Please review EXACT details of assignment … DO NOT reply if you can not return in 24 hours!!!! follow exact with American only references. ?Discuss
Please review EXACT details of assignment … DO NOT reply if you can not return in 24 hours!!!!
follow exact with American only references.
**TOTAL PAGES – FIVE PAGES**
· PART ONE – Module IV Interaction Forum: Violence Against Women, Traditional Gender Roles, & "#MeToo" – 300 Words
PROMPT: Many researchers see violence against women as related to dynamics of power and dominance in society that represent a male-dominated (patriarchal) social structure. Male domination can be expressed in various ways. For example, feminist theorists have argued that rape and sexual assault are forms of social control that reinforce both the "traditional male sex role" in society and the "historical powerlessness of women in male-dominated societies" (Alvarez and Bachman, p. 188). Other theorists argue that men and women are socialized differentially, with men being taught to be aggressive and virile whereas women are taught to be submissive and passive (Alvarex and Bachman, p. 189).
INSERT PAGE 189
Other scholars have focused on the socialization process of males and females and argue that traditional socialization practices encourage males to associate aggression, dominance, strength, and virility with masculinity. In contrast, traditional female stereotypes encourage females to be submissive and passive. Further, as Diana Scully and Joseph Marolla explain,
Males are taught to have expectations about their level of sexual needs and expectations for corresponding female accessibility which function to justify forcing sexual access. The justification for forced sexual access is buttressed by legal, social, and religious definitions of women as male property and sex as an exchange of goods. Socialization prepares women to be “legitimate” victims and men to be potential offenders.75
In fact, research does support the contention that a belief in traditional sex roles is related to attitudes endorsing violence toward women. For example, Martha Burt interviewed a representative sample of almost 600 adults and found that individuals with a belief in conventional sex-role stereotypes were more likely to
endorse rape myths, such as that women are partially responsible for their own rapes, that many women enjoy rape, and that women who are drunk cannot be raped;
have attitudes supporting violence against women; and
The Writing Part
In this interaction forum, post a response that describes some of the evidence from Alvarez and Bachman, Chapter 6, which shows that there is an association with violence against women and traditional gender roles and attitudes. Then, comment on whether you think social movements like "#Me Too" can minimize problems of sexual assault related to traditional sex roles and attitudes, as discussed in A&B pp. 196-97. Engage with other students on these issues, i.e., in terms of what studies find about the causes of violence against women or commenting on methods to minimize it.
Insert pages 196-197
In contrast to these policies, electronically monitoring high-risk sex offenders with GPS technology has shown promise. In California, the state with the greatest number of sex offenders under GPS surveillance, Stephen Gies and his colleagues recently compared outcomes between paroled sex offenders who were placed on GPS monitoring with a control group of parolees who were not. Importantly, both groups of offenders were matched to be as equivalent as possible on things such as age, race, and prior time incarcerated, along with other factors. The researchers found that compared to the control group under regular parole supervision, those under GPS surveillance were more likely to register as sex offenders, less likely to be rearrested within a one-year time period, and less likely to be reconvicted. Importantly, however, most of these arrests were for parole violations, not new offenses. In fact, less than 4% of both the control group and GPS monitored parolees were rearrested for a new offense.93 In sum, there is more work needed to determine which policies and practices actually work in preventing this type of violence.
It should not be surprising that debates about sexual offending legislation are often heated. Some critics argue that states should do more to rehabilitate sex offenders in the first place and that registries and residential restrictions placed on offenders only serve to stigmatize offenders and prevent them from moving on with their lives. Other legal scholars contend that these laws are really nothing more than a second punishment for those who have already paid their debt to society. In a fascinating examination of sex offender legislation over the 20th century, Chrysanthi Leon concluded that all sex offenders, regardless of the contextual circumstances of their crimes, are now classified as “monsters” requiring confinement, which prioritizes the public’s belief “that all sexual offending is harmful, dangerous, and caused by deviant desires that are compulsive and beyond control.”94 Today, based on politicians’ need to appear tough on crime, such legislation will probably continue to become ever more punitive, regardless of its effectiveness to combat such crimes.
