Another interesting article on the circumcision ruling in Germany

Pretty good reasoning:

After much deliberation, it concluded that a circumcision, "even when done properly by a doctor with the permission of the parents, should be considered as bodily harm if it is carried out on a boy unable to give his own consent". It ruled the child's body would be "permanently and irreparably changed", and that this alteration went "against the interests of a child to decide for himself later on to what religion he wishes to belong".

Also, feminist fail *sigh*

Women's rights groups and social policy makers also condemned the decision, but for the reason that it would have the effect of putting male and female circumcision on the same footing, when they were "in no way comparable", said Katrin Altpeter, social minister in the state of Baden-Württemberg. Female circumcision she said, was a far more drastic act. It is already outlawed in Germany.

I don't even...

More of the same: Wage-gap edition

The usual stuff:

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, single women between 22 and 30 years old earn an average of $27,000 a year, which is 8 percent more than comparable men. Women of that age earn more in 39 of the 50 biggest American cities. Source

PolitiFact debunking Obama:

In this item, we're checking the claim that "women (are) paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men." [...]

While calculations that led to the 77-cent figure did not include any part-time workers, the label "full time worker" can actually be applied to employees with a wide range of hours worked per week.

The official Bureau of Labor Statistics definition of a full-time worker is someone who works at least 35 hours per week. Someone who gets no vacation time and works 40 hours a week for 52 weeks would work 2,080 hours in a year. By contrast, a worker on a 36-hour-per-week schedule who has two weeks off would work only 1,800 hours. Meanwhile, a worker with two weeks off who averaged four hours per week of overtime would end up with 2,200 hours. [...]

The other complicating factor involves seniority on the job. Men have typically held their jobs longer than women in the same position. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, men in 2010 who were between 45 and 54 years old had a median job tenure of 8.5 years, compared to 7.1 years for women in the same age group.[...]

The Obama campaign took a legitimate statistic and described it in a way that makes it sound much more dramatic than it actually is. The 77-cent figure is real, but it does not factor in occupations held, hours worked or length of tenure. Describing that statistic as referring to the pay for women "doing the same work as men" earns it a rating of Mostly False. Source

Kay S. Hymowitz on the wage gap:

In 2007, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 27 percent of male full-time workers had workweeks of 41 or more hours, compared with 15 percent of female full-time workers; meanwhile, just 4 percent of full-time men worked 35 to 39 hours a week, while 12 percent of women did. Since FTYR men work more than FTYR women do, it shouldn’t be surprising that the men, on average, earn more.[...]

Among “physicians and surgeons,” for example, women make only 64.2 percent of what men make. Outrageous, right? Not if you consider that there are dozens of specialties in medicine: some, like cardiac surgery, require years of extra training, grueling hours, and life-and-death procedures; others, like pediatrics, are less demanding and consequently less highly rewarded. Only 16 percent of surgeons, but a full 50 percent of pediatricians, are women. So the statement that female doctors make only 64.2 percent of what men make is really on the order of a tautology, much like saying that a surgeon working 50 hours a week makes significantly more than a pediatrician working 37. [...]

Behind the Pay Gap, a widely quoted 2007 study from the American Association of University Women whose executive summary informs us in its second paragraph that “one year out of college, women working full time earn only 80 percent as much as their male colleagues earn.” [...] You don’t read until the end of the summary—a point at which many readers will have already Tweeted their indignation—that when you control for such factors as education and hours worked, there’s actually just a 5 percent pay gap. But the AAUW isn’t going to begin a report with the statement that women earn 95 percent of what their male counterparts earn, is it?[...]

A number of researchers have found that if you consider only childless women, the wage gap disappears. June O’Neill, an economist who has probably studied wage gaps as much as anyone alive, has found that single, childless women make about 8 percent more than single, childless men do (though the advantage vanishes when you factor in education). Using Census Bureau data of pay levels in 147 of the nation’s 150 largest cities, the research firm Reach Advisors recently showed that single, childless working women under 30 earned 8 percent more than their male counterparts did.[...]

Behind the Pay Gap found that “among women who graduated from college in 1992–93, more than one-fifth (23 percent) of mothers were out of the work force in 2003, and another 17 percent were working part time,” compared with under 2 percent of fathers in each case. Other studies show consistently that the first child significantly reduces a woman’s earnings and that the second child cuts them even further.[...]

If women work fewer hours than men do, it appears to be because they want it that way. About two-thirds of the part-time workforce in the United States is female. According to a 2007 Pew Research survey, only 21 percent of working mothers with minor children want to be in the office full-time. Sixty percent say that they would prefer to work part-time, and 19 percent would like to give up their jobs altogether. For working fathers, the numbers are reversed: 72 percent want to work full-time and 12 percent part-time.

In fact, women choose fewer hours—despite the resulting gap in earnings—all over the world. That includes countries with generous family leave and child-care policies. Look at Iceland, recently crowned the world’s most egalitarian nation by the World Economic Forum. The country boasts a female prime minister, a law requiring that the boards of midsize and larger businesses be at least 40 percent female, excellent public child care, and a family leave policy that would make NOW members swoon. Yet despite successful efforts to get men to take paternity leave, Icelandic women still take considerably more time off than men do. They also are far more likely to work part-time. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), this queen of women-friendly countries has a bigger wage gap—women make 62 percent of what men do—than the United States does.

Sweden, in many people’s minds the world’s gender utopia, also has a de facto mommy track. Sweden has one of the highest proportions of working women in the world and a commitment to gender parity that’s close to a national religion. In addition to child care, the country offers paid parental leave that includes two months specifically reserved for fathers. Yet moms still take four times as much leave as dads do. (Women are also more likely to be in lower-paid public-sector jobs; according to sociologist Linda Haas, Sweden has “one of the most sex-segregated labor markets in the world.”) Far more women than men work part-time; almost half of all mothers are on the job 30 hours a week or less. The gender wage gap among full-time workers in Sweden is 15 percent. That’s lower than in the United States, at least according to the flawed data we have, but it’s hardly the feminist Promised Land.

The list goes on. In the Netherlands, over 70 percent of women work part-time and say that they want it that way. According to the Netherlands Institute for Social Research, surveys found that only 4 percent of female part-timers wish that they had full-time jobs. In the United Kingdom, half of female GPs work part-time, and the National Health Service is scrambling to cope with a dearth of doctor hours. Interestingly enough, countries with higher GDPs tend to have the highest percentage of women in part-time work. In fact, the OECD reports that in many of its richest countries, including Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, Germany, the U.K., and the U.S., the percentage of the female workforce in part-time positions has gone up over the last decade.

This one comes a bit out of the left field. Regrets people have on their deathbeds:

When Ms. Bronnie Ware, a woman who worked for years with the dying, wrote a list of the top 5 regrets people say aloud on their deathbed, we teared up a little bit here at TNW.

I wish I didn’t work so hard.

This came from every male patient that I nursed. They missed their children’s youth and their partner’s companionship. Women also spoke of this regret. But as most were from an older generation, many of the female patients had not been breadwinners. All of the men I nursed deeply regretted spending so much of their lives on the treadmill of a work existence.

Enough for now....(still too much on my to do list)

STEM and motherhood

It is the same as with the wage gap:

ScienceDaily (Feb. 14, 2012) — Women with advanced degrees in math-intensive academic fields drop out of fast-track research careers primarily because they want children – not because their performance is devalued or they are shortchanged during interviewing and hiring, according to a new study at Cornell University. [...]

For the study, Williams and Ceci analyzed data related to the academic careers of women and men with and without children in academic fields, including math-heavy ones. They found that before becoming mothers, women have careers equivalent to or better than men’s. “They are paid and promoted the same as men, and are more likely to be interviewed and hired in the first place,” Williams said.

The study builds on previous research by Williams and Ceci published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences showing that women in math-intensive fields did not face discrimination in hiring, publishing or funding.

And while the following studies link is dead by now, there still is Glenn's blog post:

In this one, three researchers at Cornell University analyzed some 400 existing studies and concluded that, although women have closed the gender gap in math test scores, their representation in fields like engineering doesn’t reflect that achievement. Why not? Their conclusion is the same as in the other studies I’ve reported on – women drop out of the profession to have kids. And as in the other studies, women and men begin their careers on the same level, but women tend to opt out of the labor force (or limit their time in it)to devote time to family while men tend not to.

As the authors state, corroborating much pre-existing literature on the subject,

“The one research finding related to the underrepresentation of women in all academic careers, not just those that are math-intensive, that is robust, incontrovertible, and based on up-to-date information, is that women’s fertility choices, and the timing of when to have children, are powerful predictors of career success…”

NCFM on gender reality

An interesting post via NCFM:

Toward men and masculinity we direct accountability without compassion, which is ruthless. It is respecting men as autonomous and empowered beings responsible for their own decisions and predicaments, but it is not loving men enough to recognize their true vulnerability to forces outside their control and to lend men their fair share of empathy.

