a s by s u g g e s t i n g  extent  Rubin (1985) a l s o  t o t h e e a r l y m o t h e r - d a u g h t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p , and f u r t h e r e d  As  looked  Caplan's  t h a t an a d u l t woman's r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h  another  woman may r e a w a k e n o l d f a n t a s i e s a n d f e e l i n g s t h a t a c c o m p a n i e d  this  f i r s t woman t o woman r e l a t i o n s h i p . E n v y , t h e w i s h t o c o m p e t e , t h e  Social combination  of triumph  stem from t h e primary the attainment The  and f e a r a t t h e p r o s p e c t  12 Relationships  of w i n n i n g ,  may a l l  m o t h e r - d a u g h t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p and i n t e r f e r e w i t h  of c l o s e connections  w i t h o t h e r women i n a d u l t h o o d .  b a r r i e r c r e a t e d by women g i v i n g a h i g h e r v a l u e t o men's r a t h e r  t h a n women's a p p r o v a l , r e l a t e s d i r e c t l y t o L i p m a n - B l u m e n ' s t h e o r y o f women's i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h men a s r e s o u r c e with Rawlings defenses  and C a r t e r ' s  c o n t r o l l e r s , and  (1977) d i s c u s s i o n of i n t r o p u n i t i v e ego  operational i n disadvantaged  women a s v a l u e d a n d i m p o r t a n t expected  (1976)  groups.  If a  ( R i n d e r , 1954), then  woman v i e w s  other  i t c o u l d be  t h a t h e r b o n d s w i t h t h i s g r o u p w o u l d be s t r o n g a n d  satisfying.  Her need f o r and r e s p o n s e  t o male a t t e n t i o n and a p p r o v a l  m i g h t be l e s s t h a n a woman who i d e n t i f i e s l e s s p o s i t i v e l y w i t h h e r group. The  fear of being  e m o t i o n a l l y d r a i n e d by o n e ' s women f r i e n d s  p a r a l l e l s R u b i n ' s s e n s e o f d i s t a n c e c r e a t e d b e t w e e n woman f r i e n d s a s a r e s u l t of c o m p e t i t i v e f e e l i n g s i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h each Two women i n an e m o t i o n a l l y p o w e r f u l anxious  r e l a t i o n s h i p c o u l d e a c h become  t h a t , i n t h e face of t h i s other emotional  n e e d s w i l l be n e g l e c t e d  (Caplan,  other.  1981),  Rubin's o p i n i o n , too often covered-over  person,  h e r own  These f e e l i n g s a r e , i n w i t h a s m i l e or a veneer of  warmth and f r i e n d l i n e s s t h a t bodes i l l f o r t h e k i n d of t r u s t a friendship requires Rawlings  (1985).  and C a r t e r  (1977) e x p l o r e d s o c i a l - p s y c h o l o g i c a l  f o r m u l a t i o n s of p r e j u d i c e a g a i n s t m i n o r i t y groups i n order t o i d e n t i f y f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g t o women's p s y c h o l o g y . Allport's  In so d o i n g , they  applied  ( 1 9 5 4 ) m i n o r i t y g r o u p t h e o r y w h i c h was b a s e d on o b s e r v a t i o n s  13 Relationships  Social  t h a t m i n o r i t y p e r s o n s who w e r e s u b j e c t t o d i s c r i m i n a t i o n d e v e l o p e d c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c ego d e f e n s e s ( f t l l p o r t , had p r e v i o u s l y d e m o n s t r a t e d  1954).  t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between  Carter  (1974)  ego d e f e n s e s  o b s e r v e d i n m i n o r i t y g r o u p s a n d e g o d e f e n s e s e x h i b i t e d by women a s f o l l o w s : d e n i a l of membership i n t h e d i s p a r a g e d g r o u p ; w i t h d r a w a l and p a s s i v i t y a s a means o f s u r v i v a l , ( o f t e n r e w a r d e d b y m a l e s protection)  ( 1 9 7 7 ) ; s l y n e s s a n d c u n n i n g a s a means o f a v o i d i n g s o c i a l  ostracism, psychological with t h e dominant outlook  with  i s o l a t i o n , economic  hardship;  identification  g r o u p a n d s e l f - h a t e . "Women i d e n t i f y w i t h t h e  a n d p r e j u d i c e o f t h e m a l e c u l t u r e t o w a r d women" ( 1 9 7 7 ,  and a c c e p t t h e i r i n f e r i o r s t a t u s a s n a t u r a l .  p.18),  T h e s e came t o be  i d e n t i f i e d a s " i n t r o p u n i t i v e " ego d e f e n s e s and t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between  women a r e c l e a r .  R a w l i n g s a n d C a r t e r went on t o d i s c u s s t w o o f d e f e n s e o p e r a t i v e i n women - i n t r o p u n i t i v e a n d e x t r o p u n i t i v e . suggested that t r a d i t i o n a l  patterns  They t h e n  women e x h i b i t i n t r o p u n i t i v e d e f e n s e s s u c h  a s o u t l i n e d a b o v e , w i t h i n t h e i r own g r o u p a s w e l l a s w i t h t h e d o m i n a n t male s o c i e t y .  Feminist  women, t h e y s u g g e s t e d , t e n d t o e x h i b i t  e x t r o p u n i t i v e d e f e n s e s such as o b s e s s i v e strengthening  c o n c e r n and s u s p i c i o n ;  in-group t i e s through support groups, s e l f - h e l p  collectives, political  a c t i o n ; p r e j u d i c e against other groups i e .  a n g e r t o w a r d s men; a g g r e s s i o n  i e . r a d i c a l feminism, divorce,  enhanced  s t r i v i ng. A l t h o u g h R a w l i n g s and C a r t e r d i d n ' t d e a l w i t h t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e s e d e f e n s e p a t t e r n s f o r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h o t h e r women, i t i s e a s y t o e x t r a p o l a t e f r o m t h e e f f e c t s on i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t y o f  14 Relationships  Social membership i n t h i s m i n o r i t y group.  F o r i n s t a n c e , a woman who  i d e n t i f i e s w i t h t h e dominant group i n t e r m s of t h e i r o u t l o o k and p r e j u d i c e s t o w a r d s women, w o u l d i n t h i s a u t h o r ' s p r o p e n s i t y and f i n d l i t t l e v a l u e i n s e e k i n g of h e r m i n o r i t y g r o u p .  t h e s e bonds through  groups or u t i l i z a t i o n of other r e s o u r c e s .  oppression  and  members  In R a w l i n g s '  and C a r t e r ' s  attributes.  a s an e x p r e s s i o n  from of i n n a t e  As s u c h , t h e p o t e n t i a l  f o r growth  change i s i n f i n i t e l y g r e a t e r , as seen i n t h e ongoing  development  of f e m i n i s t  fixed  with  support  p a t t e r n s w e r e v i e w e d more a s r e s u l t i n g  and m i n o r i t y group s t a t u s than  or b i o l o g i c a l l y  bonds w i t h o t h e r  little  On t h e o t h e r h a n d , a woman who i d e n t i f i e s  o t h e r women w o u l d s e e k t o s t r e n g t h e n  w o r k , women's d e f e n s e  o p i n i o n , have  consciousness.  A p r o b l e m w i t h t h e i r work i s t h e i r d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e b o n d s o f traditional  women a s weak.  growing documentation, Rubin,  T h i s seems i n a c c u r a t e i n t h e l i g h t of  ( B e r n i k o w , 1979; C o t t , 1979; Faderroan, 1981;  1935; S m i t h - R o s e n b e r g , 1 9 7 5 ) , i m p l y i n g s t r o n g , r i c h , and  rewarding  bonds between t r a d i t i o n a l  Bernard's  women.  t h e o r y o f h o m o s o c i a l i t y h a s t o do w i t h t h e d i f f e r e n t  ways t h a t men a n d women r e l a t e  t o t h e i r own s e x . As h a s b e e n  w e l 1 - d o c u m e n t e d , men's s o c i a l b o n d s t e n d t o i n v o l v e i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , task-orientation  (Wright,  activity-sharing  ( C a l d w e l l and P e p l a u ,  low s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e ( C a l d w e l l and P e p l a u ,  1982), s e p a r a t i o n  (Bardwick,  1974),  1982), low i n t i m a c y  motivation,  (Mark and A l p e r , 1 9 8 0 ) , and low e m o t i o n a l 1982).  sharing  Women's way o f b e i n g s o c i a l , on t h e  o t h e r hand, tends t o i n v o l v e a f f i l i a t i o n and a t t a c h m e n t 1 9 7 6 ) , h i g h s e l f - d i s c 1 o s u r e and e m o t i o n a l  sharing  (Miller,  ( C a l d w e l l and  15 Relationships  Social P e p l a u , 1 9 8 2 ) , and communion ( B a r d w i c k , 1974). being social  T h i s f e m a l e way o f  r e n d e r s women more v u l n e r a b l e t o t h e s t r e s s e s o f t h e  d e p r i v a t i o n o f s u c h t i e s w h i c h m i g h t be c r e a t e d b y c e r t a i n conditions  social  (1976).  B e r n a r d d r e w on S m i t h - R o s e n b e r g t h e movement a n d c h a n g e s  (1975) and C o t t (1977) t o t r a c e  i n women's r e l a t i o n a l w o r l d , f r o m t h e  mid-18th century t o t h e present.  Smith-Rosenberg  outlined  several  f a c t o r s i n A m e r i c a n s o c i e t y d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d o f t i m e w h i c h may h a v e p e r m i t t e d women t o f o r m a v a r i e t y o f c l o s e e m o t i o n a l  relationships  w i t h o t h e r women: r i g i d g e n d e r r o l e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n w i t h i n t h e f a m i l y and s o c i e t y l e a d i n g t o e m o t i o n a l s e g r e g a t i o n o f women a n d men; s u b t l e s h a d i n g of mother  a n d d a u g h t e r r o l e s i n t o one a n o t h e r ;  biological  r e a l i t i e s of p r e g n a n c i e s , c h i l d b i r t h , n u r s i n g , and menopause w h i c h b o u n d women t o g e t h e r i n p h y s i c a l a n d e m o t i o n a l i n t i m a c y . added  Bernard  women's r e v u l s i o n t o w a r d s man's c a r n a l n a t u r e , s e x s e g r e g a t i o n  i n r e l i g i o u s and e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , a n d p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n v o l u n t a r y a s s o c i a t i o n s , as a d d i t i o n a l  factors operating i n the culture  at that t i m e .  s u p p o r t i v e networks  W i t h i n t h i s framework,  which were " i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d accompanied  developed  i n s o c i a l conventions or r i t u a l s  v i r t u a l l y e v e r y i m p o r t a n t e v e n t i n a women's l i f e ,  b i r t h t o death" (1975, p.250).  which from  T h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w e r e s u p p o r t e d by  s e v e r e s o c i a l r e s t r i c t i o n s on i n t i m a c y b e t w e e n  young  men a n d women.  Two s e p a r a t e s p h e r e s e x i s t e d f o r men a n d women, w h i c h d i f f e r e d i n terms of val  LIES i  BA  p e c t a t i o n s , and p e r s o n a l i t i e s .  according t o Smith-Rosenberg, own  Women's s p h e r e ,  h a d an i n t e g r i t y a n d a d i g n i t y o f i t s  t h a t g r e w o u t o f women's s h a r e d e x p e r i e n c e s a n d m u t u a l  affection  16 Social Relationships (1975).  A proud  s o l i d a r i t y g r e w a s i n t e n s e v a l u e was a t t r i b u t e d t o  i n t e r p e r s o n a l t i e s of s i s t e r h o o d (1981).  A consciousness of  d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n a n d t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f e q u a l i t y among p e e r s o u t s i d e t h e domestic  r e a l m i n c r e a s e d t h e i r r e l i a n c e on e a c h o t h e r a n d c o n f i r m e d  t h e v a l u e o f t h e i r new " g r o u p c o n s c i o u s n e s s " Bernard traditional  n o t e d a number o f t r e n d s w h i c h w o r l d o f women t o w a r d s  e f f e c t of i n c r e a s e d g e o g r a p h i c p s y c h i a t r y which  ( C o t t , 1977). a l l but o b l i t e r a t e d the  t h e end of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y : t h e  m o b i l i t y (1981); t h e t w o f o l d impact of  c h a n g e d r e l a t i o n s h i p n o r m s by c a s t i n g a p a l l o f  s e x u a l s u s p i c i o n on t h e s t r o n g b o n d s o f a f f e c t i o n p e r m i t t e d a n d encouraged  among women i n t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , a n d t h e d i s c o u r a g e m e n t  c o n f i d i n g i n f r i e n d s about  personal problems.  ( S a h l i , 1 9 7 8 ) may a l s o h a v e h a s t e n e d  of  The f e m i n i s t movement  t h e d e v a l u a t i o n of t h e s e  r e l a t i o n s h i p s a t t h e t u r n o f t h e c e n t u r y i n i t s f o c u s on women e m u l a t i n g of male v a l u e s of r a t i o n a l i t y and autonomy. As n o t e d a b o v e , women w e r e a l s o e n c o u r a g e d emotional  to increase their  d e p e n d e n c e on men ( S e i d e n a n d B a r t , 1 9 7 6 ) .  had n o t b e e n s o c i a l i z e d t o p r o v i d e t h e e m o t i o n a l f r i e n d s had s u p p l i e d i n t h e past This c l i m a t e encouraged  Men, h o w e v e r ,  s u p p o r t t h a t women  ( B e r n a r d , 1976, 1981; Weiss,  h e t e r o s o c i a l i t y , and t h e m a r r i a g e  be s e e n a s t h e l o c u s f o r i n t i m a c y and e m o t i o n a l  1972).  b o n d came t o  attachment  (Bernard,  1981).  E x p e c t a t i o n s c o n t i n u e d f o r m a r r i e d women t o p e r f o r m t h e  "mental  hygiene  though  f u n c t i o n of m a r r i a g e "  ( B l o o d and W o l f e ,  t h e y w e r e t o do t h i s i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a c r u c i a l  1960),  "relational  d e f i c i t " . f i l l t h i s , says B e r n a r d , has l e d t o t h e high r a t i o of depressed  women i n s o c i e t y i n t h i s  century.  even  17 Social Relationships Bernard's  theory of h o m o s o c i a l i t y addresses  the crucial  role  p l a y e d by women's f r i e n d s h i p s . She s e e s t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s a s b e i n g s o c i a l s u p p o r t , a f f i r m a t i o n o f a common a n d v a l i d l i f e e x p e r i e n c e , a n d a c o n f i d e n c e i n (women's) own s t y l e and j u d g e m e n t s ( B e r n a r d , 1976).  T h i s l e g i t i m i z a t i o n and v a l u i n g  o f b o n d s b e t w e e n women i s a s t r e n g t h o f B e r n a r d ' s In a r e c e n t  affiliative  work.  (1985) study i n v e s t i g a t i n g homosocial ( o p e r a t i o n a l l y  d e f i n e d a s f r i e n d s h i p ) p r e f e r e n c e s o f 90 y o u n g a d u l t s , R o s e c o n t r a d i c t e d L i p m a n - B l u m e n 's ( 1 9 7 6 ) ' c o n t e n t i o n t h a t m a l e s a r e more homosocial  than females.  s a m p l e , "a h o m o s o c i a l  She c o n c l u d e d  instead that i n this  study  norm o f c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s was more  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f women t h a n o f men, w i t h a m a j o r i t y o f women a n d o n l y a b o u t o n e - h a l f a s many men p r e f e r r i n g s a m e - s e x f r i e n d s h i p s t o c r o s s - s e x ones" (1985, p.71).  She l o o k e d t o t h e r e p o r t e d f u n c t i o n s  s e r v e d by f r i e n d s h i p s a s a p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h i s f i n d i n g a n d i n so d o i n g s u p p o r t e d found  Bernard's  h y p o t h e s i s of " r e l a t i o n a l  t h a t o n l y men r e p o r t e d h a v i n g a c c e p t a n c e ,  companionship f u n c t i o n s f u l f i l l e d  deficit".  i n t i m a c y , and  t o t h e same e x t e n t by b o t h same a n d  c r o s s - s e x f r i e n d s h i p s . Women's e x p e c t a t i o n s f o r f r i e n d s h i p do n o t seem t o be f u l f i l l e d friends  t o t h e same e x t e n t by men f r i e n d s a s by women  (1985).  S o c i a l R e l a t i o n s h i p s o f L e s b i a n Women  A.  Socio-Sexual  Preference  She  18 Social Relationships Before beginning  a d i s c u s s i o n of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s of l e s b i a n  women, a d i g r e s s i o n w i l l sexual preference. which  be made t o f o c u s f i r s t on t h e n o t i o n o f  W i t h i n t h e f e m i n i s t movement t h e r e i s a g r o u p  p e r c e i v e s s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n men a n d women a s a  m a n i f e s t a t i o n of t h e unequal Heterosexual  power d i s t r i b u t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m .  r e l a t i o n s a r e seen as s u p p o r t i n g and m a i n t a i n i n g t h e  o p p r e s s i o n o f women b y men.  The b e l i e f h a s g r o w n i n t h i s g r o u p t h a t  h e t e r o s e x u a l i t y f o r women means c o - o p e r a t i n g i n t h e i r own o p p r e s s i o n . Lesbianism which  h a s come t o be c o n s i d e r e d a m o n g s t them a s t h e a l t e r n a t i v e  p r o m o t e s women's i n t e r e s t s .  I t h a s become t h o u g h t  p r a c t i c e f o r t h e theory of feminism has d e f i n e d i t s e l f desire.  of as t h e  ( R a d i c a l e s b i a n , 1970),  b a s e d more on p o l i t i c a l  expediency  T h i s v i e w , i t s h o u l d be n o t e d , c a n n o t  than  and as such innate  be i n t e r p r e t e d a s t h e  v i e w s e t f o r w a r d by t h e women's movement a s a w h o l e , b u t r a t h e r by a p a r t i c u l a r g r o u p w i t h i n t h e movement.  I t i s also important  t h a t t h i s d e f i n i t i o n of l e s b i a n i s m , which  t o note  i s i n a sense a s e x u a l ,  d i f f e r s f r o m t h e more t r a d i t i o n a l n o t i o n o f l e s b i a n i s m r e f l e c t i n g s e x u a l o b j e c t c h o i c e and i n n a t e d e s i r e .  T h o u g h more c l o s e l y a l l i g n e d  w i t h t h e f e m i n i s t view of l e s b i a n i s m being a s o c i o - s e x u a l h a v i n g t o do w i t h i d e n t i t y  (of which  sexuality i s a part), this  r e p r e s e n t s a more r a d i c a l p o s i t i o n a n d s u g g e s t s b a s e d on p o l i t i c a l  considerations.  choice view  a c h o i c e of l e s b i a n i s m  This study d i d notd i s t i n g u i s h  b e t w e e n t h e s e t w o , p o s s i b l y d i s t i n c t g r o u p s o f l e s b i a n women, a n d t h i s may r e p r e s e n t a p o t e n t i a l s a m p l i n g  S o c i a l R e l a t i o n s o f L e s b i a n Women  problem  in this  study.  19 Relationships  Social The  s e c o n d and t h i r d h y p o t h e s e s of t h i s s t u d y  c l a r i f y i n g theory relationships.  