The #MeToo Movement
While the laws in the previous section were designed to protect us from certain kinds of sexual predators, our cultural consciousness regarding what is considered acceptable is quickly evolving to more accurately reflect the more typical sexual assaulter. Although the “Me Too” movement was founded in 2006 by Tarana Burke, it did not come to the forefront of public consciousness until several women alleged that movie producer Harvey Weinstein had raped them in October of 2017.95 After actress Alyssa Milano asked her followers to speak up about sexual assault after these accusations against Weinstein, the words me too began appearing on social media by the thousands.96 After the movement became a hashtag (#MeToo), The Washington Post reported that the two words were “the top trend nationwide on Twitter and yet another rallying cry for women and men who have experienced some type of sexual harassment or assault.”97 About 30% of those who have tweeted the hashtag are men.
Photo 6.5 #MeToo has appeared on social media millions of times. Has this changed your perceptive about the prevalence of sexual assault?
At the time of this writing, it has now been about one and half years since the allegations against Weinstein were made and the #MeToo movement emerged as a cultural force. This movement came on the heels of an earlier movement, under the hashtag #NotOkay, which began after an Access Hollywood video was released that showed Donald Trump boasting about kissing and groping women. There are several reasons people post in these movements. For example, while #MeToo posts are most often made to bring past victimizations to light, a large percentage of them are also to offer support to all sexual assault victims. From a societal perspective, it is hoped that these individual posts and movements like them will continue to decrease individual perceptions that this predatory behavior is tolerated.
How does this affect the prevalence of sexual assault? It goes back to the original goal of rape law reforms and deterrence theory. If would-be offenders believe that their offending behavior will be made public and sanctioned, they will be less likely to engage in such behavior. Offending behavior made public on social media not only has the potential of resulting in formal sanctions by the courts, as we have seen with Harvey Weinstein, but also involves public shaming, which is a form of informal social control. In contrast to formal social control, which involves formal law enforcement sanctions, informal social control sanctions do not involve the criminal justice system. They are meted out by our family, friends, places of employment, and so on. For example, when other famous people, including the comedian Louis C.K. and Senator Al Franken, were accused of sexual misconduct, Franken felt compelled to resign his Senate seat and Louis C.K. had several performances cancelled. Both were publicly shamed by these allegations, and even though they did not face legal sanctions, the informal sanctions they did receive surely impacted their lives and sent a message to other would-be offenders. Importantly, research shows that informal sanctions such as these are as powerful as formal sanctions in deterring criminal behavior.98
In sum, movements such as #MeToo and #NotOkay may decrease the prevalence of sexual assault for several reasons, including by changing social attitudes about what behavior is appropriate and by increasing the costs, both formal and informal, of engaging in such behavior. It is up to future research to determine what effects these movements have had. What is certain is that the #MeToo movement is spreading globally. It has brought down Bollywood stars in India, has jeopardized the former Costa Rican president Oscar Arias Sanchez’s Nobel prize, has placed academics in China under scrutiny, and has exposed faith healers in Brazil, to name a few.
Conclusions
We hope this chapter has eradicated any stereotypes you may have had about rape and sexual assault. Rape is not a rare event, and it is used in many arenas as a tool of violence, power, and dominance. We believe we have come a long way as a society in recognizing that these victimizations are no different from other forms of violence. However, we still have a long way to go. When fewer than 1 in 10 women who meet the legal criteria of being raped on college campuses and fewer than 1 in 4 victims in the general population are willing to report their victimization to police, we know that the vast majority of offenders will never be punished, and any deterrence value the criminal justice system may have for them and for other would-be offenders is lost. It is hoped that one day, societal awareness will catch up with legal norms.
· PART TWO – Module IV Assignment: Dissecting An Article 2 – Assessing Causality (750 Words)
Assignment
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
For this second assignment on dissecting an article, you will be asked to provide a critical analysis that focuses on causality & theory development. Some of the skills you will employ have already been applied in previous assignments, but some tasks are new.