Toward women and femininity we direct compassion without accountability, which is infantilizing. It is loving women as vulnerable beings to be protected, but it is not respecting women enough to recognize their true power, autonomy, and accountability as equal partners equally responsible for outcomes.

Nice take, there are more points, read it.

Some more information on false allegations

A study via Cotwa:

The study, which was published Monday, analyzed the results of new DNA testing from 634 sexual assault and homicide cases that took place in Virginia between 1973 and 1987. DNA testing was not available at the time the crimes occurred, but the study was possible because a state forensic serologist - who processed biological evidence in serious criminal cases - had retained some physical evidence, such as cotton swabs and clothing swatches.

When these old pieces of evidence were subjected to DNA testing, 5 percent of those convicted were exonerated of the crime. When only sexual assault cases were considered, the number of those exonerated jumped even higher. DNA testing supported the exoneration of between 8 and 15 percent of those convicted of a sexual crime.

Previous research had put the rate of wrongful conviction around three percent. But a difference in methodology may explain the disparity between the two estimates.

Lemon told the Associated Press that the results from the Virginia study could most likely be applied to the rest of the nation. Source

The report acknowledged certain limitations. For instance, it said that in two-thirds of the cases the samples didn't have enough DNA for testing. Roman said that may mean the number of false convictions is much higher.

Roman said there likely are "dozens, if not hundreds, of people who were convicted erroneously; dozens, if not hundreds, of people who were not convicted of a crime they committed who may have gone on to commit new crimes; and there were dozens, if not hundreds, of people who thought they had justice as a victim of a horrible crime who didn't." Source

I group this under the umbrella term of false allegations although wrongly convicted might be more fitting here.

And one huge document that I picked from my to do pile. As usual, the more interesting data points:

False Rape Allegations: An Assault On Justice by Bruce Gross, PhD, JD, MBA - The Forensic Examiner - 2009

Although there is no doubt that false rape allegations occur, it is extremely difficult to determine what percentage of rape reports is intentionally false. This is due to many factors, including jurisdictional variation in definition, criteria, and reporting practices, as well as the fact that not all rapes are reported. Although the FBI had set 8% as the average rate of false (actually, unfounded) accusations during the late 1990s, there is remarkable variation in the estimates of false allegations of rape found in the literature (Kanin, 1994; Epstein, 2005). A review of those studies on false rape accusations conducted between 1968 and 2005 showed a percentage range from 1-90% (Rumney, 2006).

Very little formal research has been conducted on the prevalence of false allegations of rape. One study looked at the 109 cases of forcible rape that were disposed of in one small midwestern town between 1978 and 1987 (Kanin, 1994). The given town was specifically selected for study because the police department used a uniquely objective and thorough protocol when investigating rape complaints. Among other procedural safeguards, officers did not have the discretion to drop rape investigations if they concluded the complaint was "suspect" or unfounded. Every rape accusation had to be thoroughly investigated and included offering a polygraph to both the accuser and the accused. Cases were only determined to be false if and when the accuser admitted that no rape occurred.

The researchers further investigated those cases that the police, through their investigation, had ultimately determined were "false" or fabricated. During the follow-up investigation, the complainants held fast to their assertion that their rape allegation had been true, despite being told they would face penalties for filing a false report. As a result, 41% of all of the forcible rape complaints were found to be false. To further this study, a similar analysis was conducted on all of the forcible rape complaints filed at two large midwestern public universities over a 3-year period. Here, where polygraphs were not offered as part of the investigatory procedure, it was found that 50% of the complaints were false.

Charles P. McDowell, a researcher in the United States Air Force Special Studies Division, studied the 1,218 reports of rape that were made between 1980 and 1984 on Air Force bases throughout the world (McDowell, 1985). Of those, 460 were found to be "proven" allegations either because the "overwhelming preponderance of the evidence" strongly supported the allegation or because there was a conviction in the case. Another 212 of the total reports were found to be "disproved" as the alleged victim convincingly admitted the complaint was a "hoax" at some point during the initial investigation. The researchers then investigated the 546 remaining or "unresolved" rape allegations including having the accusers submit to a polygraph. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of these complainants admitted they had fabricated their accusation just before taking the polygraph or right after they failed the test. (It should be noted that whenever there was any doubt, the unresolved case was re-classified as a "proven" rape.) Combining this 27% with the initial 212 "disproved" cases, it was determined that approximately 45% of the total rape allegations were false.

Unfortunately, like the two studies presented here, the empirical studies that exist on the frequency of false rape allegations are sparse in number and have notable limitations. Small sample sizes and non-representative samples preclude generalizability. Regardless, the mere number of publicized incidents of false accusations of rape over the last two decades indicates not only a need for further investigation into the problem, but a better understanding of how to identify such cases. [...]

The most frequent context and motive for the fabricated rape was consensual sex with an acquaintance that led to some sort of problem for the accuser. The perceived problem was typically something that caused feelings of shame and guilt in the accuser (such as contracting a sexually transmitted disease or becoming pregnant), which was bound to be discovered and received negatively by family or friends.

Approximately half of the accusers who were motivated by a need for an alibi identified the alleged rapist. Their goal was not to harm or cause problems for the acquaintance, but to protect themselves in what they perceived to be a desperate situation. As with most lies, the false rape accusation allowed the accuser to deny responsibility by creating an alternate reality into which to escape.

The next most common reason for lying about being a victim of rape was revenge, rage, or retribution. In the Midwest study, this included 27% of the non-student and 44% of the student accusers. In these cases, the false victim had suffered some real or perceived wrong, rejection, or betrayal by the alleged rapist. As the purpose of making the accusation was to obtain some measure of revenge, the "suspect" was always identified. Researchers in the Air Force study also found that spite or revenge and the need to compensate for a sense of personal failure through an alibi accusation were the primary motives for false rape reports.

Germany: Who cuts boys for religious reasons is liable to prosecution for assault. This decided the regional court in Cologne in a landmark judgment...

That one took my by surprise. Your turn USA.

Men are creeps, women are victims

Just one stupid double standard that popped up in my news feed:

A man who secretly video records women on the New York City subway system, mainly their legs, is being labeled a “stalker,” a “pervert” and a “creep” by the media. And depending on which media source you trust, police are either trying to track him down and throw him in jail for four years or are not doing anything at all about it.

VS

Meanwhile, there is no such outrage about a site called Subway Crush where commuters posts photos they secretly took of male subway passengers they found attractive.

More about in-group bias and gender stereotypes

A Comparative Study of the Implicit and Explicit Gender Attitudes of Children and College Students - John J. Skowronski, Melissa A. Lawrence - 2000

Implicit attitudes and explicit attitudes toward men and women and toward male soldiers and female soldiers were assessed in fifth-graders (28 male, 31 female) and college students (43 male, 42 female). Women were rated more positively than men on an explicit attitude measure. Similarly, female soldiers were rated more positively than male soldiers, except among college men, who were pro-male soldier. Different results emerged from an Implicit Association Test using names of men and women (general gender condition) or of male soldiers and female soldiers (soldier name condition). Latencies indicated pro-female attitudes in the soldier name condition and among women and college students. Error rates also indicated pro-female attitudes, except for a pro-male preference among men in the general gender condition. Reasons that implicit and explicit attitude measures may produce such divergent results are discussed.


Preferring “Housewives” To “Feminists”: Categorization and the Favorability of Attitudes Toward Women - Geoffrey Haddock, Mark P. Zanna - 1994

Four studies are described outlining the favorability of attitudes toward women. In Study 1, participants indicated their attitudes toward women and men and their construal of the term “women.” The results revealed that women were evaluated more favorably than men, but that male right-wing authoritarians (RWAs) who construed women as referring primarily to feminists were least favorable in their attitudes. In Study 2, participants indicated their attitudes toward both “housewives” and “feminists.” The results revealed that feminists were evaluated less favorably than housewives, and that the most negative attitudes toward feminists were expressed by authoritarian men. Study 3 revealed that high-RWA males held more negative symbolic beliefs concerning feminists (i.e., beliefs that feminists failed to promote participants' values) and that these beliefs accounted for variation in attitudes among high RWAs and much of the RWA-attitude relation. Finally, Study 4 revealed that high RWAs perceived greater value dissimilarity between themselves and feminists. The implications of the findings for future research are discussed.


