That's a pity that boys were not asked the corresponding questions questions with "male" changed to "female" and "math, science and computer abilities" chaged to "reading and writing". Just to get the full picture.

Yes, oswid... what about the menz????

As a man, I can also tell you that many, many men are also harassed verbally usually in regards to their lack of manness (or gayness). This is something we have to examine from both fronts because I believe the harassment of women and the harassment of men around masculinity comes from the same basic need injected into youth by certain parts of society. I believe we should be looking for a way to deal with this issue by eliminating the need to define oneself as a man by how much you can harass women and homosexuals.

Wow, first comment in.

Yes, men get harassed too for unreasonable gender expectations. Can we talk about girls for five minutes though without having to feel guilty about having left the poor men out? Does the refusal to accept that young women get harassed without insisting on comparable victimhood for men not seem like a problem?

Yes, oswid... what about the menz????

Fantastically productive comment, sgzax. Even if you aren't at all concerned with what boys thought about those issues, polling them concurrently still would've made the numbers on the girls more useful by providing a baseline. As it is, there's nothing to compare it to.

Because the numbers on girls are meaningless without using boys as a 'baseline?' Ridiculous! The study was about the experience of girls. Males are not the generic baseline for scientific studies. Really, stop thinking of yourself as the generic person and women as the other. Please?

What are you even talking about, Identity? Are you interested in discussing feminist issues, including the sexual harassment women experience from a young age?
Sgzax's comment was no less productive than Oswid's.

high school boys are the worst! I was recently telling my roommate about one of my first memories of feminist anger - when a physics lab partner commented that our lab got screwed up because "that's what happens when you let a woman do all the work." I was livid. I punished him by not letting him copy my lab book anymore. That was the absurd part: I was doing all the work because the boys were lazy and not as smart as me. Asshole. I'm still mad about that, 8 years later.

These sort of figures don't *need* a baseline, because it's not about disparate impact. It doesn't miraculously stop being harassment just because boys experience gender-based harassment too.

high school boys are the worst! I was recently telling my roommate about one of my first memories of feminist anger - when a physics lab partner commented that our lab got screwed up because "that's what happens when you let a woman do all the work." I was livid. I punished him by not letting him copy my lab book anymore. That was the absurd part: I was doing all the work because the boys were lazy and not as smart as me. Asshole. I'm still mad about that, 8 years later.

Yeah that's the funny part, Bethany. If girls are so stupid, why are they gaining admission to college/university at such a higher rate than their deadbeat dude peers? And finishing? Guess the guys are too good to compete with the lowly girls.

Yes, I think all of us here know that the patriarchy/gender norms harm both girls/women AND boys/men... and yes, maybe there should be more studies showing both sides of it. That doesn't mean that when a study like this comes out, that we can't pay attention to it or appreciate it without assuming that whoever did the study didn't think it was important to look at how these ideas affect boys as well. Sheesh.

And Jeff, you put it well... if we found out that like, 89% of boys experienced gender-based harassment, would we say that 90% of girls was nothing? Because the "baseline" of 89% makes it seem normal? That doesn't stop it from being harassment.. I hate the old "oh well, it happens all the time" argument for why we shouldn't try to change things.

sgzax, my point is, the implications of the study depends on how the numbers differ between genders, not the "boys are more important so they should be included in everything" that you read into it. If the numbers are identical for boys reporting these forms of sexual harassment, it means something different than if they are much lower than the girls. The later is much more likely, and it would've strengthened the conclusion of the study - why is that a bad thing? The males would be the baseline in this case because the point of the study was to examine how prevalent sexual harassment was for the girls polled. Baseline, as I used it, could be substituted loosely for control group. Try to give people the benefit of the doubt on the semantics once in a while.

identity... now that you've explained what you meant, i still don't agree with you. like jeff said, even if boys experienced gender-based harassment to a similar degree as girls... that doesn't make it NOT harassment.. that doesn't make it any worse that they're experiencing that. in that case, would we just assume that it was normal and ignore it?

