Aside from these anecdotal examples, there is scientific research to support my view on the madness of sex. Indeed, research evidence suggests that people’s cognitive functioning is impaired significantly when preoccupied with sex, even if they are not in the heat of a sexual moment. Heterosexual men primed to think of potential sexual activities (via pictures of beautiful women, fully clothed) have a diminished capacity for a type of rational thought—the ability to plan well for the future (Wilson & Daly, 2004). That is, they “discount” the future. It is as if the future becomes a less-than-plausible reality in the wake of the sexually charged moment. The researchers speculate that the possibility of mating (even if it is an unrealistic prospect, as the men knew they were never going to meet the women) makes men’s minds become too focused on the “mating moment,” as if the future does not matter. The researchers argue that the images of attractive women affect the brain—exciting nerve centers associated with mating, and shutting down more rational, planning-oriented centers—in a similar way as the prospect of real mating. When human brains evolved hundreds of thousands of years ago, there were, of course, no photographs. So, these modern two-dimensional images trick men’s Stone Age minds into responding as if there were actually beautiful women smiling in front of them. The men’s response, then, is doubly irrationaclass="underline" first, they are responding to pictures as if they were reality (no, boys, a real woman has not just beamed into your bedrooms!), and second, they are discounting the future at the prospect of sex.
One could argue that, from a gene-based view of life, the second irrationality—discounting the future at the prospect of sex—does make some “sense,” as the future doesn’t amount to a hill of beans if there is great potential right now to mate and replicate one’s genes. After all, the future is only important if the genetic payoff down the road is plausibly greater than the genetic payoff in the here and now. From this perspective, the “future” (i.e., a long life with plans, schemes, and delays of gratification) only exists as a concept in our minds because it often leads to genetic payoffs. Even so, let’s not forget the main point here: Isn’t it bizarre (and mad!) that the prospect of sex—and a mere image, no less—has the capacity to derail the best laid plans of mice and (particularly) men?[28]
There are other studies showing that sex is linked to various “unhealthy” behaviors (taking physical risks, exposure to infectious diseases, etc.). One study showed that adolescent boys and young men were more likely to take physical risks (e.g., doing crazy tricks) when skateboarding in the presence of an attractive woman, and this effect was caused by elevated testosterone (Ronay & von Hippel, 2010), the hormonal “poison” mentioned earlier. There is also a recent study showing that when women are primed (e.g., given very brief glimpses or reminders) with romantic and sexual themes, they have an increased willingness to engage in unhealthy and risky behaviors, like using risky dieting pills and going to cancer-causing tanning salons (Hill & Durante, 2011). The authors of the study also found that the women felt a diminished sense of vulnerability when mating goals are uppermost in their minds.
People think that our attitudes are rationally formed, the result of well-thought-out arguments and an astute and sensitive scaling of the pros and cons of the issues, along with, of course, accumulated wisdom from years of experience. Yet our attitudes are frequently governed by irrational, emotional states including—yes, you guessed it!—sexual desires. An example: One of the reasons that heterosexual men have negative attitudes toward male homosexuality but not female homosexuality is sexual in nature. Heterosexual men are often turned on by lesbian sex (Louderback & Whitley, 1997), and if one takes this arousal away, heterosexual men’s positive attitude toward lesbianism no longer exists. So, a little sexual desire/arousal toward lesbianism, and presto: positive (or at least neutral) attitudes toward it! After all, how could lesbian sex be wrong, immoral, and disgusting, if I am turned on by it? Impossible!
Ever flown into a jealous rage—just “lost it”—over a partner’s flirtation or outright sexual indiscretion with another? Most adults have experienced sexual jealousy, along with the torturous effects this emotion has on one’s thoughts and plans, even if the emotion itself doesn’t disintegrate into extreme behavior. But sometimes it does: sexual jealousy is considered one of the main motives in killings that occur in domestic disputes within the United States (Daly & Wilson, 1988; Daly, Wilson, & Weghorst, 1982). When a jealous rage does descend into violence, the resulting act is sometimes called a crime of passion. In civil courts in the United States, crimes of passion can be defensible if one pleads “temporary insanity,” making the defendant (at least theoretically) no longer criminally liable. Similarly, in nineteenth-century France, a crime passionnel (or crime of passion), including murder, was defensible in the same way. The fact that the courts in various societies at various time periods recognize that sex, at least under certain circumstances, causes “insanity” illustrates my main point: sex, in many manifestations, and perhaps even at its core, is mad.
When liberal-minded observers hear about the sex scandal of a celebrity (e.g., David Letterman) or a sports personality (e.g., Tiger Woods) or a politician (e.g., Bill Clinton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dominique Strauss-Kahn), they typically do not decry what might be perceived by more conservative observers to be the shocking immorality of the acts, but rather the shocking stupidity of the perpetrator’s behavior in getting caught. And it is clear that there is at times an almost wanton disregard for any kind of careful planning or thoughtful execution in relation to behaviors that, if discovered, could do serious damage to their reputations and careers. Even more telling is that many of the people caught in such scandals are incredibly bright, savvy, and highly functioning in the social sphere.
One might argue that this wanton behavior has less to do with the maddening effects of sex, and more to do with a sense of entitlement and disregard for others that seems to go hand in hand with power, status, and narcissism. Partly true, I expect, but this is likely not the whole story. For example, it does not explain the often careful and thoughtful behavior these men routinely display in other areas of their lives. If behavior in these other domains were chosen carelessly, it could be almost as damaging to their careers as an awkwardly planned sexual liaison. In addition, if one prefers a “power explanation” over a “sex explanation” to account for this wanton behavior of men of celebrity and status, one would still have to account for the tricky interplay of power and sex, particularly in men. For example, there is a surge of testosterone (potentially affecting both sex drive and feelings of power) in men after they win at competitions (Carré, Putnam, & McCormick, 2009). In short, it is very difficult to disentangle power from many men’s sexual motives (and vice versa). It is also hard to argue that sex is not at least partly the culprit underlying the seeming irrationality of the behavior leading to these scandals.