Are Women Evaluated More Favorably Than Men?: An Analysis of Attitudes, Beliefs, and Emotions - Alice H. Eagly, Antonio Mladinic, Stacey Otto - 1990

In an experiment in which male and female respondents evaluated the social category of women or men on several types of measures, analysis of respondents' attitudes toward the sexes and of the evaluative content of their beliefs established that they evaluated women more favorably than men. In addition, analysis of respondents' emotional reactions toward women and men did not yield evidence of negativity toward women at the emotional level. Nor did it appear that respondents' very positive evaluations of women masked ambivalence toward them. This research, therefore, provides strong evidence that women are evaluated quite favorably—in fact, more favorably than men.


A Meta-Analysis on the Malleability of Automatic Gender Stereotypes - Alison P. Lenton, Martin Bruder, Constantine Sedikides - 2009

Furthermore, given that men are, on average, liked less than are women (Eagly, Mladinic, & Otto, 1991; Rudman & Goodwin, 2004), it certainly seems there is ample scope for improving people’s beliefs about and expectations of men.


Brannon - Chapter 07 - Gender Stereotypes: Masculinity and Femininity

Listening to the conversations of groups of women or men saying terrible things
about the other may seem to confirm this view, but research results are not consistent with such a conceptualization. Although women are the targets of various types of discrimination in terms of economic, political, educational, and professional achievement, attitudes about women are not uniformly negative. Indeed, one line of research from Alice Eagly and her colleagues (Eagly, Mladinic, & Otto, 1991) showed that women as a category re-ceive more favorableevaluations than men. Results from a meta-analysis (Feingold, 1998) indicated that women received slightly more favorable ratings than men. Thus, people in general have positive feelings about the characteristics stereotypically associated with women; people believe that these characteristics provide fine examples of human qualities.

These findings are not consistent with an overall prejudice against women.
Peter Glick, Susan Fiske, and their colleagues (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002;
Glick & Fiske, 2001; Glick et al., 2000) have researched this puzzle in gender stereo-typing and formulated interesting answers. The focus of their research is their concep-tualization of sexism, that is, prejudice based on sex or gender. Their view separates positive from negative aspects of sexism. They call the negative aspects hostile sexism, and this concept includes negative attitudes toward women. They also consider benevo-lent sexism, which they conceptualize as positive attitudes that nonetheless serve to be-little women and keep them subservient. Benevolent sexism is reflected in the attitudes that women deserve special treatment, deserve to be set on a pedestal, and should be revered. Despite the positive nature of these beliefs, people who hold such attitudes tend to see women as weaker, more in need of protection, and less competent than men (Fiske et al., 2002).

Ironically, it may be the favorable traits stereotypically associated with women that
serve to perpetuate their lower status (Glick & Fiske, 2001). When people see women as warm and caring but less competent than men, they may give women positive evaluations but still feel that women need men to protect and take care of them. Thus, women’s sub-servience is justified. Men are not exempt from this type of ambivalent sexism; the stereo-typic characteristics of men can also be analyzed into hostile and benevolent components that are analogous to those that apply to women, but women’s hostile attitudes toward men do not erase men’s dominance (Glick & Fiske, 1999). This type of benevolent prejudice may rationalize racism as well as sexism, casting the dominant group as benevolent pro-tectors rather than oppressors.

Overview of National Representative Rape Studies

I came across and interesting reported and compiled a list that compares several studies on rape based on that. Before we look at the table, some observations. The data is mostly consistent. Add one time they added questions about drug induced raped and at that time the numbers go up a bit. Only half of the representative studies include men. Of those, only one included made to penetrate and therefor female on male rape and that study that included it did not even consider that rape (but instead other sexual violence). If you look at the original data, you will note that 2 more studies are in that table. I excluded those as those are crime surveys, that simply have a different methodology. So Here we go:

Summary of national representative rape statistics studies using behaviorally specific questions of people 18 years and older

                         NWS      NVAWS    NWS-R    NISVS
Includes                 1989-91  1995-96  2006     2010
-------------------------------------------------------------
Men                     |        |   X    |        |   X    | 
                        |        |        |        |        |
Made to penetrate /     |        |        |        |   X    |
Female on male rape     |        |        |        |        |
- Men Year              |        |        |        |  1.10% |
- Men Lifetime          |        |        |        |  4.80% |
                        |        |        |        |        |
Drug Facilitated or     |        |        |   X    |   X    |
Incapacitated Rape      |        |        |        |        |
- Women Year            |        |        |  0.42% |  0.70% |
- Women Lifetime        |        |        |  5.00% |  8.00% |
- Men Year              |        |        |        |   a    |
- Men Lifetime          |        |        |        |  0.60% |
                        |        |        |        |        |
Completed Rape          |   X    |   X    |   X    |   X    |
excluding the above     |        |        |        |        |
- Women Year            |  0.71% |  0.30% |  0.52% |  0.50% |
- Women Lifetime        | 12.60% | 14.80% | 14.60% | 12.30% |
- Men Year              |        |  0.10%a|        |   a    |
- Men Lifetime          |        |  2.10% |        |  0.90% |
                        |        |        |        |        |
Attempted Rape          |        |   X    |        |   X    |
- Women Year            |        |        |        |  0.40% |
- Women Lifetime        |        |  2.80% |        |  5.20% |
- Men Year              |        |        |        |   a    |
- Men Lifetime          |        |  0.90% |        |  0.40% |
-------------------------------------------------------------
Last Year Prevalence    |        |        |        |        |
- Women                 |  0.71% |  0.30% |  0.94% |  1.10%b|
- Men                   |        |  0.10% |        |  1.10%b|
Life Time Prevalence    |        |        |        |        |
- Women                 | 12.60% | 14.80% | 18.00% | 18.30%b|
- Men                   |        |  2.10% |        |  6.20%b|
-------------------------------------------------------------

NVAWS - Even though men were asked while the NVAWS was conducted, female-on-male rape was not included in the definition for rape. The male % therefor measures only male-on-male rape.
NISVS - Asked for made to penetrate but did not include this in the male rape number. The number also consists of attempts and drug induced rape so it is not easy to compare that number with the female equivalent.
a - Relative standard error exceeds 30 percent. In case of the NISVS the data is not shown
b - Includes attempts so that it can be compared with the male number. The male number includes rape & made to penetrate
Source: For the table: Understanding National Rape Statistics - Dean Kilpatrick and Jenna McCauley - 2009
For data on different Studies: NISVS, NVWS, NWS & NWS-R

Corporal Punishment

Some studies:

Corporal Punishment of Children in Nine Countries as a Function of Child Gender and Parent Gender - 2010

Background. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a global perspective on corporal punishment by examining differences between mothers' and fathers' use of corporal punishment with daughters and sons in nine countries. Methods. Interviews were conducted with 1398 mothers, 1146 fathers, and 1417 children (age range = 7 to 10 years) in China, Colombia, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, the Philippines, Sweden, Thailand, and the United States. Results. Across the entire sample, 54% of girls and 58% of boys had experienced mild corporal punishment, and 13% of girls and 14% of boys had experienced severe corporal punishment by their parents or someone in their household in the last month. Seventeen percent of parents believed that the use of corporal punishment was necessary to rear the target child. Overall, boys were more frequently punished corporally than were girls, and mothers used corporal punishment more frequently than did fathers. There were significant differences across countries, with reports of corporal punishment use lowest in Sweden and highest in Kenya. Conclusion. This work establishes that the use of corporal punishment is widespread, and efforts to prevent corporal punishment from escalating into physical abuse should be commensurately widespread.

There was considerable variability in proportions of mothers, fathers, and children in China, Colombia, Italy, Kenya, Jordan, the Philippines, Sweden, Thailand, and the United States who reported the use of corporal punishment and believed that the use of corporal punishment is necessary to rear the target child. Overall, mothers reportedly used corporal punishment more frequently than fathers, and sons were reportedly more frequently corporally punished than daughters were. International efforts to eliminate child abuse and promote children’s right to protection will be both challenging and important because of the prevalence of corporal punishment.

Corporal Punishment by American Parents: National Data on Prevalence, Chronicity, Severity, and Duration, in Relation to Child and Family Characteristics - Murray A. Straus, and Julie H. Stewart’ - 1999

We present data on corporal punishment (CP) by a nationally representative sample of 991 American parents interviewed in 1995. Sii types of CP were examined: slaps on the hand or leg, spanking on the buttocks, pinching, shaking, hitting on the buttocks with a belt or paddle, and slapping in the face. The overall prevalence rate (the percentage of parents using any of these types of CP during the previous year) was 35% for infants and reached a peak of 94% at ages 3 and 4. Despite rapid decline after age 5, just over half of American parents hit children at age 12, a third at age 14, and 13% at age 17. Analysis of chronicity found that parents who hit teenage children did so an average of about six times during the year. Severity, as measured by hitting the child with a belt or paddle, was greatest for children age 5-12 (28% of such children). CP was more prevalent among African American and low socioeconomic status parents, in the South, for boys, and by mothers. The pervasiveness of CP reported in this art&, and the harmful side effects of CP shown by recent longitudinal research, indicates a need for psychology and sociology textbooks to reverse the current tendency to almost ignore CP and instead treat it as a major aspect of the socialization experience of American children: and for developmental psychologists to be cognizant of the likelihood that parents are using CP far more often than even advocates of CP recommend, and to inform parents about the risks involved.