regarding  are concerned  f e m i n i s t l e s b i a n women a n d t h e i r s o c i a l  A number o f w r i t e r s h a v e i d e n t i f i e d u n i q u e f e a t u r e s o f  l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women's f r i e n d s h i p s a n d t h e s e w i l l Wolf (1979) d e s c r i b e d  be d i s c u s s e d  on a c t u a l b e h a v o i r s ,  m y t h o l o g y , a n d f u t u r e g o a l s o f a g r o u p o f women. p e r i o d as p a r t i c i p a n t - o b s e r v e r ,  attitudes, Through a two year  she found that although  the pair  r e l a t i o n s h i p was an i d e a l t o w h i c h members o f t h e c o m m u n i t y  aspired,  t h e more p e r m a n e n t a n d s t a b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w e r e b e t w e e n c l o s e who w e r e n o t l o v e r s t h o u g h t h e y  friends  may h a v e b e e n l o v e r s a t o n e t i m e .  These c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s w i t h i n t h e community f u n c t i o n e d  one  now.  t h e t e x t u r e of l i f e i n a contemporary  l e s b i a n community and f o c u s e d  relationships.  with  as " k i n "  "The c l o s e f r i e n d i s t h e s i s t e r who w i l l  s t i c k with  t h r o u g h o u t t h e v i c i s s i t u d e s o f l i f e a n d t o whom o n e c a n t o a t a n y  time f o r support, The  advice,  money, o r c o m p a n i o n s h i p " ( 1 9 7 9 , p . 4 8 ) .  importance of t h i s k i n s h i p f u n c t i o n of f r i e n d s h i p s i n t h e  l e s b i a n c o m m u n i t y i s a t t e s t e d t o by n u m e r o u s a u t h o r s .  Lowenstein  (1979) found t h a t f r i e n d s h i p s i n a l e s b i a n community s u b s t i t u t e f o r k i n s h i p n e t w o r k s o f ' s t r a i g h t ' women.  E d w a r d s a n d H o o v e r ( 1 9 7 3 ) saw  t h e s e f r i e n d s h i p s a s p a r a l l e l i n g f a m i l y , t h o u g h b a s e d on r e a l preference,  s h a r e d i n t e r e s t , and g e n u i n e a f f e c t i o n .  Chafetz  (1974)  spoke of r e l a t i o n s h i p s amongst l e s b i a n s as " f a m i l y a s s o c i a t i o n u n i t s " implying  a s e n s e of l o y a l t y and d e p e n d a b i l i t y .  One c o u l d  speculate  t h a t t h e k i n s h i p p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s may be e s p e c i a l l y important  t o l e s b i a n women a s a r e s u l t o f e i t h e r d i s a p p r o v a l  and  20 Social Relationships n e g a t i v e s a n c t i o n from  f a m i l y of o r i g i n  ( P a r l e e , 19795 , o r a s F'onse  w o u l d s a y , a f r e e d o m t o be and be known w i t h i n t h e p r o t e c t i v e c l o a k of s e c r e c y of t h e c o m m u n i t y .  W i t h i n the community, f r i e n d s h i p s form  c o r e o f an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l s u p p o r t c r u c i a l p s y c h o l o g i c a l and e m o t i o n a l F'onse ( 1978)  group.  the  As s u c h , t h e y s e r v e a  function.  s t u d i e d b o n d s b e t w e e n l e s b i a n women f r o m  the  s t a n d p o i n t of t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n of t h e s e b o n d s t o i d e n t i t y , and  saw  s e c r e c y as t h e c o n t e x t o f b o t h c o m m u n i t y and  identity.  dominating  'straight'wor1ds,  r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e l e s b i a n and  As w e l l  as secrecy  a l s o , s a i d P o n s e , a f f e c t s t h e c h a r a c t e r of l i f e w i t h i n t h e l e s b i a n world.  "Within the s u b c u l t u r e , the bonding  evidenced  i n the r a p i d i t y w i t h which  superficial  n a t u r e of s e c r e c y i s  f r i e n d s h i p s , a t l e a s t on a  l e v e l , are formed" (1978,  p.78).  Secrecy  tends a l s o to  i n t e n s i f y d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e gay s u b c u l t u r e and t h e s t r a i g h t w o r l d and  to promote cohesion  i n the subgroup.  p r o t e c t i v e framework w i t h i n which  The  subgroup becomes a  to i n i t i a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p s with  other  l e s b i a n women. In i t s f u n c t i o n o f s t r e n g t h e n i n g i n - g r o u p c o n s i d e r e d an e x t r o p u n i t i v e d e f e n s e formulation.  t i e s secrecy could  according to Rawlings  and  be  Carter's  D r a w i n g on G e o r g S i m m e l ' s s o c i o l o g y , P o n s e u n d e r l i n e d  t h e r e s u l t i n g p r e s s u r e t o s t a y on g o o d t e r m s w i t h o t h e r members of " s e c r e t s o c i e t y " , i n which  in-group  t i e s are strengthened  t h o s e not e x p l i c i t e l y i n c l u d e d i n "the s e c r e t " . between people  by  excluding  Resulting barriers  w i t h i n and w i t h o u t t h e g r o u p p r o m o t e a k i n d of  m y s t i f i c a t i o n of b o t h w o r l d s .  P o n s e ' s work c o n t r i b u t e s t o  understanding  b o n d s i n i d e n t i f y i n g s e c r e c y as a  of a c t u a l s o c i a l  the  our  21 Relationships  Social p r e v a l e n t o p e r a t i v e v a r i a b l e i n i n c r e a s i n g and m a i n t a i n i n g  cohesion  w i t h i n t h e l e s b i a n community. B r o o k s ( 1 9 8 1 ) s t u d i e d t h e r o l e a n d s t a t u s o f l e s b i a n women i n s o c i e t y today,  and d e s c r i b e d t h e i r m i n o r i t y c o n d i t i o n .  t h i s she examined t h e concept v a r i a b l e s found  I n o r d e r t o do  of m i n o r i t y s t r e s s and i d e n t i f i e d  t o be r e l a t e d t o p o s i t i v e a n d n e g a t i v e o u t c o m e s o f  s t r e s s among l e s b i a n women.  In d i s c u s s i n g t h e coping p r o c e s s she  i d e n t i f i e d major s t r e s s - m e d i a t i n g r e s o u r c e s  f o r l e s b i a n women a s  being: p o s i t i v e group i d e n t i t y , s a t i s f a c t o r y socio-economic and  s o c i a l d i s c l o s u r e of one's s o c i o - s e x u a l o r i e n t a t i o n .  r e l e v a n t t o t h i s s t u d y and i n agreement w i t h R a w l i n g s s a i d t h a t l e s b i a n women who i n t h e m i d s t  status, Most  and C a r t e r , she  of s t r e s s view other  (and i n p a r t i c u l a r o t h e r l e s b i a n women) a s a r e f e r e n c e g r o u p , evidence  women will  l e s s d y s f u n c t i o n t h a n t h o s e w i t h a n e g a t i v e v i e w o f women o r  o f l e s b i a n women ( 1 9 8 1 ) . identification  She t a l k e d o f p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e  and r e l a t e d t h i s a g a i n t o s e l f - i m a g e a g a i n  agreement with Rawlings  in-group  i n general  and C a r t e r t h a t a p o s i t i v e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  o n e ' s own g r o u p - o r a f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n - d e c r e a s e s  stress,  i m p r o v e s s e l f image and enhances s o c i a l r e l a t e d n e s s i n t h e group. F e m i n i s t e x p o s u r e and p o s i t i v e m i n o r i t y group i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  were  a s s o c i a t e d with i n c r e a s e d s o c i a l bonding w i t h i n t h e group. Brooks'  work i s s t r o n g i n i t s t h e o r e t i c a l a n d e m p i r i c a l  underpinnings  as w e l l as a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e o r y t o c l i n i c a l  with minority populations. regarding clinical  insight  Her p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e o r y  s t r e s s - m e d i a t i n g r e s o u r c e s , makes h e r i d e a s u s e f u l f o r p r a c t i ce.  with  Social Krieger  (1983) c o n d u c t e d  Relationships  a study t o explore i n d i v i d u a l i d e n t i t y i n  a women's c o m m u n i t y p r i m a r i l y c o m p o s e d o f l e s b i a n women.  Her f i n d i n g s  w e r e b a s e d on a o n e y e a r p a r t i c i p a n t - o b s e r v a t i o n m e t h o d , c o m b i n e d individual semi-structured  interviews.  The c o m m u n i t y s h e s t u d i e d  f u n c t i o n e d t o g i v e members a g r o u p i d e n t i t y , s u p p o r t  for their  l i f e s t y l e , a sense of s e c u r i t y , a f f i r m a t i o n and a c c e p t a n c e a v a i l a b l e elsewhere, of t h e c r u c i a l  not  a haven from t h e o u t s i d e w o r l d , and c o n f i r m a t i o n  f e e l i n g s they had about t h e m s e l v e s  f e m i n i s t s , a n d women. served  with  as l e s b i a n s ,  A l b r o and T u l l y (1979) a l l u d e d t o a f u n c t i o n  by t h e l e s b i a n c o m m u n i t y by i n d i c a t i n g t h a t when l e s b i a n women  f e e l i s o l a t e d from t h e heterosexual  macro-culture  they turn t o the  homosexual m i c r o - c u l t u r e , f o r f r i e n d s , f o r emotional  support,  f o r the  m a j o r i t y of t h e i r s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s . The  c o s t of t h i s a f f i r m a t i o n and a c c e p t a n c e  Krieger  t D be t h e e x p e c t a t i o n o f a h i g h d e g r e e o f i n t i m a c y a n d One  (1983)  found  cohesiveness.  woman s a i d t h a t i n o r d e r t o know a n y b o d y , " y o u h a d t o g i v e a  c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f what i n o t h e r c o m m u n i t i e s c o u l d be k e p t private"  (1983, p.98).  T h i s demand f o r i n t i m a c y i n v o l v e d a s e x u a l  t e n s i o n w h i c h was c l e a r i n a n o t h e r  woman's s t a t e m e n t  t h a t , "because  you h a d t o r e l a t e some i n t i m a t e d e t a i l s t o g e t a l o n g , t h e r e was a l w a y s t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r y o u w a n t e d t o be i n t i m a t e w i t h t h e p e r s o n y o u w e r e t a l k i n g t o o r w h e t h e r t h e s h a r i n g meant y o u w a n t e d t o go t o b e d w i t h them" (1983, p . 9 9 ) .  Krieger sees t h i s constant  tension  between  m e r g e r a n d s e p a r a t i o n a s t h e c e n t r a l c o n f l i c t a r e a i n l e s b i a n women's relationships.  This r e l a t e s t o Krestan  and Bepko's (1980) n o t i o n of a  tendency towards f u s i o n i n l e s b i a n r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Although  Krestan  Social and  Bepko a r e s p e a k i n g  Relationships  of e r o t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s , t h e c o n c e p t a p p l i e s t o  s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s a s w e l l b e c a u s e o f a p o s s i b l e t e n d e n c y i n some l e s b i a n communities f o r t h e b o u n d a r i e s between r o m a n t i c and  f r i e n d s h i p s t o be l e s s w e l l d e f i n e d  ( B r i s t o w and P e r n ,  As w e l l a s b o t h t h e p o s s i b l e p r e s e n c e o f e n f o r c e d p u l l towards f u s i o n , Krieger being  given and  little  recognition.  intimacy  and i n d i v i d u a l s ' u n i q u e i d e n t i t i e s w e r e Sandoval  (1984! c r i t i q u e d K r i e g e r ' s  group than with  i t being  s e x - r o l e c o n d i t i o n i n g or being P e r n ( 1 9 8 4 ) on t h e o t h e r a heterosexist  Weiss' typology Lustig's  a community of l i k e n e s s .  and H e t e r o s e x u a l  lesbian identity.  Feminist  Women  o f t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s and  (1982) f i n d i n g s i n v o l v e both l e s b i a n and be d i s c u s s e d  Weiss developed a typology  integration, the opportunity  heterosexual  i n the following paragraphs.  of p r o v i s i o n s s u p p l i e d  r e l a t i o n s h i p s : attachment, intimacy,  guidance.  B r i s t o w and  hand, suggested that t h e concept of f u s i o n i s  of Lesbian  f e m i n i s t women, and w i l l  personal  a  a t e n d e n c y t o f u s e due t o  c o n c e p t w h i c h h a s l i t t l e t o do w i t h  Social Relationships  work  oppressive  - h a d more t o do w i t h t h e l e s b i a n c o m m u n i t y b e i n g  marginalised  and t h e  In h e r v i e w ,  s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e i n t o l e r a n c e of d i f f e r e n c e s - or  behavoir  19B4).  saw a n o t h e r p r o b l e m i n t h e c o m m u n i t y a s  i t s i n t o l e r a n c e of i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s .  d i f f e r e n c e s were n o t v a l u e d  attachments  emotional  by s o c i a l  integration; social  f o r nurturing others;  r e a s s u r a n c e of  worth; a sense of r e l i a b l e a l l i a n c e ; o b t a i n i n g  h e l p and  S u f f i c i e n t a m o u n t s o f t h e s e p r o v i s i o n s i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s  social r e l a t i o n s h i p s provide  a sense of w e l l - b e i n g  and a d e q u a t e  life  24 Social Relationships I n s u f f i c i e n t amounts, p a r t i c u l a r l y of t h e p r o v i s i o n s of  organization.  emotional integration Weiss described occurring rather  and s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n , r e s u l t i n l o n e l i n e s s .  emotional integration  i n our s o c i e t y  m a i n l y w i t h i n t h e m a r r i a g e bond.  than marriage per s e , t h e c r i t i c a l  according  - or attachment- as  t o Weiss i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p with  feature  However,  of t h i s  provision  another person such that t h e  mere p r o x i m i t y  of t h e other person can promote f e e l i n g s of s e c u r i t y  and  (1971).  well-being  This person i s f e l t  ( 1 9 8 3 ) a n d may be p e r c e i v e d  as a s o u r c e of s t r e n g t h  t h e a t t a c h e d i n d i v i d u a l ' s own c a p a c i t y Attachment, according whom a s e x u a l  relationship also exists.  directed  individual. is critical  toward a f i g u r e  with  group of p e e r s (1982) r a t h e r  a small,  cohesive,  t h a n w i t h an  f o s t e r s f e e l i n g s of comfort and i t s l o s s  than t h e l o s s of any i n d i v i d u a l i n t h e group.  A l t h o u g h W e i s s made no c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h i s a n d m i n o r i t y s e , t h i s may be an i m p o r t a n t o b s e r v a t i o n between l e s b i a n Social  associations  when c o n s i d e r i n g  groups per bonds  women.  i n t e g r a t i o n , though s t i l l  typically involves affiliation.  with  emotional importance, Weiss suggested t h e  The g r o u p i t s e l f rather  challenge.  As w e l l a s b e i n g f o u n d i n  p o s s i b i l i t y of attachment bonds a l s o o c c u r r i n g r e l i a b l e , and a c c e p t i n g  importance  or as f o s t e r i n g  f o r mastering  t o Weiss, i s often  r e l a t i o n s h i p s of c e n t r a l  t o be o f u n i q u e  of c r i t i c a l  emotional  importance,  f r i e n d s , k i n , c o - w o r k e r s , a n d i s v i e w e d more a s  Bonds of s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n  are characterized  as  i n which s h a r e d i n t e r e s t s and s i m i l a r i t y of c i r c u m s t a n c e s  p r o v i d e s a b a s i s f o r mutual l o y a l t y and a s e n s e o f community  (1982).  W e i s s a d d r e s s e d t h e d i f f e r e n t ways t h a t men a n d women a c h i e v e s o c i a l  25 integration.  Social Relationships Men, he s a i d , l o o k more t o t h e i r work f o r t h i s p r o v i s i o n  w h i l e women t y p i c a l l y l o o k t o t h e i r r o l e s a s f r i e n d s , k i n , n e i g h b o r s . Both p r o v i d e support worth  f o r a sense of s e l f and a r e a s s u r a n c e  ( R u s s e l l , 1984).  from one another  S o c i a l and e m o t i o n a l  of personal  integration are distinct  a n d n e i t h e r c a n be s u b s t i t u t e d f o r t h e o t h e r .  In h e r s t u d y t i t l e d  " I n t i m a t e F r i e n d s h i p s o f F e m i n i s t Women",  ( 1 9 8 2 ) , L u s t i g e x p l o r e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p amongst t h r e e v a r i a b l e s : s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e , f r i e n d s h i p t y p e , and l e v e l of i n t i m a c y of f e m i n i s t women.  To m e a s u r e t h e d e g r e e o f i n t i m a c y i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s h e  c h o s e t o u s e F r u m ' s C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e , a n d m o d i f i e d i t w i t h an a d d i t i o n a l p e r s o n a l d a t a s h e e t , an i n t i m a c y r a t i n g , a c l o s e n e s s r a t i n g , and a r a t i n g of t h e s u b j e c t ' s and f r i e n d ' s l e v e l of f e m i n i s t identification.  Frum d e v e l o p e d  d e f i n i n g and measuring (1979).  her instrument  f o r t h e purpose of  t h e q u a l i t a t i v e components of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p  L u s t i g ' s a i m i n h e r s t u d y was t o m e a s u r e i n t i m a c y b a s e d on  Frum's s i x p a r a m e t e r s  of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p : n a t u r a l n e s s , s t a b l e  personal community, p o s i t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , a c c e s s i b i l i t y , mutual u n d e r s t a n d i n g Lustig hypothesized  mutual  and u n c o n d i t i o n a l r e g a r d .  i n her study t h a t l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t s would  r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more i n t i m a c y t h a n h e t e r o s e x u a l  feminists i n  t h e i r i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . T h i s h y p o t h e s i s was r e j e c t e d by L u s t i g who f o u n d  that the instrument  between l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l in their f r i e n d s h i p s .  used  d i d not d i f f e r e n t i a t e  f e m i n i s t s as t o t h e l e v e l of i n t i m a c y  She p r e s e n t e d  two p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of  t h i s r e s u l t being e i t h e r that the r e s u l t s supported t h a t l e s b i a n s and h e t e r o s e x u a l  previous  evidence  women may be s i m i l a r i n t h e way t h e y  26 Social Relationships seek to s a t i s f y t h e i r i n t i m a c y needs through (Oberstone  and S u k o n e k , 1976;  R o s e n , 1974;  p o s s i b l e i n s e n s i t i v i t y of t h e m e a s u r i n g  Rationale for  was  unable  a s p e c t of h o m o s o c i a l i t y ,  f r i e n d s h i p were next c o n s i d e r e d . develop  an i n s t r u m e n t  relationships.  