INSTRUCTIONS: For this assignment, please access the assigned article "Gender Differences in Sexual Assault Victimization Among College Students" by Hines and Colleagues.
After you have read the article in full, please do the following:
1) Identify the Research Question & Thesis Statement of the Article. What do the researchers want to find out in their study, i.e., what is the purpose of the study? What is their overall thesis statement based on what they find out?
2) Units of Analysis? Who are the subjects of this study in terms of their social characteristics? Were they a unitary group or were there differences among them? Another way to think about this is, who made up the study sample?
3) Research Method & Data Collection: How do the researchers go about discovering the data used for their study? What is their source of data?
4) Variables & Measurements: The primary dependent variable for this analysis is sexual assault victimization, with further differentiation by men versus women. How do the researchers define sexual violence and measure its frequency among their sample? Further, the researchers identify three primary independent variables that they hypothesize* are likely to be associated with, or perhaps causal of, sexual assault victimization. What are these variables and how are they measured (hint: these variables pertain to a student's "routine activites" with regard to school, leisure and social life as well as their personal behaviors and choices).
Note: Other independent variables used in this analysis include stalking, dating violence (not involving sexual aggression), and "self-protective" measures. You are asked not to examine these measures as part of this assignment as they are considered intervening factors.
* A hypothesis is similar to a research question but it is more specific statement of what researchers expect to find as a result of their study and geared to specific types of data collected and analyzed. Hypotheses are based on earlier research finding into given phenomena (i.e., they are not based on hunches).
5) Analysis & Assessing Causality: The researchers present a lot of details in their "Results" section on how variables are related to each other, and they also employ some quantitative methodologies to isolate effects. Don't get bogged down in these. Rather, identify and summarize key findings on the relationship between the key independent variables you identified (for purposes of measurement) and sexual assault victimization. To what degree do the results suggest that a student's "routine activities," personal behaviors and choices are associated with sexual violence victimization? How are the results different for men versus women and by sexual orientation or gender identity? To what degree can these relationships be construed as causal, i.e., the extent to which an independent variable predicts sexual assault victimization?
6) Theory & Theory Building. Conclude your assignment with a discussion of how social theory helps to explain the causes and risks to violence, in particular, focusing on the "routine activities theory." What is this theory and how can it be used to predict sexual violence on college campuses according to the authors?
,
Violence and Victims, Volume 27, Number 6, 2012
922 © 2012 Springer Publishing Company http://dx.doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.27.6.922
Gender Differences in Sexual Assault Victimization Among
College Students
Denise A. Hines, PhD Jessica L. Armstrong, MA Kathleen Palm Reed, PhD
Amy Y. Cameron, MA Clark University, Department of Psychology
College students are at particular risk for sexual assault victimization, yet research tends to focus on women as victims and men as perpetrators. The purpose of this study was to investigate gender differences in the prevalence, context, and predictors of sexual assault victimization among college students. Results showed that women were significantly more likely to have been sexually assaulted in a 2-month time period, but the context of victimization varied little by gender. Victimization was predicted by sexual orientation, time spent socializing and partying, and severe dating violence victimization for men and by year in school, time spent on the Internet, drinking and using drugs, and being a stalk- ing and dating violence victim for women. Results are discussed in the context of routine activities theory and implications for prevention and future research.
Keywords: rape; routine activities theory; male victims; vulnerability hypothesis; unwanted sex
S exual violence among college students is a significant public health concern, with estimates that 20%–25% of college women will be the victims of rape or attempted rape during their college careers (Fisher, Cullen, & Turner, 2000). Although most
research on sexual victimization among college students has focused on women, researchers are increasingly interested in sexual victimization among college men (e.g., Abbey, 2002; Aizenman & Kelley, 1988; Baier, Rosenzweig, & Whipple, 1991; Banyard, Ward, et al., 2007; Bridgeland, Duane, & Stewart, 1995; Lottes & Weinberg, 1996; Reed, Amaro, Matsumoto, & Kaysen, 2009; Rouse, 1988; Ryan, 1998; Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2001). However, few have examined how female experiences of victimization differ from those of male victims. The goal of this study is to investigate gender differences in sexual assault victimization, the context in which it occurs, and predictors of victimization.