Previous research indicates that boys experience more CP than girls at all ages (Day et ai., 1998; Giles-Sims ei al., 1995; Graziano & Namaste, 1990; Straw, 1994a). In view of the movement toward treating boys and girls more similarly, prior findings might not apply to this sample. However, row 5 of Table IV shows that the difference in the percentage of boys and girls who experienced CP during the year of this survey was statistically significant. Parents reported using CP with 65% of boys compared to 58% of girls. As for chronicity, Table Vindicates a significant difference. Of the boys who experienced CP, it occurred an average of 14.3 times, compared to an average of 12.9 times for girls. In addition, Table V shows a significant interaction between gender of child and child’s age. The deviation from the overall pattern was for children ages 2 to 4. At that age there was no difference at all in the chronicity of hitting boys and girls. Perhaps this is a ceiling effect because at
that age, the prevalence rate was 94%.

Several resources, cleaning up my "to post" list....

There are several entries that are just entirely to big to comment on, that have to be read as a whole, are good when you need to find something etc. These all do not necessarily need a new post (while some do) and it is mostly just to clear up my cluttered "to write" list (228 more to go....YEAH). Anyhow here it goes:

There are several accounts of male rape victims on reddit, and with several I mean many **Trigger Warning**: IamA Requests (comments), SRS Thread and one who did not want to share in said thread, AskReddit Thread, 2 prison rape IamAs, several IamAs more in the comments.

WMST-L File Collection, an Email forum of women's studies teachers. Pretty interesting read.

"Frauengewalt" (female violence) a German source with many English quotes of DV studies. And a somewhat similar thing.

CURRENT CONTROVERSIES AND PREVALENCE CONCERNING FEMALE OFFENDERS OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE - Why the Overwhelming Evidence on Partner Physical Violence Has Not Been
Perceived and Is Often Denied - Straus - 2009. I should probably post about that one in detail. It is the go to source for feminist critique in terms of male victimization of DV. Also, Processes Explaining the Concealment and Distortion
of Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence - 2007.

We also have the feminist position by Johnson. And the NOMAS task force link.

This is the page where the CDC has the data on their youth risk studies. I still feature a slightly older version here as the numbers do not differ that much. But for future references, this might be interesting.

Baumeister's "Is there anything good about men?". A classic.

Contemporary perspectives on masculinity. A book I will read when I have time (never).

Mensrightslinks, studies via r/mr.

The science and politics of comparing women and men.

Male Rape and Human Rights - Lara Stemple

Feminist position on privilege, oppression and power.

SRSD on sex positivity.

I collected some links on the history of women and the draft that somewhat left me nowhere.

bell hook's "Feminism is for everybody", one of those books I too want to read sometime.

"15 Intriguing Thoughts About Men, Women and Relationships" by Warren Farrell, Ph.D.

Sexismsbusters is a nice overview for issues men face.

Regender is a site that swaps male and female pronouns so one can have fun to switch those around.

There were 2 experiments where women lived like man, Nora Vincent's "Self-made Man" and "Macho like me". I want to watch / read both....sometimes. Sigh.

Female Offenders lists quite a few studies / resources.

I’m not buying the argument that banning circumcision is a violation of religious freedom, because such freedom must involve being able to choose for themselves.

Title says it all. Apparently Norway is about to ban non-medical circumcision of infant boys. Good for them. Here is the article.

Surprise, it is a wage gap post....

We start with an excellent post via Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
and I suggest you read it all because it is really good. Highlights:

[W]e cannot say women are paid less for doing the same work when men typically work longer, less flexible hours in more dangerous and uncomfortable positions. Warren Farrell’s calculations highlight the difference between the average hours worked, concluding that men who work full time work an average of 44 hours per week, while women who work full time average 41 hours per week. This represents a bigger difference than you’d immediately think, as a person who works 44 hours a week makes approximately 100% more than someone who works 34 hours a week. Warren Farrell concludes that this accounts for 70% of the wage gap in and of itself. [...]

Economist Thomas Sowell elaborates: “Not all domestic responsibilities can be shared equally, such as having babies, which is not an inconsequential thing since the existence of the human race depends on it. What it means is that women make choices that make a lot of sense for them. For example, the choice of occupations… women tend not to go into occupations in which there’s a very high rate of obsolescence. If you’re a computer engineer and you take five years out to have a child and [raise him] until the age you can put him in daycare, well my gosh, the world has changed. You’d have to start way, way back. On the other hand, if you become a librarian, a teacher or other occupations like that, you can take your five years off and then come back pretty much where you left off.”[...]

Denise Venable, of the National Center for Policy Analysis, further proves this point showing that, “in general, married women would prefer part-time work at a rate of 5 to 1 over married men.” Additionally, women over 25 years of age have held their current job for an average of 4.4 years vs. 5 years for men and pay raises come with seniority (Denise Venable, “The Wage Gap Myth,” National Center for Policy Analysis, April 12, 2002, http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba392) [...]

In 1982, never-married women earned 91% of what never-married men did. (12) In 1971, never-married-women in their thirties earned slightly more than never-married men (13). Today, among men and women living alone from the age of 21-35, there is no wage gap. (14) Among college-educated men and women between 40 and 64 who have never married, men made an average of $40,000 a year and women made an average of $47,000! (15)

Since 1960, and continuing through today, black women with a college degree earn more than white women with a college degree. In 1970, black women who had graduated college earned 125% of what white women who had graduated college earned. (17)

(12) “Current Population Reports,” Series P-60, No. 132, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982, pg. 161
(13) “The Economic Role of Women,” The Economic Report of the President, 1973 Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973, pg. 103
(14) Anita U. Hattiangadi and Amy M. Kahn, “Gender Differences in Pay,” Journal of Economic Perspective, pg. 58, Autumn 2000
(15) Warren Farrell, Why Men Earn More, Pg. 16-17, Amacom, Copyright 2005
(17) Richard Freeman, “Decline of Labor Market Discrimination and Economic Analysis,” Table 1, American Economic Review, pg. 281, May 1973

Another good one by Kay Hymowitz:

The Labor Department defines full-time as 35 hours a week or more, and the "or more" is far more likely to refer to male workers than to female ones. According to the department, almost 55% of workers logging more than 35 hours a week are men. In 2007, 25% of men working full-time jobs had workweeks of 41 or more hours, compared with 14% of female full-time workers. In other words, the famous gender-wage gap is to a considerable degree a gender-hours gap.

The main reason that women spend less time at work than men—and that women are unlikely to be the richer sex—is obvious: children. Today, childless 20-something women do earn more than their male peers. But most are likely to cut back their hours after they have kids, giving men the hours, and income, advantage.

One study by the American Association for University Women looked at women who graduated from college in 1992-93 and found that 23% of those who had become mothers were out of the workforce in 2003; another 17% were working part-time. Fewer than 2% of fathers fell into those categories. Another study, of M.B.A. graduates from Chicago's Booth School, discovered that only half of women with children were working full-time 10 years after graduation, compared with 95% of men. [...]

According to the Netherlands Institute for Social Research, in 2008 only 4% of the 70% of Dutch women who worked part-time wished they had a full-time job. A British Household Panel Survey interviewing 3,800 couples discovered that among British women, the happiest were those working part-time.

A 2007 Pew Research survey came up with similar results for American women: Among working mothers with minor children, 60% said they would prefer to work part-time, while only 21% wanted to be in the office full-time (and 19% said they'd like to give up their job altogether). How about working fathers? Only 12% would choose part-time and 70% wanted to be full-time.

An finally one interesting study:

Does Science Promote Women? Evidence from Academia 1973-2001 - Donna K. Ginther, Shulamit Kahn - NBER Working Paper No. 12691 Issued in November 2006

Many studies have shown that women are under-represented in tenured ranks in the sciences. We evaluate whether gender differences in the likelihood of obtaining a tenure track job, promotion to tenure, and promotion to full professor explain these facts using the 1973-2001 Survey of Doctorate Recipients. We find that women are less likely to take tenure track positions in science, but the gender gap is entirely explained by fertility decisions. We find that in science overall, there is no gender difference in promotion to tenure or full professor after controlling for demographic, family, employer and productivity covariates and that in many cases, there is no gender difference in promotion to tenure or full professor even without controlling for covariates. However, family characteristics have different impacts on women's and men's promotion probabilities. Single women do better at each stage than single men, although this might be due to selection. Children make it less likely that women in science will advance up the academic job ladder beyond their early post-doctorate years, while both marriage and children increase men's likelihood of advancing.