w i t h which  He d e v e l o p e d  specifically  B e c a u s e f r i e n d s h i p i s one  i n s t r u m e n t s used Wright  (1969!  was  he c o u l d e x p l o r e  the Acquaintance  to  study  the f i r s t  to  specific  D e s c r i p t i o n Form,  measured t h r e e p o s i t i v e v a l u e s or rewards which  Wright's  was  i n s t r u m e n t s with which  to study f r i e n d s h i p , t h i s instrument  Merrill  (1975) d e v e l o p e d  another  study f r i e n d s h i p , c a l l e d the F r i e n d s h i p Inventory. designed  value.  provided not  a  be  instrument  This inventory  to was  t o a s s e s s t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e a s p e c t s of c l o s e  f r i e n d s h i p s , and d i d so by m e a s u r i n g by M e r r i l l .  I t was  designed  six friendship criteria  i n i t i a l l y , however, to e x p l o r e  r e l a t i o n s h i p between p e r s o n a l adjustment  not a p p r o p r i a t e f o r An i n s t r u m e n t  actual exaperience  which  devised the  and c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p .  s t u d y does not c o n s i d e r p e r s o n a l a d j u s t m e n t , was  from  a f i r s t s t e p i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of  l i m i t e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f f r i e n d s h i p and w o u l d f o r t h a t r e a s o n useful for t h i s study.  which  m i g h t be d e r i v e d  a f r i e n d s h i p : s t i m u l a t i o n v a l u e , u t i l i t y v a l u e , and ego s u p p o r t Although  or  instrument.  t o l o c a t e an i n s t r u m e n t  as a m e a s u r e of h o m o s o c i a l i t y .  important  S i m o n and B a g n o n , 1 9 7 6 ) ,  Instrumentation  This author designed  their friendships  so M e r r i l l ' s  This  instrument  use. c o u l d c l e a r l y and  a c c u r a t e l y m e a s u r e a woman's  of and f e e l i n g s a b o u t h e r c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p w i t h a  Social t a r g e t - f r i e n d was n e e d e d . and  c a l l e d i t The C l o s e  valid scale experience  Frum ( 1 9 7 9 ) d e v e l o p e d s u c h an  Friendship  study  w i t h i n s i x p a r a m e t e r s of c l o s e  T h i s i s a r e l i a b l e and  friendship.  which measured s i m i l a r i t i e s between t h e  groups i n t h e i r experience  instrument  instrument  ( r e f e r t o Chapter Three) which measures people's  As w e l l a s an i n s t r u m e n t two  Scale.  27 Relationships  o f c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p , an  was n e e d e d w h i c h w o u l d be s e n s i t i v e t o what t h e s e  r e l a t i o n s h i p would or would not p r o v i d e  i n a woman's l i f e .  As n o t e d  a b o v e , t h e l i t e r a t u r e s u g g e s t s t h a t f e m i n i s t l e s b i a n women may experience  t h e i r c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s d i f f e r e n t l y than  heterosexual  women i n t e r m s o f what t h e y  relationship.  are provided  feminist with through the  W r i g h t ' s A c q u a i n t a n c e D e s c r i p t i o n Form d o e s e m p h a s i z e  d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s , b u t d o e s s o i n a somewhat v a g u e a n d n o n - s p e c i f i c way.  C u r t o n a ( 1 9 8 2 ) d e v e l o p e d an i n s t r u m e n t  designed t o t e s t Weiss' typology relationships.  consider  her current  as t o what t h e y  on o n e p a r t i c u l a r f r i e n d s h i p , a s  Scale, t h i s scale asks t h e respondent t o  s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s with other  supply.  respondents' experience, and  of t h e s i x p r o v i s i o n s of s o c i a l  Rather than focusing  does t h e Close F r i e n d s h i p  was u s e f u l i n t h i s  w h i c h was  women i n g e n e r a l ,  The S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e t e s t s t h e f e e l i n g s , a n d a t t i t u d e s more s p e c i f i c a l l y , study.  Summary The  literature relevant to homosociality  1esb i a n and  heterosexual  and t o f r i e n d s h i p s of  f e m i n i s t women i n p a r t i c u l a r , h a s b e e n  28 Social Relationships reviewed i n t h i s Chapter.  We h a v e s e e n t h a t f o l l o w i n g T i g e r , t w o  m a j o r t h e o r i e s o f women's s a m e - s e x b o n d s w e r e d e v e l o p e d .  Both  t h e o r i s t s a g r e e t h a t i n t h i s c e n t u r y women's b o n d s w i t h o n e a n o t h e r have been l i m i t e d .  Where t h e t h e o r i s t s d i f f e r , i s a t t h e p o i n t w h e r e  L i p m a n - B l u m e n s a y s t h a t women's h o m o s o c i a l b o n d s a r e p o o r l y d e v e l o p e d in comparison  t o men's w e l 1 - d e v e l o p e d  a l l - m a l e groups.  Bernard  b e l i e v e s t h a t a l t h o u g h women's b o n d s a r e s u f f e r i n g a c u r r e n t d e v a l u a t i o n and d i m i n i s h m e n t , t h e y have been h i g h l y d e v e l o p e d and ritualized  i n women's l i v e s o v e r t i m e , a n d h a v e a l i f e a n d i n t e g r i t y  of t h e i r own. L e s b i a n women's s o c i a l of t h e i r own, t h o u g h  r e l a t i o n s h i p s have a l s o m a i n t a i n e d a l i f e  they have f u n c t i o n e d u n t i l r e c e n t l y m a i n l y  within  t h e c o n t e x t o f s e c r e c y . ft number o f a u t h o r s h a v e h y p o t h e s i z e d ways i n w h i c h l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women may e x p e r i e n c e t h e i r differently  friendships  t h a n do h e t e r o s e x u a l f e m i n i s t women.  T h i s s t u d y c o n s i d e r e d b o t h of t h e a b o v e - s t a t e d p r o b l e m s and attempted t o both c l a r i f y major homosocial t h e o r y about  women's  f r i e n d s h i p s , a n d t o d e s c r i b e l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t woemn's a c t u a l f r i e n d s h i p e x p e r i e n c e as c o n t r a s t e d t o t h a t of h e t e r o s e x u a l f e m i n i s t women.  The m e t h o d o l o g y f o r a c h i e v i n g t h i s i s d i s c u s s e d i n t h e  following chapter.  29 Social Relationships  CHAPTER THREE  METHODOLOGY  Overview T h i s c h a p t e r o u t l i n e s t h e r e s e a r c h d e s i g n and methodology of t h e present study. approach,  I n c l u d e d i n t h i s w i l l be d i s c u s s i o n s o f m e t h o d o l o g i c a l  design of t h e r e s e a r c h , respondent  selection,  i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n , d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and d e l i m i t a t i o n s of t h e s t u d y .  Hypotheses As we h a v e s e e n , t w o m a i n t h e o r i e s o f h o m o s o c i a l i t y h a v e developed.  The t w o t h e o r i s t s , B e r n a r d  ans Lipman-Blumen, approach t h e  c o n s t r u c t i n d i f f e r e n t ways a n d r e a c h d i f f e r e n t c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g women's s o c i a l t i e s w i t h o n e a n o t h e r .  As a r e s u l t , p r e d i c t i o n s  a r i s i n g from t h e i r t h e o r i e s d i f f e r w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i n f l u e n c e of s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e on f r i e n d s h i p b e t w e e n women.  L u s t i g (1982)  through  her f i n d i n g s , p r e s e n t s a t h i r d p o s s i b i l i t y f o r t h e i n f l u e n c e of t h i s variable.  Three r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s  1. B e r n a r d ' s  arise:  theory of sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n s o c i a l i t y i m p l i e s that  l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women m i g h t  have s t r o n g e r s o c i a l bonds than  h e t e r o s e x u a l f e m i n i s t women; w h e r e a s ,  30 Social Relationships 2. L i p m a n - B l u m e n ' s t h e o r y o f s e x u a l s t r a t i f i c a t i o n w o u l d p r e d i c t t h a t l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women w o u l d h a v e w e a k e r h o m o s o c i a l heterosexual  would  f e m i n i s t women.  3. L u s t i g t h o u g h , heterosexual  bonds than  found  no d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n l e s b i a n a n d  f e m i n i s t women a s t o t h e l e v e l o f i n t i m a c y i n t h e i r  r e l a t i onshi ps. The 1974;  l i t e r a t u r e tends t o support  Bell,  1981; Davidson  so f o r t h e p u r p o s e s  Bernard's  and P a c k a r d ,  p o i n t of view  1981; Rubin,  1973, 1985), and  o f t h i s s t u d y , h y p o t h e s i s £1 i s t h e f o l l o w i n g :  1. L e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women w i l l  o b t a i n h i g h e r mean t o t a l a n d s u b s c a l e  s c o r e s on t h e C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e a n d on t h e C l o s e n e s s w i l l heterosexual  (Bardwick,  Rating,  than  f e m i n i s t women.  2. Two p a r t i c u l a r q u a l i t i e s h a v e b e e n i d e n t i f i e d n u m e r o u s t i m e s a s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c and d e s c r i p t i v e of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i k p s of l e s b i a n women - t h a t o f a s t r o n g " k i n " q u a l i t y o f f r i e n d s h i p s ( W o l f , and  1979),  an e x p e c t a t i o n o f m u t u a l demands b e i n g made i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p  ( K r i e g e r , 1983).  These q u a l i t i e s p a r a l l e l  " S t a b l e P e r s o n a l Community" and "Mutual Hypothesis  Frum's d e f i n i t i o n s of t h e  Accessibility"  subscales.  2 s t a t e s t h e r e f o r e t h a t l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women w i l l  h i g h e r mean s c o r e s t h a n h e t e r o s e x u a l  obtain  f e m i n i s t women on t h e C l o s e  F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e s u b s c a l e s of S t a b l e P e r s o n a l Community and Mutual Accessi b i1i ty.  3.  In a d d i t i o n t o r e f l e c t i n g s t r o n g k i n s h i p and mutual  accessibility  q u a l i t i e s , b o n d s b e t w e e n l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women seem t o p r o v i d e a  31 Social Relationships s e n s e of s e c u r i t y , d e p e n d a b i l i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y 1973; L o w e n s t e i n , 1979; W o l f , 1979).  (Edwards and H o o v e r ,  These p r o v i s i o n s a r e r e f l e c t e d  i n t h e S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e s u b s c a l e s o f "a S e n s e o f R e l i a b l e A l l i a n c e " and " A t t a c h m e n t " . women w i l l  I t i s hypothesised  that lesbian feminist  o b t a i n h i g h e r mean s c o r e s on t h e A t t a c h m e n t a n d S e n s e o f  R e l i a b l e A l l i a n c e s u b s c a l e s of t h e S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e , than heterosexual  will  f e m i n i s t women.  Instrumentation T h r e e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w e r e u s e d t o c o n d u c t t h i s s t u d y . The P e r s o n a l Data Sheet  ( L u s t i g , 1 9 8 2 ) , The C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e ( F r u m ,  the S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s Scale (Cutrona, 1982). questionnaires, along with r e l i a b i l i t y  1. P e r s o n a l D a t a S h e e t  1979),  A d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e s e  and v a l i d i t y d a t a , w i l l f o l l o w .  (PDS) - L u s t i g u s e d F r u m ' s CFS i n h e r 1982  study of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e , f r i e n d s h i p t y p e , and l e v e l o f i n t i m a c y o f f e m i n i s t women.  She m o d i f i e d Frum's o r i g i n a l  instrument  by c a l l i n g h e r d e m o g r a p h i a c  information a separate  instrument  -The P e r s o n a l D a t a S h e e t - a n d a d d i n g t o i t q u e s t i o n s  r e g a r d i n g i n c o m e , c h i l d r e n of r e s p o n d e n t and f r i e n d , s e x u a l  preference  of r e s p o n d e n t a n d f r i e n d , w h e t h e r o r n o t r e s p o n d e n t i s p r e s e n t l y i n a c o m m i t t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h a man o r a woman.  L u s t i g added a s w e l l ,  an i n t i m a c y r a t i n g a n d a r a t i n g o f f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . p u r p o s e s o f t h i s s t u d y , t h e PDS was u s e d a n d m o d i f i e d o n l y  For the slightly.  The i n t i m a c y r a t i n g was n o t i n c l u d e d ( a s t h i s i s n o t a s t u d y  Social Relationships i n v e s t i g a t i n g i n t i m a c y ) , and q u e s t i o n s added i n c l u d e d h i g h e s t l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n of respondent between respondent  and f r i e n d , and p r e v i o u s s e x u a l  relationship  and f r i e n d .  2. The C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e ( h e r e a f t e r c a l l e d t h e CFS) - F r u m , 1979 T h i s s c a l e was d e v e l o p e d parameters  by Frum t o a s s e s s a n d m e a s u r e t h e  of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p , i t s q u a l i t a t i v e c o m p o n e n t s , and t h e  r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n men's a n d women's same a n d o t h e r - s e x relationships.  In d e v e l o p i n g t h e i n s t r u m e n t , c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a  c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p were f i r s t d e t e r m i n e d s p e c u l a t i o n and p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h .  on t h e b a s i s o f p h i l o s o p h i c a l  S i x parameters  of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p  were then e s t a b l i s h e d : n a t u r a l n e s s , s t a b l e p e r s o n a l  community,  p o s i t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , mutual a c c e s s i b i l i t y , u n d e r s t a n d i n g , and u n c o n d i t i o n a l r e g a r d . parameters,  social  mutual  B a s e d on t h e s e s i x  s c a l e i t e m s were o b t a i n e d from s e m i - s t r u c t u r e d i n t e r v i e w s ,  p r e v i o u s l y developed literature.  i n s t r u m e n t s , and e x t r a p o l a t e d from t h e  The 2 1 0 i t e m s d e v e l o p e d  w e r e r a t e d by t h r e e e x p e r t  f o r a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s w i t h i n one of t h e s i x p a r a m e t e r s .  The f i n a l  v e r s i o n o f t h e CFS c o n s i s t s o f B8 i t e m s w i t h a 6 - p o i n t L i k e r t response  set.  judges  style  As w e l l , 13 d e m o g r a p h i c a n d q u a l i t a t i v e v a r i a b l e s w e r e  i n c l u d e d a n d a c l o s e n e s s r a t i n g was a d d e d , ( w h e r e 1 was c o m p l e t e  lack  o f c l o s e n e s s w i t h t h e t a r g e t f r i e n d , a n d 10 was a s c l o s e a s a p e r s o n c o u l d be t o a n o t h e r .  D e f i n i t i o n of the S u b s c a l e s (N)  Naturalness - Relative s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e , i n conjunction with the  Social l a c k o f i n h i b i t i o n a n d w i t h t h e f r e e d o m t o be t o t a l l y  33 Relationships  oneself,  c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e " n a t u r a l n e s s " component of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p . (MA) M u t u a l  A c c e s s i b i l i t y - The i t e m s r e p r e s e n t i n g t h i s c o m p o n e n t o f  c l o s e f r i e n d h s i p r e f l e c t a sense of s e c u r i t y t h a t r e s u l t s from f e e l i n g involved with another  i n d i v i d u a l who c a n be r e l i e d  (PIE) P o s i t i v e I n t e r a c t i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e  - T h i s component of c l o s e  f r i e n d s h i p i s r e f l e c t e d i n t h e scope of shared thoughts,  upon.  a c t i v i t i e s and  i n a sense of m u t u a l i t y , i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e other  p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s , and t h e d i s p o s i t i o n t o e n t e r s p o n t a n e o u s l y n u m e r o u s a c i t v i t i e s w i t h one (SPC)  Stable Personal  Community - T h i s f r i e n d s h i p component i s  i s t h e sense of importance  (PU)  into  another.  r e f l e c t e d i n t h e sense of being  having  when  i n community with another.  i n one a n o t h e r ' s  Included  l i f e , c a r i n g , and i n  a h i s t o r y and f u t u r e o r i e n t a t i o n t o t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p . Personal Understanding  - Items r e l a t e d t o p e r s o n a l  understanding  r e f l e c t e d t h e ease of communication, s e n s i t i v i t y t o being a b l e t o p r e d i c t each o t h e r ' s r e a c t i o n s , e x p e r i e n c e  with  non-verbal  c o m m u n i c a t i o n which r e f l e c t s h o r t c u t s i n c o m m u n i c a t i o n , and f e e l i n g s of b e i n g on t h e same (UR)  Unconditional  "wavelength". Regard - This i s r e f l e c t e d i n t h e nonjudgemental  a t t i t u d e which i s f r e e of t h e d e s i r e t o change t h e o t h e r . Unconditional  regard  i s r e f l e c t e d i n the a b i l i t y t o accept  the friend  wherever she i s at any p a r t i c u l a r time.  R e l i a b i l i t y and V a l i d i t y Odd-even r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s and i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s were  34 Social Relationships performed  on t h e s i x s u b s c a l e s a n d t o t a l s c o r e s o f t h e C F S .  C r o n b a c h ' s (1951) c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a and P e a r s o n ' s s t a t i s t i c s used.  r were t h e  The o v e r a l l r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e CFS was . 9 8 . The  r e l i a b i l i t y s c o r e s o f t h e s i x s u b s c a l e s o f t h e CFS r a n g e d women i n t h e p o s i t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e the personal understanding  subscale.  