Sexual Assault Victimization 923
PREVALENCE AND CONTEXT OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AMONG FEMALE AND MALE COLLEGE STUDENTS
Several studies have shown that college women are at high risk for sexual assault victimiza- tion. For example, 5% of a nationally representative sample of college women were victims of completed or attempted rape in a 7-month period at a rate of 27.7 per 1,000 women (Fisher et al., 2000). Other studies show that as many as half of college women experience some form of unwanted sexual activity (Abbey, Ross, McDuffie, & McAuslan, 1996; Himelein, 1995; Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, 1987; Synovitz & Byrne, 1998), with about 25%–33% of college women reporting forced sexual touching (e.g., Fiebert & Osburn, 2001).
Much less is known about sexual assault victimization among college men. Studies show that men are sexually victimized, often by female perpetrators (Choudhary, Coben, & Bossarte, 2010; Weiss, 2010). The rates of verbal sexual coercion in a 1-year period (i.e., insisting on or threatening someone into engaging in sexual activity) against college men by women are between 10% and 22% (e.g., Aizenman & Kelley, 1988; Anderson, 1998; Baier et al., 1991; Hines, 2007; Struckman-Johnson, 1988; Struckman-Johnson & Struckman- Johnson, 1994), whereas rates of physically forced sexual intercourse by college women against men are between 1% and 3% (Anderson, 1998; Baier et al., 1991; Hines, 2007; Rouse, 1988; Struckman-Johnson, 1988; Struckman-Johnson & Struckman-Johnson, 1994).
Although rates of victimization among college men have been documented, less is known about the context of these sexual assaults. Research on college women (Fisher et al., 2000) shows that most college women know their offenders, who are most often a classmate, a friend, an ex-boyfriend/boyfriend, or an acquaintance. Almost 90% of victimizations occurred during the evening, late night, or very early morning hours. Most victimization took place off campus, usually in a residence, and more than 90% of the sexual assaults that took place on campus occurred in a residence hall. About 20% of rape or attempted rape victims reported an injury of some sort.
To our knowledge, only two studies have assessed the context of sexual victimization among college men as compared to women. Reed et al. (2009) found that 70% of college men said they were drinking and/or using drugs at the time that they experienced forced sexual touching, whereas 39% of college women did; 86% of college men were drink- ing when they experienced sexual assault/rape, whereas 70% of college women were. Furthermore, 71% of men and 78% of women reported that their perpetrator was drinking at the time of the sexual assault/rape. Banyard, Ward, et al. (2007) found that men were significantly more likely than women to indicate that unwanted sexual contact occurred at a party, but there were no gender differences in whether the unwanted contact occurred on or off campus, the relationship of the victim to the perpetrator, alcohol/drug use by either the perpetrator or victim, or perpetrator tactics.
GENDER DiFFERENCES iN PREDiCTORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT ViCTiMizATiON
It is also important to identify factors that are associated with an increased risk of victim- ization. Studies that have focused on college women have shown that sexual abuse as a child or prior sexual assault victimization (Fisher et al., 2000; Follette, Polusny, Bechtle, & Naugle, 1996; Hines, 2007; Koss & Dinero, 1989), approval and enjoyment of premarital sex, the number of men with whom they have had sexual intercourse (Koss & Dinero, 1989),
924 Hines et al.
frequently drinking to intoxication, being unmarried, and living on campus (Fisher et al., 2000) predict sexual assault victimization. In a study on college men, Tewksbury and Mustaine (2001) found that significant predictors of any kind of sexual assault victimiza- tion included not being married, being non-White, having a high proportion of drug use time at parties, frequently spending leisure time at a bar, having a greater number of sib- lings, and not having a consistently employed father when he was growing up. Predictors of serious sexual assault (i.e., threats or force to engage in intercourse) included being non-White, frequently using drugs during the week, having a greater number of siblings, being an only child, and being a college athlete.