STEM and role models for girls

Tangential interesting:

The researchers found that feminine STEM role models decreased girls' self-rated math interest, ability and short-term success expectations. They also had a negative impact on girls' future plans to study math among girls who did not identify with STEM [...]

Replicating past research, this work suggests that role models whose success seems unobtainable can make young students feel threatened rather than motivated. But even if they see feminine STEM role models, girls who do not care for math or science might not be motivated to like these fields.

"Rather than opening these girls' minds to new possibilities, the feminine STEM role model seemed to shut them further," said Sekaquaptewa, U-M professor of psychology.

The overall study raises the possibility that role models who counter more than one competing stereotype (women can be good at math or be feminine, but not both) are less effective than role models who just counter one (e.g., a typical woman who excels in STEM). The researchers also say that young girls may see their success as difficult to emulate if they believe that women in STEM are "too good" to be role models.

Taking a look at this sentence again: "But even if they see feminine STEM role models, girls who do not care for math or science might not be motivated to like these fields.". Next logical step, force them into STEM at gunpoint.

Intimate Homicides

Some interesting findings on murder via a divorce law study:

Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: Divorce Laws and Family Distress - Betsey Stevenson, Justin Wolfers - 2003

Our data on homicide come from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). The UCR data are derived using a voluntary police agency-based reporting system. The Supplementary Homicide Reports of the UCR provide incident-level information on criminal homicides,
including data describing the date and location of the incident, as well as a range of information on both the offender and the victim. The particular richness of this data is that it codes the relationship of the victim to the murderer, where known.

In this section we will examine three successively broader definitions of intimate homicide. The narrowest only includes spousal homicide, the next group includes homicides committed by any family member or romantic interest, and finally we expand our treatment group to our broadest categorization, which includes all homicides committed by non-strangers.

Homicide Rates: FBI Count (1968-94) / killed per million in the state each year
             Women Mean  Men Mean  Women/Men
by Spouses          7.3       5.5       1.33
by intimates       14.7      18.4       0.80
by Non-Strangers   21.2      56.9       0.37
All Murders        32.8      92.6       0.35

Maternal Gatekeeping: Countless Studies Edition

Recently on F&F:

[T]he main people who “regard women as the default parent” are women themselves. Is she really unaware of the studies on maternal gatekeeping that examine the tendency of mothers to sideline fathers in childcare? Has she not seen the countless articles by women bemoaning their lack of children or wallowing in guilt for working too much and being apart from their kids or worst of all actually losing custody to the child’s father? It’s true that fathers tend to fall into line behind the Moms and play second fiddle in childcare. But it’s also true that they’re following the mothers’ lead. The decision-maker about who does what regarding the kids is usually Mom. And finally, it’s true that fathers are far more involved in childcare than they used to be, again as much social science shows.

So being me I wanted to look what studies did take a look at maternal gatekeeping:

Maternal Gatekeeping: Mothers' Belief and Behaviors That Inhibit Greater Father Involvement in Family Work - Sarah M. Allen & Allan J. Hawkins - Journal of Marriage and the Family 1999

Abstract: Maternal gatekeeping is conceptualized within the framework of the social construction of gender and is defined as having three dimensions: mothers' reluctance to relinquish responsibility over family matters by setting rigid standards, external validation of a mothering identity, and differentiated conceptions of family roles. These three conceptual dimensions of gatekeeping are operationalized with modest reliability and tested with a confirmatory factor analysis on a sample of 622 dual-earner mothers. With cluster analyses, 21% of the mothers were classified as gatekeepers. Gatekeepers did 5 more hours of family work per week and had less equal divisions of labor than women classified as collaborators.

Although scholars have documented that many fathers want to increase the amount of time spent caring for their home and children (Daly, 1993; Lamb, 1997; Pleck, 1997), there are many structural, cultural, familial, and personal barriers to increased father involvement in family work. Daily child care and household tasks can provide an opportunity for both husbands and wives to be connected and committed to protecting, promoting, and nurturing the growth of their children (Hawkins, Chństiansen, Sargent, Hill, 1993). However, more needs to be known about the specific contextual factors that may mediate or regulate men’s involvement in family work. Specifically, how Women’s beliefs and behaviors toward men’s involvement affect actual levels of involvement needs more attention (De Luccie, 1995). Scholars have noted that Wives as well as husbands resist more collaborative arrangements of family Work (Coltrane, 1996; Dienhart & Daly, 1997; Thompson & Walker, 1989). One way women resist increased men’s involvement in family Work is by “gatekeeping” the domain of home and family.

McBride , B. A., Brown , G. L., Bost , K. K., Shin , N., Vaughn , B. and Korth, B. (2005), Paternal Identity, Maternal Gatekeeping, and Father Involvement. Family Relations, 54: 360–372. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2005.00323.x

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine whether mothers’ beliefs about the role of the father may contribute to mothers influencing the quantity of father involvement in their children's lives. Participants were 30 two-parent families with children between the ages of 2 and 3 years. A combination of self-report and interview data were collected from both mothers and fathers. Results from multiple regression analyses indicated that fathers’ perceived investments in their parental roles and actual levels of paternal involvement are moderated by mothers’ beliefs about the role of the father. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for future research on parenting identity and maternal gatekeeping as well as the development of parenting programs for fathers.

Maternal gatekeeping, coparenting quality, and fathering behavior in families with infants. - Schoppe-Sullivan, Sarah J.; Brown, Geoffrey L.; Cannon, Elizabeth A.; Mangelsdorf, Sarah C.; Sokolowski, Margaret Szewczyk Journal of Family Psychology, Vol 22(3), Jun 2008, 389-398. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.22.3.389

The present study examined the role of maternal gatekeeping behavior in relation to fathers' relative involvement and competence in child care in 97 families with infant children. Parents' beliefs about fathers' roles were assessed prior to their infant's birth. Parents' perceptions of maternal gatekeeping behavior (encouragement and criticism) and coparenting relationship quality were assessed at 3.5 months postpartum. The authors assessed fathers' relative involvement and competence in child care using a combination of parent report and observational measures. Results suggest that even after accounting for parents' beliefs about the paternal role and the overall quality of the coparenting relationship, greater maternal encouragement was associated with higher parent-reported relative father involvement. Moreover, maternal encouragement mediated the association between coparenting quality and reported relative father involvement. With respect to fathers' observed behavior, fathers' beliefs and parents' perceptions of coparenting relationship quality were relevant only when mothers engaged in low levels of criticism and high levels of encouragement, respectively. These findings are consistent with the notion that mothers may shape father involvement through their roles as "gatekeepers."

Two news sources reported about a study that also seems to be interesting:

Kenney presented research she co-wrote at a meeting of the Population Association of America over the weekend. The study of 1,023 couples from 20 large cities in the USA found mothers were protective of their caregiving and educational engagement with the child but were less so for playtime activities that "were not considered threats to the mother's caregiving identity," the paper says. [...] Other gatekeeping research co-written by Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan, an assistant professor of child development at Ohio State University in Columbus, is significant because it studied actual behaviors rather than just beliefs, and of the 97 couples participating, fathers were more involved in daily care of infants when they received active encouragement from the wife or partner. "This study provides perhaps the best evidence to date that the phenomenon of maternal gatekeeping exists and that, under some conditions, it may have the potential to affect fathering behavior," says the study, published last year in the Journal of Family Psychology.

------------------------------------------------------------------

[F]athers' beliefs about how involved they should be in child care did not matter when mothers were highly critical of fathers' parenting. In other words, fathers didn't put their beliefs into practice when faced with a particularly judgmental mother.

"Mothers are in the driver's seat," said Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan, co-author of the study and assistant professor of human development and family science at Ohio State University.[...]

"Mothers can be very encouraging to fathers, and open the gate to their involvement in child care, or be very critical, and close the gate.

"This is the first real evidence that mothers, through their behavior, act as gatekeepers by either fostering or curtailing how much fathers take part in caring for their baby."

Schoppe-Sullivan conducted the study with Elizabeth Cannon, a graduate student at Ohio State, along with Geoffrey Brown and Sarah Mangelsdorf of the University of Illinois, and Margaret Szewczyk Sokolowski. Their results appear in the June 2008 issue of the Journal of Family Psychology.