c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h one another  from  .85 f o r  s u b s c a l e , t o .94 f o r  The s u b s c a l e s s h o w e d p o s i t i v e  r a n g i n g from  .49 f o r t h e  i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n on t h e N ( n a t u r a l n e s s ) a n d P I E ( p o s i t i v e i n t e r a c t i o n a l experience)  s u b s c a l e s f o r b o t h s e x e s t o .74 f o r women on  t h e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f MA ( m u t u a l personal community). possesses  internal  a c c e s s i b i l i t y ) a n d SPC ( s t a b l e  These r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h i s measure  c o n s i s t e n c y and i s h i g h l y r e l i a b l e .  3. S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e ( h e r e a f t e r c a l l e d t h e S P S ) - The t h i r d instrument  used  i n t h i s s t u d y was t h e S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e  (Cutrona,  1982).  T h i s s c a l e was d e s i g n e d  u s e f u l n e s s of Weiss'  by C u t r o n a  (1974) t y p o l o g y of r e l a t i o n a l  to assess the  n e e d s s u p p l i e d by  s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . B a s e d on h i s work w i t h g r o u p s l a c k i n g i n v a r i o u s aspects of t h e i r s o c i a l networks, of t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o v i s i o n s : A t t a c h m e n t , integration; social reassurance  a typology  i n t i m a c y , and e m o t i o n a l  integration; the opportunity f o rnurturing others;  of personal worth;  h e l p and g u i d a n c e .  Weiss developed  a sense of r e l i a b l e a l l i a n c e ; o b t a i n i n g  Weiss hypothesized  t h a t s a t i s f a c t o r y p r o v i s i o n of  t h e s e g i v e s t h e i n d i v i d u a l an a d e q u a t e l i f e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d s e n s e o f well being. for  attachment  D e f i c i t s , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , p a r t i c u l a r l y r e g a r d i n g and s o c i a l i n t e g r a t i o n , r e s u l t i n l o n e l i n e s s .  needs  Social  35 Relationships  The SPS c o n t a i n s 24 i t e m s , w i t h f o u r i t e m s k e y e d on e a c h p r o v i s i o n , t w o i n a p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n a n d two i n a n e g a t i v e direction. ranging  R e s p o n d e n t s a n s w e r e d e a c h q u e s t i o n on a 4 - p o i n t  scale  from s t r o n g l y agree t o s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e .  S c o r i ng A s c o r e f o r e a c h p r o v i s i o n c a n be d e r i v e d s e p a r a t e l y s u c h  that a  high score i n d i c a t e s the i n d i v i d u a l i s r e c e i v i n g that p r o v i s i o n . N e g a t i v e l y keyed i t e m s were r e v e r s e d s c o r e w h i c h c o u l d be o b t a i n e d t o t a l of s i x s e p a r a t e  scores  before scoring.  The maximum  was 16, t h e minimum s c o r e was 4.  A  (one f o r each p r o v i s i o n ) as w e l l as a  c o m p o s i t e s c o r e w i t h maximum v a l u e s o f 84 a n d minimum v a l u e s o f 16 were o b t a i n e d  D e f i n i t i o n of (A)  f o r each  respondent.  Subscales  Attachment - provided  by r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n w h i c h t h e p e r s o n  r e c e i v e s a s e n s e of s a f e t y and s e c u r i t y . (SI) S o c i a l I n t e g r a t i o n - p r o v i d e d which i n d i v i d u a l s share (NU) O p p o r t u n i t y the person  by a n e t w o r k o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n  i n t e r e s t s and  f o r Nurturance  - d e r i v e d from r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n which  f e e l s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e w e l l - b e i n g of  (RW) R e a s s u r a n c e o f W o r t h - p r o v i d e d person's (RA) person  concerns.  another.  by r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n w h i c h t h e  s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s a r e a c k n o w l e d g e d .  R e l i a b l e A l l i a n c e - d e r i v e d from r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n which t h e c a n c o u n t on a s s i s t a n c e u n d e r a n y  (G) G u i d a n c e - p r o v i d e d  circumstances.  by r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h t r u s t w o r t h y a n d  36 Relationships  Social authoritative  i n d i v i d u a l s who  R e l i a b i l i t y and  p r o v i d e a d v i c e and  and  f r o m two  internal consistency  investigations.  C u t r o n a , R u s s e l and  The  Rose (1984) i n v o l v e d  s o c i a l s u p p o r t among a s a m p l e of 100  The  SPS  Internal  consistency  provisions high may  and not  administered twice  c o r r e l a t i o n s do n o t (Russell  and  C u t r o n a , 1984,  Van  Velzen  period.  r e l i a b i l i t i e s were not  support  test-retest  p.6).  Internal  consistency  estimates  t e a c h e r s c o n d u c t e d by R u s s e l l ,  Altmier  ( 1 9 8 4 ) on t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n s o c i a l s u p p o r t  In o r d e r t o t e s t t h e f a c t o r s t r u c t u r e  of t h e  used.  An o b l i q u e  instrument, a from  s i x f a c t o r model was  the  tested  using  t h e L i s r e l VI p r o g r a m , w i t h  e a c h of t h e f a c t o r s c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o  six  factor loadings  social provisions.  f i t to the data"  The  (1984, p.6).  The  indicated  a "fairly  G o o d n e s s of F i t I n d e x was  the good  .857.  C u t r o n a ( i n p r o c e s s ) f o u n d i n a s t u d y of f i r s t - t i m e m o t h e r s t h a t provisions  and  .60.  f a c t o r a n a l y s i s b a s e d on t h e d a t a d e r i v e d  t e a c h e r s t u d y was  as  imply t h a t the s c a l e i s u n r e l i a b l e "  t e a c h e r b u r n o u t , f o u n d r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s of  confirmatory  stress  residents.  However, "given that s o c i a l  necessarily  by  individual social  be c o n s t a n t o v e r t i m e , t h e s e low  b a s e d on a s e c o n d s t u d y of 300 and  t o s i x month  Test-retest  t o .66.  s t u d y of  community e l d e r l y  r e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r the  r a n g e d f r o m .36  i n v e s t i g a t i o n conducted  a prospective  over a four  w e r e a l l a b o v e .70.  necessarily  r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s were  first  and  was  assistance.  Validity  Test-retest derived  can  the  of r e l i a b l e a l l i a n c e , r e a s s u r a n c e of w o r t h , s o c i a l  i n t e g r a t i o n , and  g u i d a n c e w e r e p r e d i c t i v e of p o s t p a r t u m  depression.  37 Social Relationships Women who l a c k e d t h e s e p r o v i s i o n s d u r i n g p r e g n a n c y w e r e more l i k e l y t o become d e p r e s s e d p.1315).  a f t e r t h e b i r t h of t h e i r c h i l d  Further support  s t u d y by C u t r o n a  ( R u s s e l l et a l . , 1984,  f o r t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e SPS i s a ( 1 9 8 2 )  of f i r s t year c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s , i n which  that the social i n t e g r a t i o n , reassurance  of worth,  and  she found  guidance  p r o v i s i o n s w e r e a l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d t o s c o r e s on t h e UCLA Loneliness Scale.  Sample S e l e c t i o n R e s p o n d e n t s f o r t h i s s t u d y were o b t a i n e d from t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n o f f e m i n i s t women, t h a t i s f o r t h e p u r p o s e s t h o s e women who p l a c e t h e m s e l v e s the Feminist  at 7 or higher  Identification Scale.  of t h i s  study,  ( b e t w e e n 1 a n d 10) o f  F e m i n i s t women w e r e s e l e c t e d o u t  o f t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n o f women i n o r d e r t o more c l o s e l y r e p l i c a t e a previous study  ( L u s t i g , 1 9 8 2 ) , a n d b e c a u s e o f an a s s u m e d c o m m i t t m e n t  t o o t h e r women. Q u e s t i o n n a i r e p a c k a g e s w e r e d i s t r i b u t e d t o women u n t i l 35 heterosexual  f e m i n i s t women a n d 35 l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women who f i t t h e  c r i t e r i a , completed  the questionnaires.  in f e m i n i s t bookstores, meetings, w e l l as through  P a r t i c i p a t i o n was s o l i c i t e d  g a t h e r i n g s , u n i v e r s i t y c l a s s e s , as  f r i e n d s h i p pyramiding.  D e s c r i p t i o n of Respondents In o r d e r t o p l a c e l i m i t s a r o u n d  the study, respondents  met t h e  38 Relationships  Social f o 1 1 o w i ng  criteria:  1.  20 - 40 y e a r s  of  2.  self-identified  age feminist  Procedures R e s p o n d e n t s were i n i t i a l l y g i v e n c e n t r a l to f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n .  a page d e s c r i b i n g  They were t h e n asked t o  t h e m s e l v e s on a s c a l e of 1 t o 10 as t o t h e i r l e v e l of identification.  F i n a l l y , they  a t 7 o r a b o v e on t h e r a t i n g s c a l e , t h e y  package c o n t a i n i n g Close  Friendship  screening  The  questionnaires. The other  were i n c l u d e d  - The  regarding  groups.  A c o p y of i n s t r u c t i o n s may  instruments  and  as w e l l as s a m e - s e x c l o s e f r i e n d . was  study.  Oral  Data Sheet,  and  The  Respondents written the  be f o u n d i n A p p e n d i x  were m o d i f i e d  to include  the  other-sex  Demographic i n f o r m a t i o n  requested  i n the f o l l o w i n g  Delete:  R e l a t i o n s h i p , Your  sex  Insert:  1.  Number of c h i l d r e n - r e s p o n d e n t and  friend  2.  Sexual  friend  preference  a  t o an  modified  be  themself  i n the  Personal  to e l i m i n a t e the reference  by Frum on t h e o r i g i n a l CFS  rated  procedures for completing  o r i g i n a l i n s t r u c t i o n s of t h e CFS  two  had  Social Provisions Scale.  were t e s t e d i n d i v i d u a l l y or i n s m a l l i n s t r u c t i o n s were g i v e n  would  r e s p o n d e n t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d  three questionnaires  S c a l e , and  feminist  of f r i e n d s h i p b e t w e e n women.  i n d i c a t e d a w i l l i n g n e s s t o p a r t i c i p a t e and  A f t e r the i n i t i a l  rate  were a s k e d whether or not t h e y  w i l l i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a l a r g e r study If t h e y  concepts  - r e s p o n d e n t and  way:  39  friend?  - respondent  Income  4.  Are you i n a committed r e l a t i o n s h i p ?  5.  Highest  6.  P r e v i o u s sexual r e l a t i o n s h i p between respondent  l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n - respondent  and  friend and  Y e s o r No. 7.  Feminist Identification  R e s p o n d e n t s were not i n f o r m e d  E a c h p a r t i c i p a n t was a s s u r e d  results will  be a v a i l a b l e upon  and S t a t i s t i c a l  Scale  t h a t t h e y w e r e g r o u p e d by s e x u a l  preference.  Design  Social Relationships and - f r i e n d  3.  anonymity.  The  final  request.  Analysis  T h i s s t u d y was an ex p o s t f a c t o c o m p a r i s o n  b e t w e e n two g r o u p s  w h e r e t h e p r e - e x i s t i n g s o u r c e o f v a r i a t i o n was s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e . t e s t the hypotheses  presented,  d a t a was a n a l y z e d w i t h t h e g o a l o f  obtaining information i n three areas: reliability  To  a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e s a m p l e ,  o f t h e CFS and S P S , and a c o m p a r i s o n  of t h e same-sex  bonds  of h e t e r o s e x u a l and l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t s . A coding t r a n s f o r m a t i o n t a b l e ( s i m i l a r to those developed L u s t i g and F r u m ) was d e v e l o p e d  f o r demographic items.  by  Means w e r e  t a b u l a t e d f o r a l l i d e n t i f y i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and q u a n t i t a t i v e d a t a . Blanks l e f t for  i n the response  n e g a t i v e l y phrased  column were g i v e n a n e u t r a l s c o r e .  Scores  items were r e v e r s e d .  D a t a c o l l e c t e d r e l a t i v e t o s o c i a l b o n d s o f t h e two g r o u p s o f women was a n a l y z e d u s i n g H o t e l l i n g ' s t 2 (a s p e c i a l c a s e o f m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s f o r u s e when t h e r e i s one i n d e p e n d e n t  variable).  The one  40 Social Relationships independent  v a r i a b l e was s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e ; t h e t w e l v e  variables correspond  t o t h e s i x s u b s c a l e s on e a c h  dependent  instrument:  n a t u r a l n e s s , s t a b l e p e r s o n a l community, mutual a c c e s s i b i l i t y , p o s i t i v e interactional experience, personal understanding, regard, attachment,  social  others, reassurance  of personal worth,  and  unconditional  integration, the opportunity f o r nurturing  o b t a i n i n g h e l p and g u i d a n c e .  a sense of r e l i a b l e  alliance,  Means a n d s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s w e r e  c a l c u l a t e d f o r the twelve treatment  conditions.  F o r t h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y , t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l was s e t a t . 05.  D e l i m i t a t i o n s of t h e Study T h i s s t u d y was d e l i m i t e d by t h i s a u t h o r 1.  The s t u d y was r e s t r i c t e d g e o g r a p h i c a l l y t o r e s p o n d e n t s  V a n c o u v e r , B.C., a n d B e l l i n g h a m , 2.  i n t h e f o l l o w i n g ways: living in  Wa..  R e s p o n d e n t a g e was r e s t r i c t e d t o a g e s 20 t o 40 y e a r s ,  thus  l i m i t i n g t h e g e n e r a l i z a b i 1 i t y of r e s u l t s t o e i t h e r younger or o l d e r women. 3.  R e s p o n d e n t s w e r e r e s t r i c t e d t o women s e l f - r e p o r t i n g a f e m i n i s t  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f 7 o r more on t h e F e m i n i s t I d e n t i f i c a t i o n  Scale,  t h e r e f o r e l i m i t i n g t h e u s e f u l n e s s of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of r e s u l t s t o a n o n - f e m i n i s t p o p u l a t i o n o f women.  41 Social Relationships  CHAPTER FOUR  RESULTS  O v e r v i ew This chapter presents t h e r e s u l t s of t h i s study. are o r g a n i s e d i n t o f o u r s e c t i o n s which  These r e s u l t s  a r e , a) D e s c r i p t i o n o f  R e s p o n d e n t s a n d F r i e n d s , b) R e s u l t s P e r t a i n i n g t o H y p o t h e s i s £ 1 , c)Results P e r t a i n i n g t o Hypothesis  £ 2 , d) R e s u l t s P e r t a i n i n g t o  H y p o t h e s i s £3. Hotelling's t2 mulitvariate test f o rstatistical used  s i g n i f i c a n c e was  i n t h e a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e because of i t s s p e c i a l a p p l i c a t i o n  when t h e r e i s o n l y o n e i n d e p e n d e n t sexual preference. SPS s c o r e means.  v a r i a b l e , which  T h i s t e s t was u s e d  i s in this  i n a n a l y s i s o f t o t a l CFS a n d  U n i v a r i a t e F t e s t s o f s i g n i f i c a n c e were used  a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e of each of t h e t w e l v e s u b s c a l e s . were computed t o d e t e r m i n e  study,  i n the  Chi-squares  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the frequency  distributions  of t h e c l o s e n e s s r a t i n g a s w e l l a s i n c o m e a n d o c c u p a t i o n  frequencies.  D e s c r i p t i o n of R e s p o n d e n t s and F r i e n d s To o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t s p e c i f i c r e s p o n d e n t ,  f r i e n d , and  r e l a t i o n s h i p c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , d a t a was o b t a i n e d f r o m e a c h o f t h e 70 respondents,  35 l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women a n d 35 h e t e r o s e x u a l  feminist  42 Relationships  Social women. Respondents  a n d f r i e n d s ' e t h n i c i t y was p r e d o m i n a n t l y C a u c a s i a n ,  w i t h 95.77. o f r e s p o n d e n t s a n d 97.17. o f f r i e n d s r e p o r t i n g t h i s . A l l r e s p o n d e n t s r a t e d t h e m s e l v e s a t 7 o r h i g h e r on a s c a l e o f f r o m 1 t o 10 measuring t h e i r l e v e l of f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . r a n g e d f r o m 22 t o 40 (M=32). (M=33).  Respondents'  ages  F r i e n d s ' a g e s r a n g e d f r o m 24 t o 52  A m a j o r i t y of both r e s p o n d e n t s and f r i e n d s were n o t m a r r i e d ,  61.4'/. a n d 54.37. r e s p e c t i v e l y .  I n t e r e s t i n g l y however,  a l t h o u g h 827. o f  t h e l e s b i a n r e s p o n d e n t s r e p o r t e d b e i n g u n m a r r i e d , 747. a l s o r e p o r t e d being i n a committed  r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h a n o t h e r woman.  Of t h e  h e t e r o s e x u a l g r o u p , 407. r e p o r t e d b e i n g u n m a r r i e d a n d p r e d i c t a b l y , 607. reported being i n a committed  relationship.  I t may be t h a t a q u e s t i o n  r e g a r d i n g " m a r i t a l s t a t u s " i s c o n f u s i n g or p r e s e n t s a dilemma f o r l e s b i a n women who a r e i n c o m m i t t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h a n o t h e r woman. H a v i n g no s o c i a l l y a c c e p t e d l a b e l f o r t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p t h e y may o r may n o t c a l l  i ta "marriage".  r e g a r d i n g committed  The d a t a r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e q u e s t i o n  r e l a t i o n s h i p may g i v e a t r u e r p i c t u r e o f t h e  l e s b i a n group f o r t h i s r e a s o n .  (See T a b l e s 1 and 2 ) .  Seventy-seven  p e r c e n t o f r e s p o n d e n t s a n d 62.97. o f f r i e n d s h a d no c h i l d r e n .  Of t h e  r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p , 887. o f l e s b i a n women a n d 657. o f h e t e r o s e x u a l women had no c h i l d r e n .  Of t h e i r f r i e n d s , 827. o f l e s b i a n women a n d 427. o f  h e t e r o s e x u a l women w e r e w i t h o u t c h i l d r e n . T a b l e 3 p r e s e n t s r e s p o n d e n t s ' and f r i e n d s ' o c c u p a t i o n s .  