"The males would be the baseline in this case because the point of the study was to examine how prevalent sexual harassment was for the girls polled. Baseline, as I used it, could be substituted loosely for control group. Try to give people the benefit of the doubt on the semantics once in a while."

Please explain further why you think boys should be the control group in a study that does not appear to have one because it was a poll/interview study. It still seems that you're implying girls are othered. and boys are the norm...as someone already pointed out, this has been medicine's/psych's/etc mistake for hundreds of years.

The demand for a "control group" in a poll makes no sense whatsoever.
Go ahead, poll the boys too. The result will be "Teenagers of both sexes report harassment from males."

Leslie, of course it's still harassment, never said it wasn't. I just think taking information from both genders would've provided a fuller picture. Like I said, this was a study about sexual harassment of girls, and that should stay the focus, but polling the boys doesn't ipso facto make it about them.

Another way in which the information could've been used is asking the boys the same or similar questions about the girls (do you think girls here are bullied/do you think you bully girls here? etc). This framing would give a better picture of how "acceptable" this kind of behavior is, how aware the boys were of the sexual harassment. If they thought it didn't exist or they saw it as much as the girls did is immaterial in regards to whether it is happening and it is harassment - it is in either case.

However, if the aim is to rectify the situation, the information is useful. If the boys think they're doing nothing wrong, and don't report much sexual harassment, they're clueless about it and need to be informed. If they report the same numbers as the girls, they think it's okay to do, which requires a different tact. Am I wrong in that the boys, regardless of your views on what motivates them, are the source of the sexual harassment?

identity: I understand how that might have added to the study, but I also think that 90% is a mindblowing statistic - it means it's a near universal experience for girls. That all by itself is pretty meaningful to me. (and I think the other 10% just forgot about or didn't notice an occasion of sexual harrassment).

The poll for boys would most likely demonstrate the following: that being perceived as even remotely feminine is a social death sentence for a boy.

This is more powerful than simply not fitting into the stereotypical gender role. It is reinforcement of the idea that femaleness is something to be discarded for boys AND girls.

Femaleness is at best tolerated in many a society; and it is tolerated only when girls and women conform to being sexual and reproductive objects.

Okay, by the time I've written a comment to post there are 3 more jumping on me, so I'll try one more time.

I initially responded poorly to the negative tone, sorry. I also didn't think it was productive to get upset that "menz" were mentioned, I was trying to point out how polling men could've informed the conclusions drawn by the study. I never "demanded" them as a control group, I said you shouldn't just write them off in the discussion. I still think that more information would provide a more complete picture of the situation. If you think my phrasing betrayed some kind of gender bias, I'm sorry, it wasn't my intent. I'm the one disagreeing, so I'm getting words put in my mouth and intent read into my comments so I can be everyone's devil's advocate.

but I also think that 90% is a mindblowing statistic - it means it's a near universal experience for girls.

Unfortunately, because I am a teenage girl I can admit that this is true statistic. The funny thing is that the very few boys in my class that have been nothing but respectful to me and my friends are also the ones being targeted by the group of guys who tries to rub up against me and my fellow female classmates everyday.

I have told them repeatedly to stop, when they didn't a group of us cornered them after school where I curtly told him that if they ever came near me again I would break their knee caps.

I know some people on this site would have objections to girls threatening their harasses as a solution but I am at the point where I am pissed off that me and the other 90% were subjected to this sort of treatment in the first place.

I understand how that might have added to the study, but I also think that 90% is a mindblowing statistic - it means it's a near universal experience for girls.

So how would having a corresponding number for what percentage of the boys thought girls experienced sexual harassment detract, rather than contribute to this?

IT WOULDN'T, Identity!!
But would you please focus on the issue at hand rather than immediately shifting the topic of the post to male harassment victims!?

Ninadeer, I say go for it; just be smart and make sure YOU don't get into trouble somehow. ;)

I was teased so much at school that I'm not even sure if any of it would count as sexual harassment. I remember many comments about my ou-of-control acne and the accusation that I was a lesbian (I was never a girly girl) happened in three different school districts. I also remember that guys treated me with so much disgust, I never thought anyone would ever ask me out and ended up dating guys just because I was so flattered that they had even noticed me. Thank god I expected life after high school to be different and eventually grew myself some self esteem.