And on with more studies:

Maternal Gatekeeping: Do They See It The Way We Do? - Lauren E. Altenburger - 2012

Research on the importance of father-child relationships has increased because prior research has indicated that father engagement has a positive influence on the child’s social, behavioral, and psychological outcomes from infancy to adolescence (Pruett, Pruett, & Wong, 2009; Sarkadi, Kristiansson, Oberklaid, & Bremberg, 2007). Higher levels of father engagement in child care have also produced positive effects on self-esteem in children and on the quality of the marital relationship (Pruett et al., 2009; Sarkadi et al., 2007). These discoveries have drawn attention to the external factors that encourage or discourage the father’s level of involvement in childrearing. Fathers are more likely to be positively engaged with their children when they have few symptoms of poor mental health, are securely attached to their own parents, communicate effectively with the child’s mother, and have more social support (Pruett et al., 2009). Research shows that one of the most significant influences on paternal quantity and quality of involvement in childrearing is the mother’s beliefs and behavior toward the father (Allen & Hawkins, 1999). The mother often acts as a ‘gatekeeper’ by controlling the father’s interaction with the child. Mothers may resist increased father involvement by attempting to exclude the father from child care, or support increased father involvement by encouraging fathers to become engaged in child care (Fagan & Barnett, 2003; Puhlman & Pasley, 2010). Specifically, maternal gatekeeping behavior is a set of conscious or unconscious behaviors the mother engages in that either support or discourage the father’s relationship with the child. [...]

In a study exploring predictors of father involvement during the first year of parenthood, researchers found that a variety of factors influence father involvement in dual-earner, working-class families. Mothers’ work hours and shift time were two characteristics that were central predictors of father involvement. Researchers found that parents who work opposite shifts are better able to share childcare responsibilities (Meteyer & Perry-Jenkins, 2010). Findings also indicated that the more hours mothers worked, the more highly involved fathers were in childcare, suggesting that when mothers work more hours they are more willing to accept the father’s help. Maternal gatekeeping was a significant predictor of father involvement at one year postpartum. The negative control gatekeepers engage in allows mothers to maintain a sense of “primacy” as mothers (Meteyer & Perry-Jenkins, 2010). [...]

Mothers high on gatekeeping were characterized by low self-esteem, a strong feminine gender orientation, and a prominent maternal identity. Gaunt also found that the stronger the mother’s religiosity, the fewer her work hours, the less importance she attached to her work, and the lower her income and education level, the more she tended to resist father’s participation in family work (2008).

The Hand That Rocks the Cradle: Maternal Gatekeeping after Divorce - Marsha Kline Pruett, Lauren A. Arthur, Rachel Ebling - 2007

[T]he power of maternal gatekeeping within the family lies in large part in the consistently demonstrated dynamic that fathers' participation in their children's life is heavily impacted by maternal influences.18 Said another way, the father-child relationship is more highly connected to the quality of the co-parental relationship than is the mother-child relationship, which is more independent of the couple. 19 One suggested rationale for this triadic aspect of fathering includes the greater clarity of mothers' family responsibilities as compared to fathers', since fathers have a less clear "job description" in relation to parenting and family work 20 thus requiring negotiations about a fathers' role between partners. 21

There is much evidence that mothers actively facilitate and promote the father-child relationship. 22 In their exploration of the role of maternal attitudes on paternal involvement, Beitel and Parke23 found that when mothers perceived their partners as motivated to engage in child care responsibilities and, to a lesser extent, as competent to do so, fathers were more involved in childcare. Mothers may passively hinder father-child relationships by behaving in ways that impact how fathers feel about their paternal role. [...]

The importance of mothers' attitudes in gatekeeping is further evident from research showing that sixty to eighty percent of mothers do not want their husbands more involved in childrearing, as such involvement would change the balance of power in the marriage and the important role mothers ascribe to themselves. 25 It is important to note that these studies were conducted over a decade ago; women's and men's roles in family-related work are converging 26 as women's extensive involvement in the workforce requires a re-equilibration of family roles with men contributing more at home. [...]

Divorce can provide myriad opportunities for maternal gatekeeping, and the anger and conflict that often characterize the divorcing period often produces more restrictive gatekeeping. 33 More restrictive gatekeeping occurs in about one-quarter of the married couples that have been studied,34 and it occurs more often in divorced contexts even if the nonresidential fathers are as involved as those living with their children are. 5 It may occur even more often among non-married, separating couples, as these fathers report more obstacles to access posed by their ex-partners than do their married-but-divorcing counterparts. 36 [...]

Results from the few studies of gatekeeping with divorced populations converge on findings that mothers' support is key to father involvement after divorce, 39 and that his non-residential status along with her perceptions of his competence lead to more restrictive maternal gatekeeping. 40

Women in America or arguments for a council on men and boys

This is about the following report:

WOMEN IN AMERICA Indicators of Social and Economic Well-Being - March 2011 - Prepared by U. S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration
and Executive Office of the President Office of Management and Budget

This report is kind of big thing not only because of the sheer size but also:

In cooperation with Bureau of Justice Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census Bureau, National Center for Education Statistics, National Center for Health Statistics, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics for White House Council on Women and Girls

White House Council on Women and Girl. Like my title states this is going to be an argument that a council for men and boys is also needed. (I am not saying there are no issues facing girls and women, there are many)

So I read through that report and copied the headlines (and sometimes further explanations as the headline in this context here can sometimes be misleading) for points a council for men and boys might also be interested in. Here we go:

While the populations of both men and women are aging, women continue to outnumber men at older ages.

Most adults live in households headed by married couples; single mother households are more common than single-father households. [Father's rights / divorce]

Women’s gains in educational attainment have significantly outpaced those of men over the last 40 years.

Female students score higher than males on reading assessments and lower than males on mathematics assessments. [...] The percentage of both boys and girls proficient
in math has increased significantly since 1990, although girls are still slightly less likely than boys to be proficient in math.

Higher percentages of women than men age 25–34 have earned a college degree.

More women than men have received a graduate education.

Higher percentages of women than men participate in adult education.

Unemployment rates for women have risen less than for men in recent recessions.

The above are fairly obvious, the next is a bit tricky.

In families where both husband and wife are employed, employed wives spend more time in household activities than do employed husbands. [...] On an average workday in 2009, employed married women spent 1.6 hours in household activities and an additional hour caring for household members. In contrast, employed married men spent nearly one hour in household activities and about 40 minutes caring for household members. [...] Employed married men spent more time in labor market work and related activities (including commuting) on an average workday in 2009 than did employed married women 8.8 hours and 7.6 hours, respectively.

Some math:
Employed wives: 1.6 + 1 + 7.6 = 10.2
Employed husbands: 1 + 0.67 + 8.8 = 10.47

It is the usual stuff, the headline makes it look like husbands do less than wives yet when you add up the numbers, there is almost equality. They also add the men have more leisure time statistic, but when you look at the graph, as women sleep more and do more other activities it seems to even out.

Women have longer life expectancy than men, but the gap is decreasing. [as if that is a bad thing]

More women than men report having a chronic medical condition. [...] Women report a higher prevalence of asthma, chronic bronchitis and emphysema, cancer, and arthritis. Men report a higher prevalence of heart disease and diabetes.

Females age 12 and older are more likely than males to report experiencing depression. [...] At all ages, females experience higher rates of depression than males. In any two-week period, 8 percent of women and girls report experiencing clinically significant depression, compared to 5 percent for men and boys. [Gap is not that big and I assume depression is underreported in men]

More than one-third of all women age 20 and older are obese. The proportions of women and men age 20 and older who are obese are similar.

The share of women age 18–64 without health insurance has increased. [...] Less than half of all women meet the Federal physical activity guidelines for aerobic activity. [...] Overall, 43 percent of women age 25 and older met the Federal aerobic physical activity guidelines in 2009, compared to 51 percent of
men. [Gap is not that big]

Many women do not receive specific recommended preventive care. [...] Only 53 percent of women age 50 and older have ever received a sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy. Men are somewhat more likely to report ever having these treatments (56 percent) than women in this age group. [...] Women age 50 and older are somewhat more
likely than men to have obtained an influenza immunization in the last year (53 percent compared to 49 percent) but the shares of women and men age 65 and older having ever received a pneumococcal immunization were similar. [...] Women age 18 and older are more likely to have had their blood cholesterol checked in the last 5 years than men (78 percent and 73 percent, respectively).

The share of women age 18–64 without health insurance has increased. [...] In 2009, 18 percent of nonelderly women (age 18–64) lacked health insurance, compared to 13 percent in 1984. For men, the percentage of uninsured rose from 16 percent to 24 percent.

One out of seven women age 18–64 has no usual source of health care. [...] Approximately 15 percent of women and 26 percent of men age 18–64 have no usual
source of health care.

Nonfatal violent crimes against women declined between 1993 and 2008. [...] The nonfatal violent victimization rate for women fell from 43 per 1,000 women in 1993
to 18 per 1,000 in 2008. During the same period, the rate of nonfatal violent victimization of men declined from 64 to 22 per 1,000 men.