Sixty-  p e r c e n t o f r e s p o n d e n t s a n d 54.37. o f f r i e n d s w e r e p r o f e s s i o n a l s .  Of  t h e t w o r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p s , 62.87. o f l e s b i a n s a n d 57.17. o f h e t e r o s e x u a l s were p r o f e s s i o n a l s .  There were a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n of  43 Relationships  Social Table 1 F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s  f o r R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s '  Marital  Status  Respondents  F r i ends  Single  43  M a r r i ed  18 ( 2 5 . 77.)  24 ( 3 4 . 37.)  Separated  3.0  ( 4 . 3'/.)  3.0  (4.37.)  Di v o r c e d  6.0  (8.67.)  5.0  (7.17.)  (61.47.)  38  L e s b i ans  (54.37.)  Heterosexuals  Single  29  M a r r i ed  4.0  (11.47.)  14 (407.)  Separated  1.0  (2.87.)  2.0  (5.77.)  Di v o r c e d  1.0  (2.87.)  5.0  (7.17.)  Note. Percentages  (827.)  14  (407.)  i n parentheses  Table 2 F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s f o r C o m m i t t e d  Relationships  Respondents Yes  47 ( 6 7 . 17.)  No  22 (31 . 47.) Lesbians  Yes  26 (74.37.)  No  9 ( 2 . 57.)  Heterosexuals 21  (607.)  13 ( 3 7 . 17.)  Social  44 Relationships  l e s b i a n t h a n h e t e r o s e x u a l women i n b o t h t h e s e m i - o r u n s k i l l e d  worker  c a t e g o r y , 11.47. t o 2,87. r e s p e c t i v e l y , a n d t h e e x e c u t i v e o r m a n a g e r i a l c a t e g o r y , 57. t o 07. r e s p e c t i v e l y .  A c h i - s q u a r e was c o m p u t e d t o  d e t e r m i n e i f t h e r e were o c c u p a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two groups.  No s i g n i f i c a n t o c c u p a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n l e s b i a n a n d  h e t e r o s e x u a l women w e r e f o u n d .  (See Table 3 ) .  E i g h t y - t w o p e r c e n t o f r e s p o n d e n t s ' a n d 81.57. o f f r i e n d s ' were above $10,000.  incomes  I n t e r m s o f t h e t w o r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p s , 45.77. o f  l e s b i a n a n d 487. o f h e t e r o s e x u a l women h a d i n c o m e s b e t w e e n $ 1 0 , 0 0 0 a n d $20,000.  F o r t y - f i v e p e r c e n t o f l e s b i a n a n d 25.77. o f h e t e r o s e x u a l  women h a d i n c o m e s a b o v e $ 2 0 , 0 0 0 .  A c h i - s q u a r e was c o m p u t e d t o  a s c e r t a i n income d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two g r o u p s .  No s i g n i f i c a n t  i n c o m e d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e f o u n d b e t w e e n l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l women. (See T a b l e 4 ) . D a t a c o n c e r n i n g l e v e l o f e d u c a t i o n s h o w e d t h a t 75.77. o f r e s p o n d e n t s a n d 62.97. o f f r i e n d s h a d c o m p l e t e d a b a s i c degree.  university  I n t h e r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p s 42.8"/ o f l e s b i a n a n d 257. o f  h e t e r o s e x u a l women h a d c o m p l e t e d g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .  Twenty p e r c e n t of  l e s b i a n r e s p o n d e n t s ' f r i e n d s a n d 207. o f h e t e r o s e x u a l r e s p o n d e n t s ' f r i e n d s had completed g r a d u a t e s c h o o l .  (See Table 5 ) .  L e n g t h o f f r i e n d s h i p s r a n g e d f r o m 0 t o o v e r 20 y e a r s (11=3.9). N i n e t y p e r c e n t o f r e s p o n d e n t s r e p o r t e d f r i e n d s h i p s o f f r o m 0 t o 15 y e a r s d u r a t i o n , 7 2 . 97. b e i n g f r o m 0 t o 10 y e a r s . c a t e g o r y was f r o m 6 t o 10 y e a r s , a t 32.97..  The l a r g e s t  It i s interesting  single that  r e s p o n d e n t s were a s k e d t o t h i n k of t h e i r c l o s e s t f e m a l e f r i e n d , and t h a t t h e mean l e n g t h o f r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e c h o s e n f r i e n d was o n l y  Social  Relationshi  Table 3 F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s o f R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s '  O c c u p a t i on  Respondents  Occupations  F r i ends  Exec./Manageri a l  2 (2.97.)  2  Professional  42  (607.)  38  Cleri cal  5  (7.17.)  Skilled  2 (2.97.)  5  Semi/Un-skilled  5  7 (107.)  Student  10  Military  1 (1.47.)  1 (1.47.)  Homemaker  1 (1.47.)  4 (5.77.)  Other  2 (2.97.)  1 (1.47.)  (7.17.) (14.37.)  L e s b i ans  (2.9%) (54.37.)  4 (5.77.)  6  (7.17.)  (8.67.)  Heterosexuals  Exec./Manageri a l  2 (5.07.)  P r o f e s s i onal  22 ( 6 2 . B7.)  20 ( 5 7 . 17.)  Clerical  1 (1.47.)  4 (5.77.)  Skilled  1 (1.47.)  1 (1.47.)  Semi/Un-ski1 l e d  4  (5.77.)  1 (1.47.)  Student  3  (4.37.)  7 (107.)  Mi 1 i t a r y  1 (1.47.)  Other  1 (1.47.)  X2(8,  N=70) = 9 . 2 9 5 , p_<. 05  1 (1.47.)  46 Relationships  Social  Table 4 F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s of R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s '  Income  Respondents  Income  Friends  Under $10^000  12 ( 1 7 . I X )  12 (17.17.)  $10,000-*20,000  33 (47.17.)  27 (38.67.)  Above $20,000  25 ( 3 5 . 77.)  1 (1.47.)  N/A  1 (1.4%)  Income  Lesbi ans  Heterosexuals  Under $10,000  3 (8.57.)  9 (25.77.)  *10,000-$20,000  16 ( 4 5 . 77.)  17 (48.57.)  Above $20,000  16 ( 4 5 . 77.)  9 ( 2 5 . 77.)  X2(2,  N=70) = 4 . 9 9 , p<.05  Social  47 Relationships  Table 5 F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s o f R e s p o n d e n t s ' and F r i e n d s ' H i g h e s t of  Level  Education  Highest  Level  Respondents  F r i ends  10th  Brade  2 (2.97.)  3  High  School  14 (207.)  18 ( 2 5 . 77.)  1 (1.47.)  5  Uni v e r s i t y  29 (41 . 47.)  30 ( 4 2 . 97.)  Srad.  24 ( 3 4 . 37.)  14  Tech.  School  School  Highest  Level  L e s b i ans  (4.37.)  (7.17.)  (20.07.)  Heterosexuals  10th  Grade  1 (1.47.)  1 (1.47.)  High  School  6  8 (227.)  Tech.  School  (177.)  1 (1.47.)  Uni v e r s i t y  12 ( 3 4 . 27.)  17 ( 4 8 . 57.)  Grad. School  15  9 (257.)  (42.87.)  48 Social Relationships 3.9 y e a r s .  T h i s may h a v e h a d t o do w i t h f a c t o r s s u c h a s B e r n a r d  i d e n t i f i e d , f o r instance increased geographic  m o b i l i t y , an i n c r e a s e i n  t h e number o f women i n t h e work f o r c e , a s w e l l a s w i t h t h e a g e and developmental  t a s k s of t h e respondent  age group.  Of t h e s e  r e l a t i o n s h i p s , 207. o f l e s b i a n women's f r i e n d s h i p s a n d 2.87. o f heterosexual The  women's f r i e n d s h i p s h a d h a d a p r e v i o u s s e x u a l  f a c t t h a t 62.87. o f l e s b i a n r e s p o n d e n t s  component.  c h o s e l e s b i a n f r i e n d s and  o n l y 207. r e p o r t e d a p r e v i o u s s e x u a l i n v o l v e m e n t  would appear t o  q u e s t i o n r e c e n t s u g g e s t i o n t h a t i n t h e l e s b i a n community  boundaries  between s o c i a l and e r o t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e i l l d e f i n e d ( B r i s t o w and Pern,  1984).  R e s p o n d e n t s were asked  t o r a t e t h e i r f r i e n d s h i p on a s c a l e o f 1 t o  10 a s t o t h e d e g r e e o f c l o s e n e s s t h e y e x p e r i e n c e d Responses ranged  f r o m 3 t o 10 ( M = 7 . 5 ) , c l o s e l y r e s e m b l i n g  ( 1 9 8 2 ) mean c l o s e n e s s r a t i n g o f 7.24. respondents  with the friend.  a n d 85.77. o f h e t e r o s e x u a l  in t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p a t 7 or above.  S i x t y percent respondents  Lustig's  of l e s b i a n  rated the closeness  (See Table 6 ) .  R e s u l t s P e r t a i n i n g t o H y p o t h e s e s £1: Hypothesis  1 s t a t e s : ( a ) L e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women w i l l  obtain  t o t a l a n d s u b s c a l e mean s c o r e s on t h e CFS a s w e l l a s h i g h e r r a t i n g s , than w i l l  heterosexual  T a b l e 7 s h o w s mean t o t a l d e v i a t i o n s on t h e C F S .  higher  closeness  f e m i n i s t women.  and s u b s c a l e s c o r e s and s t a n d a r d  T a b l e 8 shows u n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t s f o r s u b s c a l e s  as w e l l a s a n o n s i g n i f i c a n t t 2 v a l u e o f . 8 1 7 , p<.05.  This i n d i c a t e s  Social  49 Relationships  Table 6 F r e q u e n c i e s and P e r c e n t a g e s of C l o s e n e s s  Rating  11=  Ratings  Respondents  3  1 (1.47.)  4  1 (1.47.)  5  6 ( 8 . 77.)  6  8 ( 1 1.47.)  7  12 (17.17.)  8  26  (37.17.)  9  11  (15.77.)  10  5(7.17.)  7.514  S.D.=  1.49 Rating  Lesbians  Heterosexuals  3  1 (1.47.)  4  1 (1.47.)  5  5 (7.17.)  1 ( 1 . 47.)  6  4 ( 5 . 77.)  4 ( 5 . 77.)  7  5 (7.17.)  7 ( 107.)  8  12 (34.27.)  14 (207.)  9  5 ( 7 . 17.)  6 ( 8 . 67.)  10  2 ( 2 . 97.)  3 ( 4 . 37.)  50 Social Relationships t h a t t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n o v e r a l l c l o s e n e s s l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women a n d h e t e r o s e x u a l their close friendships.  f e m i n i s t women p e r c e i v e a n d r e p o r t i n  T a b l e 6 ( p . 5 1 ) s h o w s mean r a t i n g s o f t h e  c l o s e n e s s r a t i n g s c a l e . A c h i - s q u a r e computed r e v e a l s  that there i s  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p s i n t h e s e r a t i n g s . Hypothesis  i ( c ) was t h e r e f o r e s u p p o r t e d ,  reject the null hypothesis.  a n d no e v i d e n c e  found t o  On b o t h t h e c l o s e n e s s r a t i n g s c a l e a n d  t h e CFS l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women a n d h e t e r o s e x u a l f e m i n i s t women r e p o r t no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e c l o s e n e s s o f t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h a target friend.  These f i n d i n g s r e p l i c a t e those of L u s t i g  Results P e r t a i n i n g to Hypothesis Hypothesis  £2  2 s t a t e s : L e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women w i l l  s c o r e s than h e t e r o s e x u a l  obtain higher  mean  f e m i n i s t women on t h e s u b s c a l e s o f S t a b l e  P e r s o n a l Community and Mutual  Accessibility.  Refer t o Table 7 f o r  mean s c o r e s , s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s f o r t h e s e s u b s c a l e s . t h e s e s u b s c a l e s f o l l o w i n T a b l e 8.  F values f o r  The F v a l u e f o r t h e S t a b l e  P e r s o n a l C o m m u n i t y s u b s c a l e i s . 0 0 1 , p<.05. Mutual  (1982).  The F v a l u e f o r t h e  A c c e s s i b i l i t y s u b s c a l e i s . 2 5 6 , p<.05.  Both F values a r e  n o n s i g n i f i c a n t . T h i s i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women a n d h e t e r o s e x u a l  f e m i n i s t women on  t h e i r r e p o r t s of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of s t a b l e p e r s o n a l community and mutual a c c e s s i b i l i t y i n t h e i r c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s . rejected. the n u l l  No e v i d e n c e hypothesis.  Hypothesis  2is  was f o u n d w h i c h w o u l d a l l o w t h e r e j e c t i o n o f  51 Soci al R e l a t i o n s h i p s Table 7 Means and S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s f o r CFS S u b s c a l e s and T o t a l S c o r e s  Sub s e a l e  Mean Lesbian  Standard Deviation Heterosexual  Lesbian  Heterosexual  N  74.08  76.80  9.78  9.01  MA  82.17  83.25  9.53  8.36  SPC  59.65  59.71  7.00  7.06  PIE  49.17  49.51  7.43  6.96  PU  92.86  94.80  15.75  11.41  UR  61.20  61.48  5.74  6.69  Mean Total Score  419.13  425.56  Table 8 U n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t s With S i x S u b s c a l e s  Subscale  H o t e l l i n g s t 2 = .817  F  N  1.45  MA  .256  SPC  .001  PIE  .039  PU  .349  UR  .036  52 Social Relationships Table 9 Means a n d S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s f o r S u b s c a l e s a n d T o t a l S c o r e s o f The SPS  Mean Subscale  Standard Deviation  Lesbian  Heterosexual  A  14.26  14.97  2.58  1.52  SI  14.28  14.54  2.06  1.85  NU  11.28  11.57  2.95  2.63  RW  14.37  14.48  2.04  1.44  RA  15.22  15.31  1.45  1.54  G  15.05  15. 40  1.60  1.21  Mean Total Score  84.45  86. 27  Lesbian  T a b l e 10 U n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t s With  Subscales  Subscale  H o t e l l i n g s t 2 = .883  F  A  1.98  SI  .300  NU  .182  RW  .073  RA  .056  G  1.01  Heterosexual  53 Social Relationships  Results Pertaining to Hypothesis  £3  H y p o t h e s i s 3 s t a t e s : L e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r mean s c o r e s on t h e A t t a c h m e n t R e l i a b l e A l l i a n c e s u b s c a l e s of t h e SPS, than w i l l  obtain  and S e n s e o f heterosexual  f e m i n i s t women. T a b l e s 9 and 10 show m e a n s , s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s , and F v a l u e s f o r t h e s i x s u b s c l a e s o f t h e SPS.  The F v a l u e s f o r t h e A t t a c h m e n t  and  S e n s e o f R e l i a b l e A l l i a n c e s u b s c a l e s a r e 1.98, p<.05, and . 0 5 , p<.05 r e s p e c t i v e l y , both n o n s i g n i f i c a n t . I t appears  from t h i s d a t a t h a t  t h e r e a r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n r e s p o n d e n t  groups  on mean  s c o r e s of t h e s e two s u b s c a l e s . H y p o t h e s i s 3 i s r e j e c t e d . D i s c u s s i o n of t h e s e r e s u l t s , i n c l u d i n g d i s c u s s i o n of t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of Type I I e r r o r r e s u l t i n g i n n o n - s i g n i f i c a n c e , w i l l d i s c u s s e d i n t h e next  chapter.  be  Social  54 Relationships  CHAPTER F I V E  D I S C U S S I O N AND SUMMARY  O v e r v i ew This study construct women.  explored  one p a r t i c u l a r a r e a w i t h i n t h e g e n e r a l  of homosociality,  t h a t of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p bonds between  The o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e s t u d y  were t o a d d r e s s t h e f o l l o w i n g  quest ions: 1. Do l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t a n d h e t e r o s e x u a l  f e m i n i s t women's f r i e n d s h i p s  d i f f e r , a n d i f s o , how? 2. W h i c h o f t h e t w o m a j o r t h e o r i e s o f h o m o s o c i a l i t y c l o s e l y w i t h women's s e l f - r e p o r t o f t h e i r a c t u a l  a g r e e s more  friendship  experi ence? These o b j e c t i v e s were a d d r e s s e d t h r o u g h a s k i n g consider and  both t h e q u a l i t a t i v e components of t h e i r c l o s e  t h e p r o v i s i o n s of these r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  (through  r a t i n g themselves at 7 or higher  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ) were g i v e n Personal  respondent groups t o  a questionnaire  D a t a S h e e t , The C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p  P r o v i s i o n s Scale, along  friendships  R e s p o n d e n t s who q u a l i f i e d on a s c a l e o f f e m i n i s t package c o n t a i n i n g a S c a l e , a n d The S o c i a l  w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s a s t o how t o c o m p l e t e t h e m .  55 Social Relationships  P r o f i l e of Respondents The  average  respondent  was a C a u c a s i a n ,  s i n g l e , f e m i n i s t woman,  a b o u t 33 y e a r s o f a g e . S h e h a d no c h i l d r e n .  She had c o m p l e t e d  at  l e a s t one u n i v e r s i t y d e g r e e a n d was most l i k e l y a p r o f e s s i o n a l e a r n i n g between $10,000 and $20,000.  The l e n g t h o f h e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h h e r  t a r g e t f r i e n d was a p p r o x i m a t e l y e i t h e r a t work o r t h r o u g h  4 y e a r s a n d t h e y h a d p r o b a b l y met  mutual f r i e n d s .  I f t h e respondent  l e s b i a n woman s h e l i k e l y c h o s e a l e s b i a n f r i e n d was  a heterosexual  target friend  was a  (62.87.), a n d i f s h e  woman s h e w i t h o n e e x c e p t i o n c h o s e a h e t e r o s e x u a l  (98.67.).  The f r i e n d s h i p s w e r e g e n e r a l l y f e l t t o be  c l o s e (M=7.5) a n d s a t i s f y i f y i n g . Lustig  ( 1 9 8 2 ) r a i s e d a number o f q u e s t i o n s w h i c h  t h i s s t u d y by a d d i t i o n s t o t h e " P e r s o n a l D a t a S h e e t " . concerns  The f i r s t  a s u g g e s t i o n by h e r t h a t t h e r e may be i m p o r t a n t  d i f f e r e n c e s between h e t e r o s e x u a l p.149).  were a d d r e s s e d i n  women a n d l e s b i a n women  class (1982,  A q u e s t i o n p e r t a i n i n g t o h i g h e s t l e v e l o f e d u c a t i o n was a d d e d  to that of o c c u p a t i o n .  Chi-squares  c o m p u t e d on b o t h r e v e a l e d no  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s , a n d p r o v i d e no e v i d e n c e suggestion.  t o support  As L u s t i g s t a t e s h o w e v e r , a q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g  this parents'  h i g h e s t i n c o m e m i g h t be u s e f u l i n i t s p o s s i b l e r e f l e c t i o n o f c l a s s l e v e l of t h e r e s p o n d e n t s '  families.  L u s t i g was a l s o c o n c e r n e d  t h e p o s s i b i l i t y Df p l a t o n i c f r i e n d s h i p s h a v i n g h a d a p r e v i o u s  with sexual  c o m p o n e n t , w h e t h e r o r n o t t h i s was i d i o s y n c r a t i c , a n d what e f f e c t i t c o u l d h a v e on t h e p r e s e n t study asked  l e v e l of i n t i m a c y i n t h e f r i e n d s h i p .  t h e q u e s t i o n d i r e c t l y and found  t h a t 207. o f l e s b i a n  This  56 respondents  and  1,47. of h e t e r o s e x u a l  respondents  Social Relationships r e p o r t e d h a v i n g had a  p r e v i o u s l y s e x u a l component i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e i r f r i e n d . This response in the heterosexual  suggests  t h a t i t i s an i d i o s y n c r a t i c e x p e r i e n c e  g r o u p , b u t l e s s so i n t h e l e s b i a n g r o u p .  