Giving: how 429,079 couples answered
Each couple falls into exactly one of six outcomes, ordered from strongest agreement (left) to mutual decline (right).
Give n = 429,079 couples. Cell percentages are rounded to one decimal and may not sum to exactly 100%.
Receiving: how 446,592 couples answered
A separate question answered by a separate set of couples. The two samples are never merged.
Receive n = 446,592 couples. Cell percentages are rounded to one decimal and may not sum to exactly 100%.
Side by side
| Outcome | Give | Receive |
|---|---|---|
| Both yes | 64.3% | 68.6% |
| One yes, one maybe | 16.9% | 15.1% |
| Both maybe | 2.3% | 1.6% |
| One yes, one no | 12.3% | 11.4% |
| One maybe, one no | 2.4% | 1.8% |
| Both no | 1.9% | 1.6% |
| No explicit no | 83.5% | 85.3% |
At the couple level both sides are highly compatible, with receiving slightly ahead of giving — a 4.3-point edge on mutual yes. Each grouping below is summed from its displayed cells, so the figures reconcile by addition.
- No explicit no — 83.5% giving, 85.3% receiving. Pairings where neither partner refused. A maybe indicates openness or uncertainty, not consent — these couples still have a conversation ahead of them, not a settled plan.
- Disagreement involving a no — 14.7% giving, 13.2% receiving. One partner open, the other declining.
- Mutual no — 1.9% giving, 1.6% receiving. Both partners declined — uncommon on either side.
The gender flip: who wants which role
The couple matrices look similar, but splitting by gender reveals a clean reversal: men and women lean toward opposite roles.
Said yes, by respondent group and side
Give: men n = 532,394, women n = 459,521. Receive: men n = 553,925, women n = 482,534. The gender gap reverses between the two questions — men +7.0 points on giving, women +5.9 points on receiving — and the underlying score averages confirm it (giving leans male, receiving leans female). Respondents who did not state a gender (about 44% of answers on each side) said yes at 69.4% on giving and 72.2% on receiving; they are counted in the couple and overall totals but excluded from the men-versus-women comparison.
In mixed-gender couples these marginals are suggestive of a comfortable fit — the role many men lean toward giving is the one many women lean toward receiving. But this is an inference from population averages, not a measured within-couple match. Spicer records each question's couple agreement separately and does not join one partner's giving answer to the other's receiving answer, so we describe the overall rates, not who paired with whom. Same-gender couples and individual exceptions sit inside these averages, not outside them.
Men's strongest yes is to give a massage; women's is to receive one — a near-mirror in opposite directions.
What the finding suggests
Sensual massage is one of the most agreed-upon things in our data, and the gender pattern is about role rather than appetite: nearly everyone is interested, and the lean is toward giving for men and receiving for women on average. The couples who landed one-yes-one-maybe — 16.9% on giving and 15.1% on receiving — are mostly a small coordination question rather than a real disagreement.
In context
Affectionate touch between partners is associated with relational, psychological, and physical well-being,[1] and everyday touch functions as a way couples regulate emotion and feel close.[2] A massage is a structured, low-pressure way into exactly that kind of touch.
What this suggests couples can do
Offer the role you're likelier to want
Because the leanings are complementary on average, the simplest coordination is often just to offer: if giving appeals to you, offer it; if receiving does, ask for it. Affectionate touch is reliably tied to feeling closer and better, so the act itself tends to repay the small effort of initiating.[1]
Let it be its own event, not a prelude
Massage works best when it isn't freighted with expectation that it must lead somewhere. Treated as touch for its own sake — a way to slow down and connect — it does the emotional-regulation work the research describes,[2] and where one partner isn't in the mood, that is a complete answer, not a negotiation.
How the counts fit together
Giving: of 1,795,070 individual answers, 1,266,216 came from users with a linked partner; the other 528,854 sit outside the couple analysis. The give figures rest on 429,079 couples (858,158 partner responses), so 67.8% of linked users had a partner who also answered. Receiving: of 1,820,886 answers, 1,311,376 came from linked users and 509,510 did not; the receive figures rest on 446,592 couples (893,184 partner responses), a 68.1% pairing rate. On each side, roughly 44% of respondents did not state a gender and are excluded from the men-versus-women comparison but kept in the couple and overall totals.
References
- Jakubiak, B. K., & Feeney, B. C. (2017). Affectionate Touch to Promote Relational, Psychological, and Physical Well-Being in Adulthood: A Theoretical Model and Review of the Research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(3), 228–252. doi.org/10.1177/1088868316650307
- Debrot, A., Schoebi, D., Perrez, M., & Horn, A. B. (2013). Touch as an interpersonal emotion regulation process in couples' daily lives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(10), 1373–1385. doi.org/10.1177/0146167213497592