Homicides of females declined between 1993 and 2008. [...] In 2008, 3,541 females and 12,731 males were victims of homicide.

The imprisonment rate for females has increased significantly. [...] The imprisonment rate for females quadrupled between 1985 and 2008, from 0.17 per 1,000
females to 0.68 per 1,000 females. The 2008 rate was much greater for males (9.52 per 1,000 men) than for females.

There are a whole lot of issues men and boys face. It is time to take a closer look at them.

Mate poaching...

Pretty interesting:

Noting that single women often complain that “all the good men are taken,” the psychologists (Melissa Burkley and Jessica Parker of Oklahoma State University) wondered if “this perception is really based on the fact that taken men are perceived as good.”

[...E]ach of the experimental subjects was told that he or she had been matched by a computer with a like-minded partner, and each was shown a photo of an attractive person of the opposite sex. (All the women saw the same photo, as did all the men.) Half of the subjects were told that their match was already romantically involved with someone else, while the other half were told that their match was unattached. Then the subjects were all asked how interested they were in their match.

To the men in the experiment, and to the women who were already in relationships, it didn’t make a significant difference whether their match was single or attached. But single women showed a distinct preference for mate poaching. When the man was described as unattached, 59 percent of the single women were interested in pursuing him. When that same man was described as being in a committed relationship, 90 percent were interested.

According to a recent poll, most women who engage in mate poaching do not think the attached status of the target played a role in their poaching decision, but our study shows this belief to be false. Single women in this study were significantly more interested in the target when he was attached. This may be because an attached man has demonstrated his ability to commit and in some ways his qualities have already been ‘‘pre-screened” by another woman.

There was also this study:

Are all the taken men good? An indirect examination of mate-choice copying in humans - Kevin W. Eva, Timothy J. Wood - 2006

Across many species, females are typically the more choosy of the 2 sexes because female-specific investment (e.g., gestation and lactation) constrains the number of offspring a female can produce, whereas the main constraint in this regard for males is simply access to females.2 As a result, poor mate choices harm a female's reproductive value to a greater extent than they do a male's. Evolutionary theory predicts that such pressures will lead females to rely on cues from their environment that can aid them in determining the reproductive value of a potential mate. One cue shown to be used by female Japanese quail and numerous other species is the choice behaviour of other females.3 If a female has deemed a male worthy of mating, that provides information to other females about the value of that male. Whether or not human females are sensitive to such social information (mate-choice copying) is, therefore, an interesting empirical question. [...]

Females were simply asked to rate the attractiveness of males who were presented in head-and-shoulder photographs. Each male was presented to half of the participants as “married” and to half as “single.” Analysis of covariance revealed that males were rated as more attractive when labelled “married,” thereby suggesting that human females are indeed sensitive to information provided by the choices of other females, despite the minimalist nature of the intervention used in this experiment.

Sentencing: Sex Offenders edition

Interesting study:

Female sex offenders receive lighter sentences for the same crimes than males says a study recently published in Feminist Criminology, a SAGE journal and the official journal of the Division on Women and Crime of the American Society of Criminology.

Embry and Lyons looked at the sentences that male and female sex offenders received for specific sex offenses and found that even after the implementation of sentencing guidelines to ensure equality in sentencing, on average male sentences were between 6% and 31% longer than female sentences for the same or similar crimes.

"It appears as if the criminal justice system actually treats women more leniently than men," wrote Randa Embry and Phillip M. Lyons, Jr., authors of the study. [...] "This leads to the supposition that women, regardless of the departure from social and gender norms committed in concurrence with the offense for which they are being sentenced, continue to be viewed as individuals who should be protected by the justice system," wrote the researchers. "Obviously, as a social institution, the criminal justice system is reluctant to break those social norms and gender roles in response to atypical gendered behavior."

As I skimmed through the Original, which is

Sex-Based Sentencing: Sentencing Discrepancies Between Male and Female Sex Offenders - Randa Embry and Phillip M. Lyons, Jr. - Feminist Criminology - 2012 7: 146


As previously stated, the prevailing number of studies that address gender differences in sentencing overwhelmingly find women receive more lenient sentences (Blackwell, Holleran, & Finn, 1998; Curry et al., 2004; Daly & Bordt, 1995; Daly & Tonry, 1997; Farnsworth & Teske, 1995; Jeffries et al., 2003; Koons-Witt, 2002; Spohn & Beichner, 2000). Although research has shown that gender does impact sentencing decisions, further exploration has found these differences can be mediated by extralegal factors such as having children and family responsibilities (Koons-Witt, 2002). Koons-Witt found that after accounting for personal characteristics of offenders based on gender roles, such as responsibility for child care (having children), the impact of gender on sentencing decisions of whether or not to incarcerate is diminished. These findings suggest that the chivalry hypothesis does not apply to all women but to those who most closely follow stereotypical gender roles as a parent. This then indirectly may provide support for the selective chivalry hypothesis by way of harsher sentences for those women who do not take on typical gender roles. In an effort to replicate the findings of Koons-Witt’s study in Minnesota, sentencing decisions were evaluated in Ohio to identify possible changes in sentence disparity after implementation of determinate sentencing structures (Griffin & Wooldredge, 2006). Unlike the findings of Koons-Witt, this study found reductions in sentencing disparities after the guidelines were implemented. More important, Griffin and Wooldredge found no support for the chivalry hypothesis and focal concerns model when it comes to extralegal factors such as having a dependent child. No significant differences were found for those women being sentenced who had children versus those who did not have children.[...]

Even after the implementation of determinate sentencing, it appears judges are more apt to consider extralegal factors for women when making sentencing decisions (Williams, 1999). By examining adult felony case files in Florida, Williams observed that judges were more likely to consider only legally relevant factors such as criminal history or offense and case-based factors for men, whereas extralegal determinations were taken into consideration to determine penalties of female offenders, allowing a downward departure from sentencing guidelines put in place in the state of Florida.[...]

However, it can be argued that the most compelling case for the selective chivalry hypothesis or evil woman theory stems from the examination of more specific behaviors as they apply to traditional gender roles. Unfortunately, those studies that examine sentencing differences between male and female offenders have typically found little to no support for the theory (Farnsworth & Teske, 1995; Mustard, 2001; Rodriguez et al., 2006; Steffensmeier, Kramer, & Streifel, 1993).

[...]

When all variables, sex, sentence length, and offense category, were considered, a significant difference was recognized in sentence length, and mean sentence length for men was longer, indicating a harsher penalty for the same or similar offense. Standardized scores for length of sentence with regard to sex offenses in general showed a mean of 8.42 for men as opposed to 7.92 for women. In addition, those specific offenses, which found a significant difference in sentence length, rape, child sexual assault, and forcible sodomy, showed a mean standardized sentence length of 9.38, 7.88, and 9.04 for men, as opposed to 8.83, 7.41, and most notably, 6.23, respectively (Table 2). In no instance were women sentenced to longer or more severe sentences with regard to any sex offense.

Sexual Misconduct in Schools

From Study to Study. Toy Soldiers pointed me to an interesting article:

A 2004 report mandated by Congress estimated that 4.5 million, or 9.6 percent, of America’s public-school students are victims of educator sexual misconduct by the time they reach 12th grade. Of those cases, 30 percent are boys abused by women working in schools, according report author and Virginia Commonwealth University professor Charol Shakeshaft, the nation’s leading researcher in what she calls “educator sexual misconduct.”

That sounded somewhat similar to the numbers I have heard before to cite from a CDC source:

Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance - 2007 - Page 47 Table 11

Percentage of high school students who experienced dating violence and who were ever physically forced to have sexual intercourse
Male 11% raped 4.5%
Female 8.8% raped 11.3%

The report itself was pretty interesting, too:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION: Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of Existing Literature - Charol Shakeshaft - 2004

Although I identified nearly 900 citations in the literature that discussed educator sexual misconduct in some format, there were only 14 U.S. and five Canadian or UK empirical studies on educator sexual misconduct. Of the U.S. studies, only one (Shakeshaft, 1994, 1995) received federal funding (U.S. Department of Education). None of these studies—either singly or as a group—answers all of the reasonable questions that parents, students, educators, and the public ask about educator sexual misconduct, and they certainly do not provide information at a level of reliability and validity appropriate to the gravity of these offenses. [...] Four studies include survey data from national samples, but only the American Association of University Women (AAUW) studies are based upon data from a representative national sample (AAUW, 1993; 2001; Cameron et al., 1986; Stein, Marshall, and Tropp, 1993; SESAME, 1997). [...] The AAUW Hostile Hallways surveys, administered to a nationwide sample of 8th to 11th-grade students in 1993 and again in 2000, are the only studies that provide reliable nationwide U.S. data on educator misconduct. The purpose of these two studies was not specifically to document educator sexual misconduct. Peer sexual harassment is the primary focus of the surveys and the reports. However, the data from these studies were subjected to a secondary reanalysis which focused only on educator sexual misconduct (Shakeshaft, 2003). [...] As a group, these studies present a wide range of estimates of the percentage of U.S. students subject to sexual misconduct by school staff and vary from 3.7 to 50.3 percent (Table 5). Because of its carefully drawn sample and survey methodology, the AAUW report that nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator sexual misconduct sometime during their school career presents the most accurate data available at this time.