e f f e c t of t h i s on t h e p r e s e n t  l e v e l of i n t i m a c y was  t h i s s t u d y and w o u l d be i n t e r e s t i n g t o  F i n d i n g s of t h e  £1.  and not  Result:  heterosexual  experiencing  not d e t e r m i n e d  in  explore.  T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n  f e m i n i s t women on t h e c l o s e n e s s t h e y  in their close friendships.  the n u l l h y p o t h e s i s  i s not r e j e c t e d .  Hypothesis  report  1(c) i s  accepted  H y p o t h e s e s 1 ( a ) and  1(b)  are  supported. P i s c u s s i on:  be c o n s i d e r e d  the t e s t .  p o s s i b i l i t y of T y p e I I e r r o r must  b i a s ( t h e i n f l u e n c e of  an i n s e n s i t i v e m e a s u r i n g  T h i s s t u d y has a s a m p l i n g  feminism),  instrument.  b i a s w h i c h may  be a s s o c i a t e d  m e t h o d s r e s u l t i n g i n e x t r e m e s of s o c i o - e c o n o m i c  educational status.  A  h a v e c o n t r i b u t e d t o p r o d u c e a l a c k of power i n  These i n c l u d e sampling  s a m p l e s i z e and  recruitment  The  i n d i s c u s s i n g t h e f i n d i n g s of n o n - s i g n i f i c a n c e .  number of f a c t o r s may  The  The  Study  Hypothesis l e s b i a n and  target  This could lead to homogeneity i n the  with and  sample.  r e s u l t s of t h i s s t u d y h o w e v e r , q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e r e i s an  actual sampling  b i a s r e s u l t i n g i n homogeneity, given that the  d e v i a t i o n s of t h e s c o r e s a r e as g r e a t as t h e y  are.  standard  Social  57 Relationships  Another p o s s i b i l i t y which could help e x p l a i n t h e lack of s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e c o u l d be t h e u s e o f an i n s e n s i t i v e m e a s u r i n g instrument. and  The CFS a n d SPS a s d e v e l o p e d h a v e b e e n shown t o be v a l i d  r e l i a b l e measures of t h e q u a l i t a t i v e components of c l o s e  f r i e n d s h i p and of t h e p r o v i s i o n s of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . t h a t u s e d i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r way, t h e y d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two g r o u p s . consideration  i n f u t u r e study  are not s e n s i t i v e to subtle  T h i s may be a  of t h i s  methodological  construct.  I t may be t h a t w i t h an N o f 35 i n e a c h g r o u p , t h e t e s t power.  However, w i t h such a small  the r e s u l t i n g small  I t may b e  lacked  d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n mean s c o r e s a n d  e f f e c t s i z e , an u n m a n a g e a b l y l a r g e s a m p l e w o u l d be  needed t o p o s s i b l y i l l u m i n a t e any e x i s t i n g d i f f e r e n c e between t h e two groups (Cohen, 1977).  Thus, i t i s d o u b t f u l  that sample s i z e i s a  s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r i n t h e f i n d i n g o f no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e the two g r o u p s .  In any c a s e ,  i f s u c h an e x t r e m e l y  to f i n d a d i f f e r e n c e , i t probably  between  l a r g e sample were  w o u l d be o f t h e k i n d r e f e r r e d t o a s  s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t but p r a c t i c a l l y t r i v i a l .  H y p o t h e s i s £2.  Result:  l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l  T h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n  f e m i n i s t women i n t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e  q u a l i t a t i v e components of " S t a b l e Personal Accessibility" i n their close friendships. and  no e v i d e n c e i s f o u n d t o r e j e c t t h e n u l l  H y p o t h e s i s £3. experience  Result: Lesbian  and r e p o r t  of t h e  Community" and "Mutual Hypothesis 2 i s rejected, hypothesis.  and h e t e r o s e x u a l  feminist  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e r e g a r d i n g t h e  women  Social provisions  58 Relationships  of " A t t a c h m e n t " and "Sense of R e l i a b l e A l l i a n c e " i n t h e i r  close friendships.  T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e s u f f i c i e n t t o r e j e c t t h e n u l l  hypothesis. P i s c u s s i on: have been c h a r a c t e r i z e d provides 1979,  Friendships  of l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t  as i n v o l v i n g a " l e v e l of c a r i n g  women  (which)  f o r a s t a b l e f a m i l y - l i k e commitment t o one a n o t h e r "  (Frum,  p . 4 3 ) , s u p p o r t and a s e n s e of s e c u r i t y i n knowing t h e f r i e n d c a n  be r e l i e d upo"n, a s e n s e o f s a f e t y a n d s e c u r i t y , t h e f r e e d o m t o c o u n t on a s s i s t a n c e  under any c i r c u m s t a n c e s (Weiss, 1974). T h i s  obvious  i n - g r o u p i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ( B r o o k s , 1981) o p e r a t e s w i t h i n a c o n t e x t secrecy  w h i c h seems t o f a c i l i t a t e a r a p i d f o r m a t i o n  of  of f r i e n d s h i p s .  T h e s e f r i e n d s h i p s t e n d t o e x p r e s s b o t h a f a m i l y - l i k e c o m m i t m e n t a n d an expectation  of mutual s u p p o r t and  availability.  f i n d i n g s o f no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s and  heterosexual  feminist  been o b t a i n e d  actual  between f r i e n d s h i p s of l e s b i a n  women?  Much o f t h e d a t a r e g a r d i n g has  Why t h e n t h e  s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s of l e s b i a n  through observation  lesbian communities.  women  or participant-observation  of  I t may be t h a t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f  r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s o f l e s b i a n women d e s c r i b e d  by  t h e s e w r i t e r s - such as t h e k i n q u a l i t y , mutual a c c e s s i b i l i t y , sense of a t t a c h m e n t , a n d s e n s e o f r e l i a b l e a l l i a n c e - h a v e more t o do w i t h community l i v i n g  ( p e r h a p s i n t e n s i f i e d by b e i n g a  community! than with  sexual  preference.  marginalized  I t may a l s o be t h a t  f i n d i n g s were, a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y , due t o o b s e r v e r b i a s . women i n t h i s s t u d y w e r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y f i n d i n g s of previous  researchers  these  The l e s b i a n  l i v i n g i n community, thus t h e  may n o t a p p l y .  59 Relationships  Social Age  may be a f a c t o r a f f e c t i n g t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y .  With a  mean a g e o f 3 2 , r e s p o n d e n t s w o u l d t e n d t o h a v e r e s o l v e d t h e developmental task of i n t i m a c y versus  isolation  ( E r i c k s o n , 1950), and  whether p r e s e n t l y w i t h p a r t n e r s or n o t , would tend t o have a t l e a s t made some d e c i s i o n s a b o u t t h e r o l e t h i s w i l l p l a y i n t h e i r l i v e s . a r e s u l t , they tend  t o be i n v o l v e d i n t h e i s s u e o f g e n e r a t i v i t y  s t a g n a t i o n , p a r t of which i s b u i l d i n g and m a i n t a i n i n g  As versus  friendships.  It  w o u l d be i n t e r e s t i n g t o e x p l o r e c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s o f women i n o t h e r developmental stages.  Women i n e a r l y a d u l t h o o d  a s w e l l a s o l d e r women  have been e x p o s e d t o d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l / c u l t u r a l i n f l u e n c e s than r e s p o n d e n t g r o u p , one of which i s t h e d i f f e r e n t time  this  i n each group's  l i f e t h a t t h e y w e r e a f f e c t e d by t h e women's movement.  T h i s may o r may  not p r e d i c t d i f f e r e n c e s i n s o c i a l b o n d i n g . This study "Sixty-two  d i d not s p e c i f y sexual  percent  heterosexuals  preference  o f l e s b i a n s c h o s e l e s b i a n f r i e n d s , w h i l e 98.67. o f  chose heterosexual  friends.  f e m i n i s t woman c h o s e a l e s b i a n f r i e n d . the p r o p o r t i o n  of t h e t a r g e t f r i e n d .  Only one h e t e r o s e x u a l  I t may be t h a t t h i s r e l a t e s t o  o f l e s b i a n women i n t h e g e n e r a l  population, to  p r o x i m i t y , or t o perhaps unresolved  homophobic f e e l i n g s amongst t h e  heterosexual  C a p l a n (1981) p o i n t s o u t t h a t  f e m i n i s t respondents.  d e s p i t e t h e e f f e c t s o f t h e women's wovement a n d a g e n e r a l s o c i e t a l awareness of t h e homosexual l i f e s t y l e , b a r r i e r b e t w e e n women.  homophobia remains a  The n o n - s p e c i f i c a t i o n o f s e x u a l  t h e t a r g e t f r i e n d may a l s o h a v e o b s c u r r e d " s e p a r a t i s t s " and " i n t e g r a t i o n i s t s " .  increase i n  preference of  d i f f e r e n c e s between l e s b i a n  60 Relationships  Social  General  Discussion  One  other  p o s s i b i l i t y e x i s t s however, t o e x p l a i n t h e f i n d i n g s of  nonsignificant accurate there  d i f f e r e n c e s , a n d t h a t i s t h a t t h e f i n d i n g s a r e an  r e f l e c t i o n of r e a l i t y .  i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n l e s b i a n a n d  feminist  women i n t h e d e g r e e o f c l o s e n e s s  close f r i e n d s h i p s with and  They s u g g e s t , a n d i t may b e , t h a t  other  women.  p u r p o s e s , t h e same p o p u l a t i o n  without t h e v a r i a b l e of sexual exerted  of L u s t i g  they experience i n t h e i r  I t may be t h a t f o r a l l i n t e n t s  was t e s t e d .  preference  l i t t l e influence, the populations  ( f e m i n i s t women).  heterosexual  Or, i n other  which appeared t o have may h a v e b e e n h o m o g e n e o u s  H y p o t h e s i s 1 f i n d i n g s do s u p p o r t p r e v i o u s  e x p e r i e n c e t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h e i r intimacy  One  evidence  ( 1 9 8 2 ) , a n d s u g g e s t i o n s o f S i m o n a n d Gagnon ( 1 9 7 6 ) , a n d  O b e r s t o n e and Sukonek ( 1 9 7 6 ) , t h a t l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l  similar  words,  women may  needs i n f r i e n d s h i p i n  ways. might s p e c u l a t e  that needs f o r i n t i m a c y  could  differ  depending  on w h e t h e r o r n o t an i n d i v i d u a l was i n a c o m m i t t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p . a n a l y s i s of variance  was c o m p u t e d w i t h  respondent groups f o r t h e  e f f e c t o f a c o m m i t t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p on c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p . study's instruments,  An  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s  Using t h i s  were found between  women i n c o m m i t t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s o r n o t i n c o m m i t t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The  e v i d e n c e seems t o s u g g e s t t h a t w h e t h e r o r n o t i n c o m m i t t e d  r e l a t i o n s h i p s , f e m i n i s t women t e n d t o meet t h e i r n e e d s i n c l o s e friendships  i n s i m i l a r ways.  four questionnaire  I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note however,  packages were r e t u r n e d  i n c o m p l e t e by l e s b i a n  that  61 Social Relationships respondents  w i t h t h e e x p l a n a t i o n t h a t t h e y r e a l l y h a d no c l o s e woman  f r i e n d other than t h e i r p a r t n e r . completed  Two o t h e r l e s b i a n  respondents  t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e p a c k a g e b u t s t a t e d t h e y had d i f f i c u l t y  b e c a u s e t h e y were u n a b l e  t o use t h e i r p a r t n e r f o r t h e CFS.  I t h a s b e e n shown t h a t a t t h e l e v e l o f c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p e v i d e n c e does not support  a d i f f e r e n c e between l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l  f e m i n i s t women. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p a p p e a r t o r e l a t e more t o women a s a g r o u p a n d t h e i r a f f i l i a t i v e s t y l e o f r e l a t i n g , a n d t e n d n o t t o be d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e on t h e b a s i s o f s e x u a l Rubin  preference.  d r e w on C h o d o r o w ( 1 9 8 5 ) t o p o i n t o u t t h e c o n n e c t i o n  powerful  between t h e  m o t h e r - d a u g h t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p a n d a d u l t women's s a m e - s e x  friendships.  P e p l a u a n d Amaro ( 1 9 8 2 ) s e e c h i l d h o o d  e x p e r i e n c e s of g i r l s i n t h i s c u l t u r e as emphasizing  socialization emotional  e x p r e s s i v e n e s s a n d l o v e a s c e n t r a l t o women's c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s . T h e s e t h e m e s c a n be s e e n , t h e y s u g g e s t ,  i n a d u l t r e l a t i o n s h i p s of both  l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l  and P e p l a u , 1979).  women ( C o c h r a n  The  women's movement o f t h e 1 9 6 0 ' s h a s d o n e much t o r e - l e g i t i m i z e a n d v a l u e women's b o n d s w i t h o n e a n o t h e r . suggestion  Rawlings'  o f a number o f e x t r o p u n i t i v e d e f e n s e  f e m i n i s t women i s r e l e v a n t .  and C a r t e r ' s p a t t e r n s e x h i b i t e d by  C o n c e r n s w i t h b u i l d i n g and s t r e n g t h e n i n g  t i e s w i t h i n t h e i r group through  c l o s e a s s o c i a t i o n s , and t h e r e w a r d s of  t h e " a f f i r m a t i o n o f a common a n d v a l i d l i f e e x p e r i e n c e confidence  i n (women's) own a f f i l i a t i v e s t y l e "  or a f e m i n i s t c o n s c i o u s n e s s ,  as w e l l as  (Bernard,1976,  may o v e r r i d e c o n c e r n s  regarding  p.233), sexual  preference. The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y a p p e a r t o s u p p o r t  Bernard's  t h e s i s of  hi Social Relationships women's b o n d s b e i n g r i c h a n d s a t i s f y i n g .  Regardless of sexual  p r e f e r e n c e f e m i n i s t women i n t h i s s t u d y i d e n t i f i e d s i m i l a r  qualities  of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , a n d r e p o r t e d r e c e i v i n g s i m i l a r s u p p l i e s o f t h e p r o v i s i o n s of these r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  T h e i r f r i e n d s h i p s a r e viewed as  c l o s e and i m p o r t a n t i n t h e i r e v e r y d a y  living.  One w o u l d  assume t h i s  t o be t h e c a s e when s t u d y i n g f e m i n i s t women, a n d t h i s a t t e s t s t o t h e p e r v a s i v e n e s s of homosocial  b o n d s i n women's l i v e s a n d t o t h e  r e l u c t a n c e o f women t o l i v e w i t h an a b s e n c e o f t h e m . One  s t a t e d o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o f u r t h e r t h e p r o c e s s o f  demystifying the l e s b i a n population through experience. cause  reporting actual  life  The i n t e n t i o n was t o c o n t i n u e t h e movement away  from  and e f f e c t t h i n k i n g and i n t h e d i r e c t i o n of r e c o r d i n g b e h a v o i r s  and p e r c e p t i o n s o f e x p e r i e n c e . overwhelmingly  The r e s u l t s o f t h i s  study  s u p p o r t a f o c u s on how l e s b i a n women a r e s i m i l a r i n  v a l u e s a n d e x p e r i e n c e s t o o t h e r women, r a t h e r t h a n t o how t h e y a r e different.  In these times of changing  advantageous to concern  r o l e s and v a l u e s , i t would  o u r s e l v e s w i t h s i m i l a r i t i e s , common  ground,  u n i f y i n g f a c t o r s , r a t h e r than w i t h f a c t i o n s and d i v i s i v e n e s s . f r i e n d s h i p s may b e , a s v i e w e d  by Lens and M y e r h o f f  seem  Women's  ( 1 9 8 5 ) "a p o s s i b l e  a n t i d o t e t o t h e a l i e n a t i n g , d e p e r s o n a l i z i n g e f f e c t s of t h e dominant, m a l e - c o n t r o l l e d c u l t u r e " (1985, p . 3 7 ) , and a s such m a i n t a i n a c r i t i c a l importance  i n women's l i v e s .  Methodological Limitations An ex p o s t f a c t o c o m p a r i s o n  d e s i g n was u s e d  The u s u a l l i m i t a t i o n o f t h i s d e s i g n e x i s t s w h i c h  in this  study.  i s t h a t one cannot  Social i n f e r c a u s e and e f f e c t . R a t h e r ,  one c a n o n l y c o n c l u d e  r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s between t h e v a r i a b l e s .  and c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p e x p e r i e n c e  As d i s c u s s e d considerations hypotheses.  one can  sexual  f o r f e m i n i s t women.  p r e v i o u s l y , t h e r e a r e a number o f p o s s i b l e i n the nonsignificant findings i n this  A methodological  to the sample.  that a  In t h i s study  i n f e r t h a t t h e r e i s v i r t u a l l y no r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n preference  63 Relationships  study's  consideration i s noteworthy with  Three q u e s t i o n n a i r e  regard  p a c k a g e s were e l i m i n a t e d from t h e  sample pool b e c a u s e t h e r e s p o n d e n t s d i d n o t a s s i g n t h e m s e l v e s t o one of t h e two s e x u a l  preference  categories.  Instead,  they created a  t h i r d , t h a t of " b i s e x u a l " , and l o c a t e d t h e m s e l v e s t h e r e . r e s p o n d e n t s who w e r e i n c l u d e d i n t h e s a m p l e p o o l category  Four  also created the  o f " b i s e x u a l " a n d commented t h a t t h e y may h a v e l o c a t e d  t h e m s e l v e s t h e r e i f t h e c h o i c e had been g i v e n . d i d , however, respond t o t h e f o r c e d - c h o i c e t h e m s e l v e s i n one o f t h e two c a t e g o r i e s . b i s e x u a l women  Each of these  women  s i t u a t i o n by p l a c i n g T h i s may i n d i c a t e t h a t  have i n a d v e r t e n t l y been i n c l u d e d i n t h e s a m p l e , which  may p o s s i b l y mask s u b t l e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n h e t e r o s e x u a l  and l e s b i a n  women. A n o t h e r l i m i t a t i o n o f t h e m e t h o d c h o s e n i s t h a t o n l y f e m i n i s t women were s e l e c t e d f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n . W h i l e t h i s assumes a c e r t a i n c o m m i t t m e n t t o women a n d t o a f f i l i a t i o n w i t h o t h e r women, t h i s a l s o l i m i t s t h e g e n e r a l i s a b i 1 i t y of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e study.  