ROUTiNE ACTiViTiES THEORY
One theory that offers insight into the pattern of emerging findings related to the predic- tion and context of sexual victimization among college students is the routine activities theory. According to this theory, opportunity is key to explaining victimization, which occurs when three important factors are present: (a) the absence of capable guardians who could protect against a crime, (b) a motivated offender, and (c) a suitable target (Cohen & Felson, 1979; Felson, 1998). The first factor of routine activities theory is supported by the fact that college often represents a new developmental phase characterized by having fewer capable guardians than at any other point in their lives previously.
Support for the second factor regarding motivated offenders comes from research on unde- tected rapists (Lisak & Miller, 2002). Most (80.8%) of these offenders strategically identified “targets” who are incapacitated because of drugs or alcohol and are within their own social networks. Similarly, college women who have friends who use alcohol to get women drunk for the purposes of having sex are significantly more likely to be sexually assaulted in com- parison to college women who do not have such friends (Schwartz & Pitts, 1995).
In a college setting, these motivated offenders without capable guardians are in close proximity to, and come into repeated contact with the third factor, suitable targets, which has been discussed elsewhere as the vulnerability hypothesis (Koss & Dinero, 1989). According to this hypothesis, several aspects of one’s lifestyle can increase one’s vulner- ability to being sexually assaulted. For example, a prior sexual assault may increase one’s risk for sexual assault during college (Follette et al., 1996; Gidycz, Orchowski, King, & Rich, 2008; Hines, 2007; Koss & Dinero, 1989). Increased time in situations that moti- vated offenders seek out might also increase vulnerability (e.g., high levels of alcohol and drug use; Fisher et al., 2000; Koss & Dinero, 1989; Reed et al., 2009; Schwartz & Pitts, 1995; Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2001). Conversely, using protective measures against an assault (e.g., educating self about victimization) may decrease vulnerability (Felson, 1998). Although the extant literature has focused on this hypothesis in women, it may hold true for male victims of sexual assault as well. In fact, Tewksbury and Mustaine (2001) found that male victims who are active in college athletic teams, and involved in partying and socializing, were more at risk for serious sexual assault.
PRESENT STUDY AND HYPOTHESES
This study uses a large, multiyear sample of college students to investigate gender dif- ferences in the prevalence and context of sexual assault victimization. We hypothesized
Sexual Assault Victimization 925
that women would be sexually assaulted at higher overall rates and frequencies than men. Further, we hypothesized that most of both genders would report drinking and/or drug use by both themselves and their perpetrators during sexual assault incidents. Given the paucity of research on the context in which male sexual assault victimization occurs, we offered no other specific hypotheses regarding potential gender differences victimization contexts.
We also explored gender differences in the predictors of sexual assault. The chosen predictors were guided by the vulnerability hypothesis and included the demographics of the participants, the activities they engage in on a daily basis (e.g., studying, socializing), their level of alcohol and drug use, other violent victimization, and self-protective measures (Tewksbury & Mustaine, 2001). We hypothesized that living on campus and being non- White would put students at increased risk for sexual victimization. We also hypothesized that certain activities, such as time spent socializing/partying, would make them vulnerable; whereas other activities, such as time spent studying, would make them less vulnerable. Further, we hypothesized that alcohol and drug use would make them more vulnerable, as would other victimization. Finally, we hypothesized that self-protective measures, such as educating themselves about interpersonal violence, would make them less vulnerable. Given that routine activities theory is not a gender-specific theory, we did not hypothesize that there would be gender differences in the prediction of sexual assault victimization.
METHODS
Participants and Procedure
Participants included 1,916 students (535 male, 1,381 female; mean age 5 20.81 years, SD 5 3.20) from a small Northeastern university. Demographic characteristics were roughly equivalent to the demographics of the student body, with a slight overrepresenta- tion of women (72.1%; university is 60% women).