So how would having a corresponding number for what percentage of the boys thought girls experienced sexual harassment detract, rather than contribute to this?

Sara, I think you misread what I wrote. I feel like I'm being lumped in with the commenters that are concerned with male harassment victims. Please reread what I wrote, I'm trying to explain how surveying boys could be used to help look at female sexual harassment victims.

You are right, I misread what you wrote. Sorry.

Assuming you want to be able to take constructive action based on a study like this, that it isn't just bean counting, including boys is valuable.
Essentially, changing the way things happen in society is applied memetics, and memetics is very much like ecology. If you try to study ecology without looking at whole systems, you get nowhere.
The same with studies like this. If you don't have a map of the social terrain, then any plan or action you develop is going to misfire. You need to know how these things are impacting boys, not because boys are the norm or more valuable than girls or what have you, but because they are part of the social terrain that you are studying. Social changes have to be broad based if you want them to last/function.

(Basic assumption: that harassment of girls and harassment of boys is based on the same underlying memescape. If this is so, you won't have any luck changing the treatment of one group unless you change the treatment of all groups.)

My answer to all questioning "Why boys should be surveyed also?":

The study shows some figures regarding girls. That's perfectly fine until it is being used. For example, by justifying spending taxes to fight this practice of juvenile sexual harrasment against girls only.

It would mean that public money are spent to help women only, not knowing what is situation with men. It would mean that the feminism is not movement for gender equality but the special interest group. Which is not, right?

Specifically, 67 percent of girls reported receiving unwanted romantic attention

I disagree that unwanted romantic attention is sexual harassment, unless it continues after the girl tells the boy she's not interested.

and 76 percent of girls reported sexist comments on their athletic abilities, again predominantly from male peers.

Does this mean that the girls who received sexist comments from their female peers are also considered to have been sexually harrassed?

Where does it say anything about tax money, Oswid?

Classical feminism isn't a woman's lobby; it fought against eliminating unfair gender stereotyping that hurts people. It has done much good for women -- and men, too. Most unfair stereotyping has historically affected women. Not all. It's not whining about the "menz" to say that unfair gender stereotyping is the principal problem, and in certain respects it affects men and boys, too. In certain respects it hurts men more than women. Any contrary position is dishonest. To suggest the the problem at issue is one-sided and that the victims are always female is dishonest and provides a skewed, gender divisive picture of what's going on. Frankly, some of the commentators here (not the hosts) seem to be OK with that.
I will also say that inclusion in the poll of "unwanted romantic attention" renders it meaningless. What the hell does that mean? A boy asks a girl out on a date renders the girl a victim??? Puh-lease! Especially in our culture where the boys are "supposed" to initiate the dating process (another unfair gender stereotype that doesn't help either sex).

My gut tells me the 90% rate of sexual harassment is accurate. But I would also say, as some of the commenters have implied, that a 90% harassment rate *in general* is also accurate. That's why the question of boys' responses is an important one to ask.

Not to knock the study, but the EurekAlert! press release gives me pause. Doesn't it seem a bit high that 49% of respondents were Latina, even for CA and GA? And don't the definitions of sexual harassment seem a bit broad? Consider the problem of girls being "teased because of their appearance." Does that include teasing from other girls? Teased because of wearing un-hip clothes? How was this quesiton presented -- and does it help us assess the problem of sexual harassment if draw the target too big?

Or consider "unwanted romantic attention." Clearly this would get a different -- presumably higher -- response rate than asking about "unwanted sexual attention" or "unwanted sexual advances." What makes romantic attention "unwanted"? Is any attention from a person in whom you are not interested potentially "unwanted"? (Ask yourself, alternately, what would make romantic attention "wanted," and the problem becomes a bit clearer. This is not, I think, just a maybe-they-were-asking-for-it objection.)