The r e s u l t s  a r e l i m i t e d t o f e m i n i s t women, b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 20 a n d 4 0 . A f i n a l possible methodological have been t h e a c t u a l method c h o s e n .  l i m i t a t i o n of the present Greater  study  may  depth and t h e a b i l i t y t o  64 Social Relationships make u s e of i m m e d i a t e f e e d b a c k questionnaires. subject matter t h a n was  Use  may  have been s a c r i f i c e d i n u s i n g  of t h e i n t e r v i e w t e c h n i q u e  may  have, with  this  and w i t h t h i s p o p u l a t i o n , e l i c i t e d a g r e a t e r r i c h n e s s  a l l o w e d by a L i k e r t - s t y l e q u e s t i o n n a i r e .  Summary T h i s study e x p l o r e d the r e l a t i o n s h i p between sexual p r e f e r e n c e c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p a m o n g s t l e s b i a n and h e t e r o s e x u a l  and  f e m i n i s t women. In  o r d e r t o do t h i s , t h e C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e , t h e S o c i a l P r o v i s i o n s S c a l e , and t h e P e r s o n a l D a t a S h e e t w e r e c h o s e n f o r u s e . D a t a S h e e t was  m o d i f i e d from  whether respondent  was  and  and f r i e n d ,  f r i e n d , i n c o m e of r e s p o n d e n t  f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s c a l e . To be i n c l u d e d i n t h e  Seventy  were r e q u i r e d t o r a t e t h e m s e l v e s  and  had  friend, a  study,  a t 7 o r h i g h e r on a s c a l e  feminist identification.  respondents,  35 h e t e r o s e x u a l  and 35 l e s b i a n f e m i n i s t women  were r e c r u i t e d f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n through ( B o x l e y , 1973;  friend,  and f r i e n d , w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e r e  been a p r e v i o u s s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e s p o n d e n t  o f 1 t o 10, m e a s u r i n g  and  sexual  i n v o l v e d in a committed r e l a t i o n s h i p , highest  l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n of r e s p o n d e n t  respondents  Personal  i t s f o r m on t h e o r i g i n a l C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p  S c a l e t o i n c l u d e : number of c h i l d r e n of r e s p o n d e n t p r e f e r e n c e of r e s p o n d e n t  The  Thompson e t a l . , 1 9 7 1 ) ,  f r i e n d s h i p pyramiding  university classes,  meetings,  and g a t h e r i n g s of women. The  d a t a was  analyzed  through  c o m p u t i n g an a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e f o r  t o t a l and s u b s c a l e mean s c o r e s f o r b o t h t h e CFS  and t h e  SPS.  65 Social Relationships Chi-squares  were computed t o a n a l y z e f r e q u e n c y  demographic data.  d i s t r i b u t i o n s of t h e  MANOVAs w e r e a l s o c o m p u t e d f o r c o m m i t t e d  relationship.  The  main c o n c l u s i o n s of t h i s s t u d y a r e :  1.  T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e  t o suggest  of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p and s e x u a l 2.  T h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e  a r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e q u a l i t i e s  preference.  t o suggest  a r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e  p r o v i s i o n s of c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p and s e x u a l 3.  There i s evidence to experience  which  preference.  would s t r o n g l y suggest  t h a t a l l women t e n d  t h e i r c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s s i m i l a r l y , r e g a r d l e s s of sexual  preference. 4.  There i s evidence  t o support  bonds as s t r o n g , wel1-developed,  Bernard's  t h e s i s o f women's  and e n d u r i n g .  homosocial  Social  Relationsh  REFERENCES  Acker, and  J . , B a r r y , K. , & E s s w e l d ,  J . (1981).  F e m i n i s m , -female f r i e n d s  t h e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of i n t i m a c y . Research  i n the  I n t e r w e a v e o f S o c i a l R o l e s ; F r i e n d s h i p . 2_, 7 5 - 1 0 8 . A l b r o , J . C . , 2< T u l l y , C. ( 1 9 7 9 ) .  A study of l e s b i a n l i f e s t y l e s i n t h  homosexual m i c r o - c u l t u r e and t h e h e t e r o s e x u a l Journal of Homosexuality. Armstrong, J.C. P e r c e i v e d agent.  4_(4) , 3 3 1 - 3 4 3 .  i n t i m a t e f r i e n d s h i p as a q u a s i - t h e r a p e u t i c  J o u r n a l of C o u n s e l i n g  B e l l , R.R. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  macro-culture.  Psychology.  1 6 , 2, 1 3 7 - 1 4 1 .  F r i e n d s h i p s o f women a n d o f men. P s y c h o l o g y o f  Women Q u a r t e r l y . 5, 4 0 2 - 4 1 7 . Bernard,  J . (1976).  Social Bernard,  Homosociality  and f e m a l e d e p r e s s i o n .  Journal of  I s s u e s . 3 2 , 213-238.  J . (1981).  The F e m a l e W o r l d . New Y o r k :  B e r n i k o w , L. ( 1 9 8 0 ) .  Among women. New Y o r k :  B r i s t o w , A.R. & P e a r n ,  P.L. ( 1 9 8 4 ) .  The F r e e  H a r p e r a n d Row.  Comment on K r i e g e r ' s  i d e n t i t y and community: r e c e n t s o c i a l  Press.  "Lesbian  science l i t e r a t u r e " .  Signs:  J o u r n a l o f Women i n C u l t u r e a n d S o c i e t y . 9_, 4, 7 2 9 - 7 3 2 . B r i t t a i n , V, ( 1 9 4 0 ) . Brooks,  V. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  Testament of F r i e n d s h i p . Toronto: M i n o r i t y s t r e s s a n d l e s b i a n women.  MacMillan. Lexington,  M a s s . : D.C. H e a t h a n d C o . . B r o w n , B.B. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  A l i f e - s p a n approach t o f r i e n d s h i p : age-related  Social Relationships dimensions of  o f an a g e l e s s r e l a t i o n s h i p . R e s e a r c h  i n t h e Interweave  S o c i a l R o l e s : F r i e n d s h i p . 2, 2 3 - 5 0 .  C a l d w e l l , M.A. & P e p l a u , L.A. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . The b a l a n c e o f power i n r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Sex R o l e s . 1 0 , 7 / 8 , 5 8 7 - 5 9 9 . C a n d y , S.G., T r o l l , L . G . , & L e v y , S.G. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  A developmental  e x p l o r a t i o n o f f r i e n d s h i p f u n c t i o n s i n women. P s y c h o l o g y o f Women Q u a r t e r l y . 5, 4 5 6 - 4 7 1 . Caplan, P.J. (1981).  B a r r i e r s b e t w e e n women. New Y o r k : S p e c t r u m .  Caplan, P . J . (1981).  B e t w e e n women: l o w e r i n g t h e b a r r i e r s .  Personal  Toronto:  Library.  C h a f e t z , J . S . , S a m p s o n , P., B e c k , P., & W e s t , J . ( 1 9 7 4 ) .  A study of  h o m o s e x u a l women. S o c i a l Work. N o v . , 7 1 4 - 7 2 3 . C o b b s , S. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . Psychosomatic  S o c i a l support as a moderator of l i f e M e d i c i n e . 38_, 3 0 0 - 3 1 4 .  C o t t , N.F. ( 1 9 7 7 ) .  The B o n d s o f Womanhood. Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .  C o t t , N. & P l e c k , E. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . and  stress.  A h e r i t a g e o f h e r own. New Y o r k :  Simon  Schuster.  D a v i d s o n , S. ( 1 9 8 3 ) .  The f e l t c o n n e c t i o n : f r i e n d s h i p b e t w e e n women.  A s s o c i a t i o n o f Women i n P s y c h o l o g y , D a v i d s o n , S. , S< P a c k a r d , T. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  Seattle.  The t h e r a p e u t i c v a l u e o f  f r i e n d s h i p b e t w e e n women. P s y c h o l o g y o f Women Q u a r t e r l y . 5_, 495-510. E l l i o t , P. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . for  L e s b i a n i d e n t i t y and s e l f - d i s c l o s u r e .  Feminist Research/Documentation:  Resources  The L e s b i a n I s s u e . 1 2 ( 1 ) ,  51-53. E t t o r r e , B. ( 1 9 8 0 ) .  S a p p h o r e v i s i t e d : a new l o o k a t l e s b i a n i s m .  Social Women's S t u d i e s F a d e r m a n , L. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  International Quarterly. Surpassing  68 Relationships  3_, 4 1 5 - 4 2 8 .  t h e l o v e o f men. New Y o r k :  William  Morrow. F a r a d a y , A. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . Homosexuality. Frum, J . L . (1979).  Liberating lesbian research.  I n K. Plummer  ( p p . 1 1 2 - 1 2 9 ) G r e a t B r i t a i n : The A n c h o r  (Ed.),  Press.  Development of t h e c l o s e f r i e n d s h i p s c a l e and  examination of t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of f r i e n d s h i p r e l a t e d t o a person's s e l f . Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y of Maryland. G i b b s , M. , A u e r b a c h , D. , V. F o x , M. ( 1 9 8 0 ) .  A comparison of male and  f e m a l e same-sex f r i e n d s h i p s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l Studies.  o f Women's  3_, 2 6 1 - 2 7 2 .  H a c k e r , H.M. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  B l a b b e r m o u t h s and c l a m s : sex d i f f e r e n c e s i n  s e l f - d i s c 1 o s u r e i n same-sex and c r o s s - s e x P s y c h o l o g y o f Women Q u a r t e r l y .  f r i e n d s h i p dyads.  5_, 3 8 5 - 4 0 1 .  K n a p p , C.W., & H a r w o o d , B.H. ( 1 9 7 7 ) .  Factors  i n t i m a t e same-sex f r i e n d s h i p . J o u r n a l  i n the determination  of Genetic  of  Psychology. 131,  83-90. K r i e g e r , S. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . science Society.  Lesbian  i d e n t i t y and community: r e c e n t  l i t e r a t u r e . Signs:  Journal  social  o f Women i n C u l t u r e a n d  8 ( 1 ) , 91-108.  K r i e g e r , S. ( 1 9 8 3 ) .  The m i r r o r  dance. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Temple U n i v e r s i t y  Press Lipman-Blumen, J . (1976). explanation  Toward a h o m o s o c i a l t h e o r y  of t h e sex segregation  R e a g a n k M. B l a x a l l  of s o c i a l  o f s e x r o l e s : an  institutions.  ( E d s . ) , Women a n d t h e W o r k p l a c e .  I n B.  Chicago:  69 Social Relationships U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago P r e s s . L e a r y , R.L. ( 1 9 8 3 ) .  S o c i a l s u p p o r t and p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s o r d e r : a  r e v i e w . J o u r n a l of Community P s y c h o l o g y . L e n z , E. 8< l i y e r h o f f , B. ( 1 9 8 5 ) .  11, 3-21.  The f e m i n i z a t i o n o f a m e r i c a . L o s  A n g e l e s : J e r e m y P. T a r c h e r , I n c . L o w e n s t e i n , S.F. ( 1 9 8 0 ) .  Understanding  l e s b i a n women. S o c i a l  C a s e w o r k : The J o u r n a l o f C o n t e m p o r a r y S o c i a l Work. 2 9 - 3 8 . L o p a t a , H. ( 1 9 7 3 ) .  L o n e l i n e s s : F o r m s a n d c o m p o n e n t s . I n R.S. W e i s s  ( E d . ) , L o n e l i n e s s : The e x p e r i e n c e o f e m o t i o n a l a n d s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n . C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . : MIT P r e s s . L u s t i g , J . (1982),  I n t i m a t e f r i e n d s h i p s o f f e m i n i s t women.  Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . Wright O b e r s t o n e , A. & S u k o n e c k , H. ( 1 9 7 6 ) .  I n s t i t u t e : Los Angeles.  P s y c h o l o g i c a l a d j u s t m e n t and  l i f e s t y l e o f s i n g l e l e s b i a n a n d s i n g l e h e t e r o s e x u a l women. P s y c h o l o g y o f Women Q u a r t e r l y . 1.(2), 1 7 2 - 1 8 8 . P a r l e e , M.B. ( 1 9 7 9 ) .  The f r i e n d s h i p b o n d . P s y c h o l o g y T o d a y . O c t . ,  43-54. P e p l a u , L.A. & A m a r o , H. ( 1 9 8 2 ) .  Understanding  In W. P a u l e t a l ( E d s . ) , H o m o s e x u a l i t y : and B i o l o g i c a l P o n s e , B. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . Greenwood  lesbian  relationships.  Social, Psychological,  Issues. (pp.233-247). I d e n t i t i e s i n the lesbian world. Westport,  Conn.:  Press  Q u i n l a n , J . (1983).  Lesbian r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Resources f o r Feminist  R e s e a r c h / D o c u m e n t a t i o n : The L e s b i a n I s s u e . V2A 1) , 5 0 - 5 1 . R a w l i n g s , E . I . & C a r t e r , D.K. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . psychotherapy.  V a l u e s and v l a u e change i n  I n E . I . R a w l i n g s a n d D.K. C a r t e r ( E d s . ) ,  70 Social Relationships Psychotherapy  f o r women. S p r i n g f i e l d , 1 1 1 . : C h a r l e s C. Thomas.  R i c h e y , M.H. ?! R i c h e y , H.W.  (19B0).  The s i g n i f i c a n c e o f b e s t - f r i e n d  r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n a d o l e s c e n c e . P s y c h o l o g y i n t h e S c h o o l s . 17, 536-540. R o s e , S.M. ( 1 9 8 5 ) .  Same- a n d c r o s s - s e x f r i e n d s h i p s a n d t h e p s y c h o l o g y  o f h o m o s o c i a l i t y . Sex R o l e s . 1 2 . ( 1 / 2 ) , 6 3 - 7 5 . R u b i n , L. ( 1 9 8 5 ) .  J u s t f r i e n d s . New Y o r k : H a r p e r  a n d Row  R u b i n , Z. ( 1 9 7 3 ) .  L i k i n g a n d l o v i n g . New Y o r k : H o l t , R i n e h a r t , a n d  Winston. R u s s e l , D. , C u t r o n a , C.E., R o s e , J . , & Y u r k o , K. ( 1 9 8 4 ) .  S o c i a l and  e m o t i o n a l l o n e l i n e s s : an e x a m i n a t i o n o f W e i s s ' t y p o l o g y o f l o n e l i n e s s . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y .  46(6),  1313-1321. S a f i 1 i o s - R o t h s c h i 1 d , C. ( 1 9 8 1 ) .  Toward a s o c i a l  psychology of  r e l a t i o n s h i p s . P s y c h o l o g y o f Women Q u a r t e r l y . 5_, 3 7 7 - 3 8 3 . S a n d o v a l , C. ( 1 9 8 4 ) .  Comment on K r i e g e r ' s " L e s b i a n i d e n t i t y a n d  community: r e c e n t s o c i a l s c i e n c e l i t e r a t u r e " . S i g n s : J o u r n a l of Women i n C u l t u r e a n d S o c i e t y . 9 ( 4 ) , 7 2 5 - 7 2 9 . S e i d e n , A. & B a r t , P. ( 1 9 7 5 ) .  Woman t o woman: i s s i s t e r h o o d p o w e r f u l ?  In N. G l a z e r ( E d . ) , O l d f a m i l y / n e w  f a m i l y . New Y o r k : D. Van  Nostrand. S i m o n , W. & G a g n o n , J . ( 1 9 6 7 ) . S o c i a l Problems.  Feminity i n the lesbian  community.  14_, 2 1 2 - 2 2 1 .  S m i t h - R o s e n b e r g , C. ( 1 9 7 5 ) .  The f e m a l e w o r l d o f l o v e a n d r i t u a l :  r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n women i n n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y a m e r i c a . J o u r n a l o f Women i n C u l t u r e a n d S o c i e t y . 1_, 1-29.  Signs:  71 Social Relationships T i g e r , L. ( 1 9 7 0 ) .  Men i n g r o u p s .  W e i s s , R.S. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . social Wolf,D.G.  New Y o r k :  Vintage Books.  Loneliness: the experience  of e m o t i o n a l and  i s o l a t i o n . C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . : MIT P r e s s . ( 1979).  California  The l e s b i a n c o m m u n i t y . B e r k e l y : U n i v e r s i t y o f  Press  W o l f f , C. ( 1 9 7 1 ) .  L o v e b e t w e e n women. L o n d o n : G e r a l d D u c k w o r t h &Co  Ltd. . W o o l s e y , L.K. ( i n p r e s s a . ) .  B o n d s b e t w e e n women a n d b e t w e e n men,  p a r t 1: a r e v i e w o f t h e o r y . A t l a n t i s : W o o l s e y , L.K. ( i n p r e s s b . ) .  A Women's S t u d i e s J o u r n a l .  B o n d s b e t w e e n women a n d b e t w e e n men,  p a r t 2: a r e v i e w o f r e s e a r c h . A t l a n t i s : Journal.  A Women's S t u d i e s  Social  APPENDIX A LETTER OF  I N I T I A L CONTACT  Relationship  Social  APPENDIX B ADVERTISEMENT FOR VOLUNTEER RESPONDENTS  Relationshi  Social  APPENDIX C F E M I N I S T I D E N T I F I C A T I O N RATING SCALE  Relationshi  Social  77 Relationships  F E M I N I S T I D E N T I F I C A T I O N RATING S C A L E Central  to feminist i d e n t i f i c a t i o nare the following  concepts:  1. Women s h o u l d h a v e b o t h t h e f r e e d o m a n d t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o d i r e c t a l l important areas of t h e i r l i v e s - emotional, intellectual, economic, and s e x u a l . 2. Women must d e f i n e t h e m s e l v e s a s i n d e p e n d e n t p e r s o n s , s e p a r a t e a n d a p a r t f r o m t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h o t h e r s , be t h e y h u s b a n d s , p a r e n t s , c h i l d r e n , or lovers. 3. F e m i n i s m h o l d s t h a t , i n t h e o r y , a l l r o l e d a r e open t o a l l p e o p l e ; that every person i s e n t i t l e d t o the opportunity t o develop her/his potential to the fullest. 4. F e m i n i s m a s s u m e s t h a t w h e r e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n men a n d women e x i s t , t h e y c a n no l o n g e r be s e e n i n t e r m s o f " i n f e r i o r i t y " a n d "superiority". 5. Feminism s t r i v e s t o Power i s c o n c e p t u a l i z e d s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n and v i o l e n t , c o e r c i v e , and  e q u a l i z e p e r s o n a l power b e t w e e n t h e s e x e s . a s an e n a b l i n g f o r c e u s e d f o r c o n t r o l over one's l i f e r a t h e r than as a destructive force against others.  Imagine a s c a l e of f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ranging from 0 t o 10, w h e r e 0 i s no f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , a n d 10 i s c o m p l e t e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n as a f e m i n i s t . C o n s i d e r i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e s s t a t e d above, r a t e your l e v e l of f e m i n i s t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n .  