In November of 2008, 2009, and 2010, all students were sent an e-mail inviting them to participate in an online, anonymous survey on safety and well-being at the university. The survey was located within the secure survey software system maintained by the university. Students were given 1 month to complete the survey and sent weekly reminder e-mails to encourage survey completion. Raffle incentives were offered to increase participation. To enter the raffle, participants were redirected to a separate survey on which they entered their contact information. Prizes each year included one $100 gift card and twenty $20 gift cards to the university bookstore.
In 2008, 2009, and 2010, 574 students (19.0% of the student body), 705 students (22.8%), and 639 students (20.3%) participated in the survey, respectively. There were no differences between survey years on major demographic variables, including gender, race/ ethnicity, and sexual orientation. However, in comparison to students in 2008, students in 2009 and 2010 were significantly older, less likely to be first-year students but more likely to be graduate students, and more likely to live off campus. These demographic differences are likely because of a different, intensive survey (unrelated to the current article) we con- ducted with the first-year students earlier in the year in both 2009 and 2010, which possibly decreased their willingness to participate in another survey conducted by the researchers.
The methods for this study were approved by the institution’s board of ethics. All stu- dents were apprised of their rights as study participants. At the completion of the survey, information on psychological resources and support services was provided.
926 Hines et al.
Measures
Demographics. Basic demographic information was collected, including age, gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, class year, and residence status.
Sexual Assault Victimization. Sexual assault victimization was measured with six ques- tions modified from a survey developed at the University of New Hampshire (Banyard, Ward, et al., 2007). These questions assessed how often (never, once, twice, 3–5 times, 6–10 times, 11–20 times, more than 20 times) someone forced, threatened, and engaged in nonconsen- sual sexual contact or intercourse against the participants since the beginning of the academic year. Participants were provided with the definitions of the terms used in the questions: (a) “sexual contact—attempting or actually kissing, fondling, or touching someone in a sexual intimate way, excluding sexual intercourse”; (b) “unwanted sexual contact—those situations in which you were certain at the time that you did not want to engage in the sexual experi- ence and you either communicated this in some way . . . or you were intimidated or forced by someone or you were incapacitated . . . ”; (c) “sexual intercourse—any form of sexual penetration including vaginal intercourse, oral sex, and anal intercourse”; and (d) “unwanted sexual intercourse—those situations in which you were certain at the time that you did not want to engage in the sexual experience and you either communicated this in some way . . . or you were intimidated or forced by someone or you were incapacitated. . . .”
They were then given the following instructions: “Since school began in September 2008/09/10, please indicate the number of times that anyone, male or female (including people you know), has done the following things to you.” Questions included “physically forced you to have sexual contact against your wishes,” “threatened to harm you to have sexual contact against your wishes,” “had sexual contact with you when you were so intoxicated that you were unable to consent,” “physically forced you to have sexual inter- course against your wishes,” “threatened to harm you to have sexual intercourse against your wishes,” and “had sexual intercourse with you when you were so intoxicated that you were unable to consent.” If participants indicated any sexual assault victimization, they were asked follow-up questions regarding the most recent incident. These questions included information regarding whether the victim and/or perpetrator were drinking and/ or using drugs during the incident, what the victim was doing at the time of the sexual assault, the time of day the sexual assault occurred, the location of the sexual assault, demographic characteristics of the perpetrator, and whether and what types of injuries were sustained.
Daily Activities. We asked participants whether they participated in any of the student clubs on campus; clubs were grouped according to the rubric established by the univer- sity’s Office of Student Life (see Table 1). We asked participants to indicate the number of weekends per month they spent away from campus and the number of hours per week they typically engaged in working, watching TV, playing videogames, using the Internet for personal reasons, studying, meeting with faculty, exercising, partying, socializing, and doing service work.
Drinking and Drug Use. Participants were asked two questions regarding their use and abuse of alcohol: “How often do you drink alcohol?” (response options: never, less than once per week, once per week, twice per week, three to four times per week, five or more times per week) and “On average, when you drink, how many drinks do you have in an evening?” (response options: I don’t drink, less than one drink, one to two drinks, three to four drinks, five to six drinks, seven or more drinks). They were also asked, “How often do you use marijuana?” with the following response options: never, less than once
<
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
