IS DATE RAPE JUSTIFIABLE? The Effects of Dating Activity, Who Initiated, Who Paid, and Men's Attitudes toward Women

In two related studies, 268 male undergraduates rated the justifiability of date rape under various circumstances. As predicted, rape was rated as significantly more justifiable (a) if the couple went to the man's apartment rather than to a religious function, (b) if the woman asked the man out rather than vice versa (significant in Study 1 only), and (c) if the man paid all the dating expenses rather than splitting them with the woman. It was also predicted that men who were classified as traditional on the Attitudes toward Women Scale would rate rape as more justifiable than nontraditional men, especially under the three conditions mentioned above. These results were always in the predicted directions, but did not always reach statistical significance. Two explanations for the differences between traditional and nontraditional men are explored.     

SHAKEN CONFIDENCE

Anecdotal evidence suggests that sexual harassment may cause women to doubt their abilities, attributing their success to their professor's or supervisor's attraction to them rather than to their qualifications. Two experiments assessed whether a decrease in confidence could result from something as seemingly harmless as flirting. In Experiment 1, a male confederate posing as an advertising executive asked 56 female students to draw an advertisement, which he then praised. He behaved either flirtatiously or neutrally. In Experiment 2, female and male students interacted with a flirtatious or neutral advertisement executive of the other gender. In both experiments, women's self-creativity ratings decreased significantly more from pre- to posttest in the flirtatious condition than in the control condition. Men were affected less than women by the ad executive's flirtatiousness. The results suggest that flirtatiousness by an authority figure may have negative consequences for women's self-confidence.     

Prenatal Paranoia: An Analysis of the Bumpy Landscape for the Pregnant Athlete

ABSTRACT

I analyze the case of pregnant athletes, and argue that sexism surrounds pregnant athlete’s participation in sport. I claim that we stigmatize the pregnant body in action. Participating in sport while pregnant is often considered socially irresponsible behaviour because of unfounded fear of harming the fetus. Many believe that elite sport is in conflict with reproductive ability. However, this belief is not rooted in scientific findings, and rather is reinforced by traditional sexist views of the woman’s athletic body and its capabilities. Analyzing the various degrees of sexism like sexual objectification and unjust discrimination that surround the pregnant athlete is a relevant and necessary exercise in order to challenge traditional sexist views and increase agency for the pregnant athlete.     

NOT WANTED IN THE INBOX!: EVALUATIONS OF UNSOLICITED AND HARASSING E-MAIL

This study was designed as a first step to explore sexual harassment in the electronic domain. One hundred six students read 10 e-mail messages ranging from jokes to spam to a sexual proposition from a stranger and rated them on an offensiveness evaluative scale. Participants also completed social desirability and attitudes toward sexual harassment scales. Messages with sexual content were generally perceived less favourably than e-mail without such content. Gender was critical to the experience of receiving many types of e-mail messages. When the e-mail content was perceived to be offensive, women found it more offensive than did men. Marked gender differences emerged in response to the sexual proposition, which women perceived to be extremely offensive while men rated it as somewhat enjoyable. Tolerance of sexual harassment and familiarity with a type of e-mail were also related to lower offensiveness evaluations for some messages.