Rating Thankyou f o r your c o o p e r a t i o n . I f y o u w o u l d now be w i l l i n g t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a l a r g e r s t u d y e x p l o r i n g women's f r i e n d s h i p s - w h i c h w o u l d r e q u i r e a n o t h e r 30 m i n u t e s o f y o u r t i m e - p l e a s e l e t me know by w r i t i n g y o u r name a n d t e l e p h o n e number b e l o w . I w i l l c o n t a c t y o u t o a r r a n g e an a p p o i n t m e n t .  Pat  Henderson  Social  APPENDIX D E T H I C A L ASSURANCES  78 Relationships  Social  Relationships  E T H I C A L ASSURANCES I am a w a r e t h a t my p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h i s s t u d y  i s completely  I am a w a r e t h a t I may d e c l i n e t o p a r t i c i p a t e o r d i s c o n t i n u e p a r t i c i p a t i o n a t any t i m e w i t h o u t p r e j u d i c e . I have been i n f o r m e d be h o n o r e d .  voluntary.  mu  t h a t t h e c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y o f my t e s t r e s u l t s  will  I am a w a r e t h a t I c a n o b t a i n a d e b r i e f i n g a s t o t h e n a t u r e and p u r p o s e of t h e s t u d y a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n , i f I s o r e q u e s t . My s i g n a t u r e b e l o w s i g n i f i e s t h a t I h a v e r e a d t h e e t h i c a l assurances l i s t e d a b a o v e and t h a t I a g r e e t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s s t u d y w i t h f u l l y informed consent.  Name  Date  Social  APPENDIX E PERSONAL DATA SHEET  80 Relationships  Social  81  Relationships  PERSONAL DATA SHEET P e o p l e f e e l d i f f e r e n t l y a b o u t t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h some f r i e n d s t h a n t h e y do a b o u t o t h e r s . The t w o f o l l o w i n g s c a l e s a r e a i m e d a t e x p l o r i n g t h e ways y o u f e e l and r e a c t i n r e l a t i o n s h i p t o y o u r women f r i e n d s . The f i r s t i n v e n t o r y i s c a l l e d The C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e , a n d i n o r d e r t o f i l l i t o u t p l e a s e t h i n k o f y o u r c u r r e n t c l o s e s t woman f r i e n d who i s n o t an i m m e d i a t e f a m i l y member o r y o u r p a r t e n e r . The s t a t e m e n t s i n t h i s i n v e n t o r y d e s c r i b e a v a r i e t y o f ways t h a t y o u may f e e l a b o u t y o u r f r i e n d , o r ways t h a t y o u may a c t t o w a r d y o u r f r i e n d , and h e r t o y o u . C o n s i d e r e a c h s t a t e m e n t c a r e f u l l y and d e c i d e t o what degree i t i s r e f l e c t i v e of your p r e s e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h your f r i e n d . T h e r e a r e , o f c o u r s e , no r i g h t o r wrong a n s w e r s ; e a c h p e r s o n h a s h e r own i d e a s . Sometimes people tend t o answer q u e s t i o n s l i k e t h e s e i n terms of what t h e y t h i n k a p e r s o n s h o u l d be l i k e . T h i s i s n o t what i s w a n t e d here. We w o u l d l i k e t o know how y o u a c t u a l l y e x p e r i e n c e y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p . Some i t e m s may seem s i m i l a r t o o h t h e r s ; h o w e v e r , e a c h i t e m i s d i f f e r e n t . S o , p l e a s e a n s w e r e a c h one w i t h o u t r e g a r d t o t h e others. I f p o s s i b l e , p l e a s e a v o i d l e a v i n g any blank spaces. B e f o r e a n s w e r i n g t h e i t e m s , be s u r e t o f i l l i n c o m p l e t e l y t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c a l l e d f o r b e l o w . Remember, a l l i n f o r m a t i o n w i l l be k e p t in complete confidence.. Your  initials:  Your a g e :  Friend's age:  Your m a r i t a l s t a t u s : single m a r r i ed  Friend's marital status: si ngle m a r r i ed separated divorced  separated  divorced  Number o f c h i l d r e n : You  are: Asian White Black Other Your s e x u a l p r e f e r e n c e : Heterosexual Lesbian Your  occupation:  Your i n c o m e : Under $10,000 $ 1 0 , 000-$20 , 00 0 Above $20,000 Highest  Number o f F r i e n d ' s c h i l d r e n : Friend i s : Asian White B l a c k _ _ _ 0ther~.~_ Friend's sexual preference: Heterosexual Lesbian Fr.i e n d ' s o c c u p a t i o n : Friend's  l e v e l of e d u c a t i o n f o r  You  income: Under $10,000 $ 10 , 0 0 0 - $ 2 0 , 0 0 0 Above $20,000 Friend  82  Social Relationships Number o f y e a r s i n t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p : How d i d y o u m e e t ?  Was t h e r e a p r e v i o u s s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n y o u and y o u r f r i e n d ?  A r e y o u p r e s e n t l y i n a c o m m i t t e d re-1 a t i o n s h i p? W i t h a man?  Closeness rating: Imagine a where 0 i s as d i s t a n t as you as c l o s e a s y o u c a n p o s s i b l y of c l o s e n e s s y o u f e e l t o w a r d s  W i t h a woman?  s c a l e of c l o s e n e s s r a n g i n g from 0 t o 10, c a n be t o an i n d i v i d u a l y o u know, a n d 10 b e . Then r a t e y o u r f r i e n d on t h e d e g r e e her.  Social  APPENDIX F CLOSE F R I E N D S H I P SCALE  83 Relationships  Soclal  84-  Relationships  CLOSE F R I E N D S H I P SCALE  In c o m p l e t i n g t h i s s c a l e p l e a s e keep i n mind y o u r c l o s e s t f e m a l e f r i e n d who i s n o t an i m m e d i a t e f a m i l y member o r y o u r p a r t e n e r . Mark e a c h s t a t e m e n t i n t h e l e f t m a r g i n , a c c o r d i n g t o how s t r o n g l y y o u feel that i t i s true or not true i n t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p . W r i t e i n 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, t o s t a n d f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g a n s w e r s :  1 def i n i t e not t r u e  not true  3 4 t e n d s t o be true  J  true  especi a l l y true  I go o u t o f my way t o i n c l u d e h e r i n t h i n g s t h a t s h e w i l l enjoy. There i s nothing She  that I can't  her.  i s l i k e a f a m i l y member.  My f r i e n d  w o u l d l o a n me a n y t h i n g  I find i t impossible She  f a l k about with  she h a s .  t o d i s c l o s e my r e a l s e l f t o h e r .  u n d e r s t a n d s my w o r d s b u t d o e s n o t know how I f e e l .  I w o u l d j o i n h e r i n an a c t i v i t y j u s t t o be w i t h 3  She  c a n r e a d me l i k e a b o o k .  9  The  desire for contact  her.  is reciprocated.  10  I d o n ' t h a v e t o w a t c h what I s a y o r do when I am a r o u n d  11  She seems t o h o l d t h i n g s b a c k , r a t h e r t h a n t e l l really thinks.  i 2.  My f r i e n d  13.  T h e r e a r e t i m e s when I d o n ' t h a v e t o s p e a k ; s h e knows how I feel.  14.  S o m e t i m e s I f e e l t h a t what s h e s a y s t o me i s v e r y f r o m t h e way s h e r e a l l y f e e l s .  15.  I f s o m e t h i n g were t o go w r o n g , I w o u l d t u r n t o h e r f o r or j u s t t o be a l i s t e n i n g e a r .  seems t o e n j o y  doing  her.  me what s h e  t h i n g s w i t h me.  different help  85 Social  T h e r e i s an a c c e p t a n c e She  almost  o f o u r own d i f f e r e n c e s .  a l w a y s seems c o n c e r n e d  She u n d e r s t a n d s h e l p me o u t .  Relationships  a b o u t me.  me enough t o be a b l e t o s a y t h i n g s t h a t c a n  I don't t h i n k she r e a l l y cares i f I l i v e or d i e . I c a n u s u a l l y c o u n t on h e r t o t e l l or f e e l s . I can c a l l  h e r when I am r e a l l y  I would f e e l c o m f o r t a b l e me.  me what s h e r e a l l y  needy.  r e q u e s t i n g t h a t she spend time  I am a b l e t o be me w i t h a l l my w a r t s , w i t h o u t me f e e l u g l y . I am a c c e p t e d I see her.  thinks  with  her making  w i t h w h a t e v e r r a n g e o f f e e l i n g s I h a v e when  I f e e l a t t i m e s t h a t s h e c a n r e a d my m i n d . I am o p e n l y  myself  i n our r e l a t i o n s h i p .  We a r e o f t e n on t h e same  wavelength.  She seems t o be a b l e t o p r e d i c t my t h o u g h t s and feelings i n certain situations. I g e t a f e e l i n g o f l o v e and c o m p a n i o n s h i p when I am w i t h h e r . Nothing Her  s h e c a n do w o u l d c h a n g e how I f e e l a b o u t  her.  t i m e i s a v a i l a b l e t o me.  I c a n take s h o r t c u t s w i t h h e r and save l e n g t h i l y e x p l a n a t i o n s . I t r u s t that she w i l l respond turn t o her. I h a v e gone t o h e r f o r s u p p o r t to c r y w i t h .  a p p r o p r i a t e l y t o me when I a n d / o r t o h a v e someone  T h e r e seems t o be an a c u t e s e n s e o f p e r c e p t i v e n e s s between u s . I t r u s t t h a t s h e won't l o o k a t me i n d i s g u s t .  86  Social Relationships 37.  Her r e s p o n s e s of me.  t o me r e f l e c t a r e a l i n t u i t i v e  33.  She i s someone I f e e l t h a t I c a n s h a r e a l m o s t  39.  We h a v e a c o l l a b o r a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p .  40.  She seems t o e a s i l y p i c k up on how I am f e e l i n g a b o u t  41.  She i n c l u d e s me i n e v e n t s  42.  I f I needed s o m e t h i n g , I c o u l d ask h e r f o r i t .  43.  T h e r e i s a m u t u a l r e s p e c t f o r t h e ways we l i v e o u r l i v e s .  44.  I c a n p i c k up i n h e r v o i c e when s h e i s f e e l i n g u p s e t .  45.  Our r e l a t i o n s h i p c a n w i t h s t a n d  46.  I a p p r e c i a t e e x a c t l y how t h e t h i n g s s h e e x p e r i e n c e s her.  47.  I f s o m e t h i n g c a t a s t r o p h i c h a p p e n e d , s h e w o u l d be one o f t h e f i r s t people I would c o n t a c t .  43.  I f e e l t h a t s h e p u t s on a r o l e o r f r o n t w i t h me.  49.  There i s a f e e l i n g of commitment t o each  50.  I c a n c o n f r o n t h e r w i t h what b o t h e r s h e r f e a r i n g l o s s o f my f r i e n d s h i p .  51.  She w o u l d h e l p me d u r i n g t i m e o f c r i s i s o r d e p r e s s i o n .  52.  I t r u s t that our r e l a t i o n s h i p w i l l  53.  Though t h e r e a r e h i g h s a n d l o w s i n o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p , t h e r e i s much s t a b i l i t y .  54.  I share  55.  N o t much c o u l d h a p p e n t h a t w o u l d t u r n h e r a g a i n s t me.  56.  She w o u l d be a v a i l a b l e f o r me i n a l m o s t w o u l d a s k f o r i t c l e a r l y and d i r e c t l y .  57.  She h a s t a s t e s i n common w i t h me w h i c h o t h e r s do n o t s h a r e .  58.  Gur r e l a t i o n s h i p i s b a s e d on r e a l g e n u i n e a u t h e n t i c f o r each o t h e r .  59.  When I am w i t h h e r , s h e seems t o r e l a x a n d be h e r s e l f , and not t h i n k o f t h e i m p r e s s i o n s h e i s c r e a t i n g .  important  understanding a l l o s me w i t h .  myself.  and a c t i v i t i e s .  physical separation. feel to  other.  me a b o u t h e r w i t h o u t  a l w a y s be t h e r e .  common i n t e r e s t s w i t h h e r .  a n y way i f I  concern  8? Social Relationships 60.  I f I were s i c k o r h u r t , I c o u l d c o u n t on h e r t o do t h a t w o u l d make i t e a s i e r t o t a k e .  things  61.  I w o u l d do a l m o s t a n y t h i n g -for h e r .  62.  I speak f r e e l y and e a s i l y w i t h h e r .  63.  When s h e p l a n s f o r l e i s u r e t i m e a c t i v i t i e s , s h e makes i t a p o i n t t o g e t i n t o u c h w i t h me t o s e e i f we c a n a r r a n g e t o do t h i n g s t o g e t h e r .  64.  I d o n ' t h a v e t o go i n t o g r e a t d e t a i l t o s e n s e t h e w h o l e o f what I mean.  65.  T h e r e i s a s e n s e o f h i s t o r y and c o n n e c t e d n e s s i n o u r relationship.  66.  I f I were s h o r t o f c a s h a n d n e e d e d money i n a h u r r y , I c o u l d c o u n t on h e r t o be w i l l i n g t o l e n d i t t o me.  67.  She a c c e p t s me f o r who I am.  68.  S h e i s w i l l i n g t o e x p r e s s w h a t e v e r i s a c t u a l l y on h e r mind w i t h me, i n c l u d i n g a n y f e e l i n g s a b o u r h e r s e l f o r me.  69.  S h e a c c e p t s me f o r what I am b u i l d i n g  70.  She knows t h e t r u t h o f my f e e l i n g s even when I w i l l n o t own up t o them.  71.  I do n o t h i d e a n y p a r t o f m y s e l f f r o m h e r t h a t I do n o t a l s o h i d e from m y s e l f .  72.  She m i g h t u n d e r s t a n d my w o r d s , b u t s h e d o e s n o t s e e t h e way I feel.  73.  I h a v e t h e s e n s e t h a t s h e i s a c o n s t a n t p a r t n e r even when we are a p a r t .  74.  Whether t h e i d e a s a n d f e e l i n g s I e x p r e s s a r e "good" o r " b a d " seems t o make no d i f f e r e n c e t o h e r f e e l i n g s t o w a r d s me.  75.  I c a r e f o r h e r even when s h e d o e s t h i n g s t h a t u p s e t o r annoy me.  76.  She f e e l s deep a f f e c t i o n f o r me.  77.  I d o n ' t know i f s h e w o u l d come t o my a i d i f I n e e d e d h e r .  78.  Whether I am f e e l i n g happy o r u n h a p p y w i t h m y s e l f makes no r e a l d i f f e r e n c e t o t h e way s h e f e e l s a b o u t me.  79.  I c a n r e a d h e r g e s t u r e s and mood  f o r h e r t o be a b l e  i n my l i f e .  88 Social  Relationships  30.  I -feel t h a t s h e i s r e a l and g e n u i n e  81.  I l i k e sharing experiences with her.  82.  T h e r e a r e t i m e s when we seem t o know what e a c h wants w i t h o u t words.  33.  This friend  84.  She u n d e r s t a n d s  85.  I feel  36.  We c a n m u t u a l l y e n j o y p l e a s u r a b l e e x p e r i e n c e s .  87.  I c a n r e a d b e t w e e n t h e l i n e s o f what s h e i s s a y i n g .  38.  I c a n p r e d i c t how s h e w o u l d  seems t o be a r o u n d  w i t h me.  other  when I need h e r .  e x a c t l y how I s e e t h i n g s .  I h a v e t o a c t when I am a r o u n d h e r .  react to a situation.  Thank y o u v e r y much f o r y o u r c o o p e r a t i o n i n f i l l i n g o u t t h e C l o s e F r i e n d s h i p S c a l e . I f y o u w o u l d l i k e a summary o f t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s c a l e , p l e a s e i n c l u d e y o u r name and a d d r e s s .  Name: Address:  Social  APPENDIX G S O C I A L P R O V I S I O N S SCALE  89 Relationships  90 Social  Relationships  SOCIAL PROVISIONS SCALE  • In a n s w e r i n g t h e n e x t s e t o f q u e s t i o n s , p l e a s e t h i n k a b o u t  your  c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h women f r i e n d s ( e x c l u d i n g y o u r p a r t e n e r and immediate f a m i l y members).  P l e a s e i n d i c a t e t o what e x t e n t y o u a g r e e  t h a t e a c h s t a t e m e n t d e s c r i b e s y o u r c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h women. Use t h e s c a l e 1 t o 4 ( s e e b e l o w ) t o g i v e y o u r o p i n i o n . example,  i f you f e e l a s t a t e m e n t i n very t r u e of your  So, f o r current  r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h women, y o u w o u l d c i r c l e #4 " s t r o n g l y a g r e e " .  If  you f e e l a s t a t e m e n t c l e a r l y does n o t d e s c r i b e y o u r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h women, y o u w o u l d c i r c l e #1 " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e " .  A f t e r you r e s p o n d ,  p l e a s e i n d i c a t e t h e number o f women y o u a r e t h i n k i n g of when y o u answer  the question.  A space i s provided  i=Strongly Disagree 2=Disagree  where a p p r o p r i a t e .  3=Aqrse 4 = S t r o n g l y  Disagree 1.  I feel  t h a t I do n o t have  personal 3.  r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h women.  3  4  1 2  3  4  1  3  4  1 2  3  4  1  3  4  T h e r e i s no woman I c a n t u r n t o t o r  T h e r e a r e women who depend  2  on me  for help. 5.  1 2  close  guidance i n times of s t r e s s . 4.  Agree  T h e r e a r e women I c a n depend on t o h e l p me i f I r e a l l y need i t .  2.  Agree  T h e r e a r s women who e n j o y t h e same s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s I do.  2  No. o f Women  Disagree  Relationships  Agree  No. o f Women  O t h e r women do n o t v i e w me a s competent.  1 2  3  4  1 2  3  4  1 2  3  4  1 2  3  4  1 2  3  4  1 2  3  4  1 2  3  4  1 2  3  4  1  3  4  3  4  I feel personally responsible f o r t h e w e l l - b e i n g o f a woman. I f e e l p a r t o f a g r o u p o f women who s h a r e  my a t t i t u d e s and b e l i e f s .  I do n o t t h i n k t h a t women  respect  my s k i l l s and a b i l i t i e s . I f s o m e t h i n g went w r o n g , t h e r e i s no woman who w o u l d come t o my assistance. I have c l o s e p e r s o n a l  relationships  w i t h women t h a t p r o v i d e me w i t h a sense of emotional  s e c u r i t y and.  well-being. T h e r e a r e women I c a n t a l k t o a b o u t important  t h i n g s i n my l i f e .  I h a v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h women where my c o m p e t e n c e  and s k i l l  are recognized. T h e r e a r e no women who s h a r e  my  i n t e r e s t s and c o n c e r n s .  2  T h e r e i s no woman who r e l i e s on me for her w e l l - b e i n g . There a r e t r u s t w o r t h y  1 2 women i n my  l i f e I could turn to f o r advice i f  91  Social  92 Social Disagree I were h a v i n g  17. I f e e l  problems.  a strong emotional  at l e a s t  Agree  bond  with  one o t h e r woman.  1  2  1  2  1  2  1  2  18. T h e r e i s no woman I c a n d e p e n d on f o r a i d i f I r e a l l y need i t . 19. T h e r e i s no woman I f e e l with talking  comfortable  a b o u t my p r o b l e m s .  20. T h e r e a r e women who a d m i r e my t a l e n t s and a b i l i t i e s . 21. T h e r e i s no woman who l i k e s t o do t h e t h i n g s I do-. 22. I l a c k a f e e l i n g  1 2 of i n t i m a c y  with  o t h e r women.  1  2  1  2  1  2  23. T h e r e a r e women I c a n c o u n t on i n an e m e r g e n c y . 24. No woman n e e d s me t o c a r e f o r h e r .  Relationships No. o f Women  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054314/manifest

Comment

Related Items