Again, I know enough of high-school life to assume the worst. And I know that press releases are not the same as actual findings. But this survey, from what I see of it, seems potentially biased toward finding "the worst" that we know is out there.

To suggest the the problem at issue is one-sided and that the victims are always female is dishonest and provides a skewed, gender divisive picture of what's going on.

Good thing nobody said that.
But plenty of people ARE refusing to talk about harassment towards girls, period.

“90% is a mindblowing statistic - it means it's a near universal experience for girls.� - Bethany

Given how vague the criteria are, I am surprised that % isn’t higher.

SarahMC, if it is not about spending tax money in the end, then why was this research done at all? Just because of authors' curiosity?

Look, I am completely for battling sexism and sexual harassment (juvenile, in this particular case). Unfortunately, this study limited itself by analyzing sexism towards girls only, thus it has VERY limited use.

Moreover, I believe that stating that "unwanted romantic attention" is sexual harassment is overkill. Who is going to show any "romantic attention" if it most likely will be considered as sexual harassment towards victim? Don't forget that it will be applied to girls showing "romantic attention" also.

“and the accusation that I was a lesbian (I was never a girly girl)�

That is sexual harassment, FYI.

Also, I don’t think that you can conclude the criteria used in the study were vague, simply from a little news blurb. You would have to get your hands on the study itself, and look at the detailed methodology with regards to what "unwanted romantic attention" means in the context of the study. Right now you are just guessing/making assumptions.

Another thing, I don’t know if anyone on this thread would care, but: I would say out of the guys I’ve slept with in college so far, they were all non-stereotypically masculine and were teased by other men as teenagers, and they still managed to treat me in ways I found disappointing (read: less than ideal, arguably disrespectfully). I’m not saying that male harassment of males and male harassment of females isn’t part of the same system, but I definitely don’t think the two are totally motivated from the same feelings or directly comparable.

As the writer of the Dollymix post and the press release, I just wanted to toss in that of course it's a good idea to also survey boys. But social science studies function within real-life parameters of funding, time and access. So that may be another survey for another day. Big conclusions come when studies build on each other. This just provides one piece in an interesting and complex puzzle.

And if anyone wants to see the more complete explanation of the survey questions and data, please visit the EurekAlert link for the link to the actual journal. It can be accessed through many libraries and has the full information. I've read it and it's really interesting. There was no way to fit everything into one tiny press release.

"Unfortunately, this study limited itself by analyzing sexism towards girls only, thus it has VERY limited use."

Very limited use for over 50% of the world's population?

Why don't you explain it to us again? We can't seem to get enough men in here already doing that.

Boys have been polled, it's not hard to find the results, usually in the same articles with the results on girls.

I used to get a ton of crap in High School, I wasn't girly, and dyed my hair blue (this was 15 years ago- it was heard of but uncommon as hell where I lived). I also became familiar with feminism around that time, and it honestly did make me want to stand up to it more.
Getting called a dyke never struck me as an insult though, they were calling me gay and that isn't negative in my mind (it's not like stupid, ugly, etc). Once in a while I would correct them and tell them I was Bi, but generally I didn't mind that one much.

Frankly, I think its probably safe to assume that almost 100 percent of both women and men have been "sexually harassed" at some point in their lives, based on the relatively broad definition set forth here. I certainly have -- its hard to get through four years at university these days without receiving some sort of "unwanted romantic attention" or a "demeaning gender-related comment."

But I think the most telling sentence in the whole article is this: "The researchers found that girls have different levels of understanding of sexism and sexual harassment, which may affect reporting data."

Keeping that in mind, my assumption would be that if you asked 600 or however many men about whether they'd been sexually harassed, a much smaller percentage than women would respond "yes," because of the perception (not truth) that 'sexual harassment' is something that only happens to women.

I'm thinking of -- I'm a male by the way -- a particular example in my life, which I won't bore you all with, but suffice to say that I was (and I'm framing it this way for the first time right now) on the receiving end of some EXTREMELY aggressive sexual advances, which did, at the time, make me uncomfortable. But moving forward, I sort of brushed/laughed the whole thing off -- chalked it u