Reading the above, I will focus on the AAUW studies.

Table 8. Sex of Offenders
-----------------------------------------------------
AAUW and Shakeshaft secondary analysis (2003)
Male: 57.2% Female: 42.8%

Cameron et al. (1985)
Male: 57% Female: 43%
-----------------------------------------------------

Table 9. Same-Sex Misconduct
-----------------------------------------------------
AAUW and Shakeshaft secondary analysis (2003)
Male-Male: 15.2% Female-Female: 13.1% Same Sex: 28.3%

Cameron et al. (1985)
Male-Male: 8.9% Female-Female: 8.9% Same Sex: 17.8%
-----------------------------------------------------

Table 11. Targets by Sex
-----------------------------------------------------
AAUW and Shakeshaft secondary analysis (2003)
Male: 44% Female: 56%

Cameron et al. (1985)
Male: 43% Female: 57%
-----------------------------------------------------

The AAUW study was also available online and gives us a lot of details:

Hostile Hallways: Bullying, Teasing, and Sexual Harassment in School - AAUW - 2001

Major Findings:

Significant numbers of students are afraid of being hurt or bothered in their school lives. [...] Girls and boys are almost equally likely to feel this way [...] Girls are more likely than boys to experience sexual harassment ever (83 percent vs. 79 percent) or often (30 percent vs. 24 percent).

Would You Complain to a School Employee If
-----------------------------------------------------
Another Student Harassed You? (% Saying Yes)
Boys: 29% Girls: 52%

a School Employee Harassed You? (% Saying Yes)
Boys: 67% Girls: 76%
-----------------------------------------------------

How Often Do You Experience Sexual Harassment?
-----------------------------------------------------
Often, occasionally, rarely:
Boys: 79% Girls: 83%

Often, occasionally:
Boys: 56% Girls: 63%

Often:
Boys: 24% Girls: 30%
-----------------------------------------------------

Personal Experiences of Nonphysical Harassment
-----------------------------------------------------
Target of sexual comments, jokes, gestures, or looks
Boys: 59% Girls: 73%

Target of sexual rumors:
Boys: 32% Girls: 39%

Target to be flashed or “mooned”:
Boys: 39% Girls: 32%

Being Called gay/lesbian:
Boys: 42% Girls: 29%

showed, gave, or left them sexual photographs,
illustrations, messages, or notes
Boys: 35% Girls: 28%
-----------------------------------------------------

Personal Experiences of Physical Harassment
-----------------------------------------------------
Touched, grabbed, or pinched in a sexual way
Boys: 42% Girls: 57%

Intentionally brushed up against in a sexual way
Boys: 42% Girls: 53%

Clothing pulled at in a sexual way
Boys: 28% Girls: 34%

Blocked or cornered in a sexual way
Boys: 23% Girls: 34%

Forced to kiss someone
Boys: 7% Girls: 7%

Clothes pulled down
Boys: 19% Girls: 12%

Forced them to do something sexual other than kissing
Boys: 12% Girls: 9%
-----------------------------------------------------

Who did you tell
-----------------------------------------------------
No one (Nonphysical Harassment)
Boys: 24% Girls: 17%

No one (Physical Harassment)
Boys: 27% Girls: 14%
-----------------------------------------------------

Judging by the above boys are not that rarely victims of sexual harassment, rape and educator sexual misconduct. Who would have thought? (Besides my educated readers of course)

Another wage gap tidbit....

How I hate it when an article does not give sources:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics looked at weekly wages instead of annual salaries, and determined that women earn 81 percent what men earn. That gap narrows to 86 cents on the dollar when hourly wages are examined.

And hourly wages among those with college degrees are at parity: The BLS figures show there is no gap between men and women.

So I looked up what the BLS had to say:

Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2010 - U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics - July 2011

Women earned 81 percent of the median weekly earnings of their male counterparts [...] Sixty-two percent of women and 56 percent of men employed in wage and salary jobs were paid by the hour in 2010. Women who were paid hourly rates had median hourly earnings of $11.83, 86 percent of the median for men paid by the hour ($13.76). (See tables 9, 10, and 18–21.)

That is where the first 2 are from, even though I am not sure if "people who were paid hourly rates" = "when hourly wages are examined". The last fact, I could not find in the statistics. Table 9 tells us that the gap by people who were paid by the hour for "Some college or associate's degree" is 83.4% while for "Bachelor's degree and higher" it is 96.9% which also isn't exactly parity but close.

These other tidbits were also interesting:

Earnings differences between women and men were widest for Whites and for Asians. White women earned 81 percent as much as their male counterparts in 2010, while Asian women earned 83 percent as much as their male counterparts. By comparison, Hispanic women had earnings that were 91 percent of those of their male counterparts, while Black women earned 94 percent as much as Black men. (See tables 1 and 14.)

Among younger workers, the earnings differences between women and men were not as great. Women earned 91 percent of what men earned among workers 25 to 34 years old and 95 percent as much as men among 16- to 24-year-olds. (See table 1.)

Among full-time workers (that is, those working 35 hours or more per week in their sole or principal job), men were more likely than women to have a longer workweek. In 2010, 25 percent of men in full-time jobs worked 41 or more hours per week, while 14 percent of females in full-time jobs worked the same number of hours. Women were more likely than men to work 35 to 39 hours per week: 13 percent as opposed to 5 percent. A large majority of both male and female full-time workers had a 40-hour workweek; among these workers, women earned 87 percent as much as men earned. (See table 5.)

The solution to figure out the wage gap usually is to keep in mind that the main reason is often women, going out of the work force due to childbirth / taking care of family obligation. Which of course correlates with younger workers who have a lower gap and men that work more hours to support their family. I looked into the data and tried to figure out if marriage rate and race could explain the racial wage gap (the idea is that if a fewer percentage of black women are married than white women this might explain the gap) but this didn't really work out.

And finally a summary of two tables in the BLS report of items where the gap is lower than 10%

Table 1. Median usual weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers, by selected characteristics, 2010 annual averages - Women's earnings as percent of men's

16 to 19 years                   94.6
20 to 24 years                   93.8
25 to 34 years                   90.8

Black or African American        92.1
Hispanic or Latino ethnicity     90.7

Never married                    97.2

Table 9. Median hourly earnings of wage and salary workers paid hourly rates, by selected characteristics, 2010 annual averages - Women's earnings as percent of men's

16 to 19 years                   97.8
20 to 24 years                   91.7
25 to 34 years                   91.9
65 years and older               93.8

Black or African American        92.1

Never married                    95.1

Bachelor's degree and higher     96.9

Start Strong, a teen dating violence survey....

...that slightly disappoints me as there is not breakdown in sex in their results. The last CDC study tell us that about 1/3 of rape victims in that age group are male as are more than half of dating violence victims. What the study tells us, is that there is plenty of violence:

The Start Strong evaluation is one of the few studies looking in-depth at dating violence behaviors and risk factors among 7th-grade students.

75% of students report ever having a boyfriend or girlfriend

More than 1 in 3 (37%) students surveyed report being a victim of psychological dating violence in the last 6 months

Nearly 1 in 6 (15%) students surveyed report being a victim of physical dating violence in the last 6 months

Nearly 1 in 3 (31%) students surveyed report being a victim of electronic dating aggression in the last 6 months

Nearly half (49%) report being a victim of sexual harassment in the past six months, such as being touched, grabbed, or pinched in a sexual way. or that someone made sexual jokes about you.

The reason I cite that study is the next statement where we get data on sex. Does that mean that sexual harassment / violence was roughly equal in their sample? Who knows. Anyhow:

Half of students strongly agreed that it was okay for a girl to hit her boyfriend under certain circumstances, such as a boy who makes his girlfriend jealous on purpose.

7% of students strongly agreed that it was okay for a boy to hit his girlfriend under certain circumstances, such as a girl who makes her boyfriend jealous on purpose.

Is it fair to say that violence against boys is normalized? Well maybe compared to violence against girls.

Maybe we get a better breakdown on the data once the other waves of date get analyzed. Here is the mainpage btw.