30 Aralık 2015 Çarşamba

Opendemocracy entry - Why don’t men care?

https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/gary-barker/why-don%E2%80%99t-men-care


Why don’t men care?

Caregiving is neither a male nor female responsibility - it’s what helps to make us all human. It’s time we reshaped society and social norms to make equality possible. 
Village chief in Burundi playing with his child as part of a community discussion about the role of men in caring for children. Credit: Gary Barker/Promundo. All rights reserved.
In 1999, while conducting interviews with young men involved in gangs in Chicago, I met Tony. The son of immigrants from Mexico, Tony had spent time in prison for gang activity. The tattoos on his face marked him as a gang member, and he was undergoing a painful process of laser surgery to have them removed because of the harassment he faced from police, former gang members and rival gangs.
Tony was bitter, both at the gang members who didn’t end up in prison and at a world that treated him like a walking problem.  He was a marked man wherever he went, seen as either a potential criminal or a potential rival. He couldn’t get a job because of his prison record.
On the cold winter evening that we talked, his life didn’t look very promising. I asked him, “How will you stay out of the gang and not go back to that life?”
Tony pointed to his young daughter, who was sleeping in his lap. “Her, man, she’s the reason,” he said.
Tony is not unique. In one of the largest studies ever carried out on gang violence in the United States, researchers followed almost 1,000 low-income young men in Boston aged over 45 years. They found that being married, a father and strongly connected to their children were key factors in keeping men out of gangs and criminal activity. The same conclusion emerged frominterviews I carried out with young men who participated in gangs in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
The evidence is clear: caring for children and for others transforms men. But if that is the case, why don’t more men care?
The answers are both personal and political. At the personal level, many men don’t see caregiving as their role. Maybe they grew up in households where women and girls did all the care work, or maybe they simply follow the dominant social norms. Either way, too few men are prepared to accept an equal share of caregiving responsibility.
At the political level, both men and women need help to do caregiving in the form of affordable daycare, flexible leave, paid maternity and paternity leave, and other forms of support.
Both levels need to be addressed simultaneously. Personal commitment to doing care work is vital, but it easier for some men and women to translate it into action because of their position in society. That’s why action on the political side of the equation is just as important.
At the same time I was interviewing young men like Tony in Chicago, my own daughter was born. I was working on my doctorate in child development, studying brain development and attachment, and sharing care-giving responsibilities with my partner.
One day, as I was leaving class early, some of my fellow students said, “You’re leaving to be the babysitter.” They said the word “babysitter” in a condescending tone.
“I’m not a babysitter, I’m a caregiver,” I told them slowly so they could understand me. They looked at me as if I were speaking a foreign language.
Getting men to do half of the world’s care work means changing what it means to be a man. It’s also one of the keys to ending violence against women and children. It’s essential to achieving equality for women. And research shows that in taking on more responsibility for caregiving, men’s lives improve as well.
According to the World Health Organization, one in three women worldwide has experienced physical violence from a partner. A vast majority of countries have made it a crime for men to use violence against their wives or partners, but, with a few exceptions, there is little evidence that violence against women is declining.
However, research is consistent in affirming which men are more likely to use violence in this way. In surveys that Promundo and its partners have carried out, men who witnessed their fathers or other men use violence against their mothers when they were children are twice as likely to commit similarly-violent acts later on. Men who believe that they are entitled to sex with women are more likely to commit rape. And men who have themselves experienced violence as children are more likely to use violence when they are adults.
Which men are less likely to use violence against women? According to the International Men and Gender Equality Survey (or IMAGES), the answer is clear: men whose fathers didn’t use violence; men whose fathers treated their mothers with respect, and shared decision-making responsibilities with them in the home; and men whose fathers cared for them when they were growing up. What men do as caregivers every day can either strengthen or interrupt these violent cycles.
One of the few countries where violence against women has declined isNorway. Since the late 1980s, Norway has promoted equal pay for women, extensive family leave, and, since 1993, paid paternity leave. Twenty years later, violence against women and children had decreased by a third, partly because these policies have enabled men to do more of their share of caregiving. Now, Norway is ranked as one of the most gender-equitable countries in the world nearly every year.
There has been nothing short of a global revolution in many aspects of gender equality over the past 20 years. According to the World Bank’s 2012 World Development Report, women now make up 40 per cent of the paid workforce, and half of the world’s food producers. With some exceptions, girls today are as likely as boys to be in primary school. Fewer women die during childbirth. There are more women in politics, in business, in government, and working outside of their homes than ever before. 
But with all these changes, who still cares for children? In the Global South, women and girls do two to ten times more of the unpaid domestic and care work than men.
In the Global North, men do between 20 and 40 per cent of the care work, at least in Europe according to a 2012 study by the European Commission. But while men’s incomes continue to rise, women’s incomes hit a ceiling, and expensive daycare pushes women out of the labour market. After having children, women are far more likely to move to part-time work.  According to the same study, the result is a Europe-wide gender pay-gap of 16 per cent, and in the US, a gap of more than 20 points.
The implication of these statistics is unambiguous: if we want equal pay and other forms of equality for women, then men have to do more of the caregiving.
The benefits to children are also evident. Girls raised in households with more equitable relationships are less likely to experience unwanted sex. Men who have stronger relationships with their children contribute more of their incomes to their households, so their children are less likely to grow up in poverty. Women are more likely to report safe and calm birthing processes, to breastfeed and to seek prenatal care when their partners are more involved in birth, pregnancy and caregiving.
About 80 per cent of men in the world will be biological fathers at some point in their lives, and the rest will have parents or other children who also need caring for. But what many men don’t realize is this: getting more involved in caregiving is good for everyone, including men themselves.  
recent article in the Lancet confirms that men lead women in every one of the top ten causes of premature death and chronic health problems. Men are four times more likely to commit suicide and two times more likely to drink or smoke too much compared to women. In Europe, men die five years earlier than women on average. Women have cancer more often than men, but men die from cancer earlier. Why? Because men don’t go in for preventive health care, and they don’t take care of themselves when they get sick.
The IMAGES study, for example, found that men were more likely to go to a prenatal visit with their partners than they were to visit a doctor for their own health needs. Building on this finding, the Brazilian Ministry of Health enacted a “prenatal protocol for men.” When men accompany their pregnant partners to prenatal clinics, health providers encourage them to make another appointment for a check-up for themselves.
What does men’s health have to do with their caregiving responsibilities?Studies from Sweden and the USA have found that men who report close connections to their children live longer, have fewer mental health problems, are less likely to abuse drugs, are more productive at work, and report being happier than men who are not connected to their children. Caring for others helps men to care for themselves, and men’s lives are made richer and happier when they do.
Gender equality and reducing violence against women are impossible to achieve without equality in caregiving. The daily care of others is as important as anything else that men or women will do in their lives. Indeed,developmental psychologistsevolutionary psychologists and neuroscientistshave all affirmed that human beings are hard-wired to care for, and live in close social connection with, one another. But caregiving is still seen and organized primarily as the work of girls and women. It’s time this was ended.
Caregiving is neither male nor female; it’s what helps to make us all human. 

Opendemocracy entry - Why manning up is the worst thing we can do

https://www.opendemocracy.net/transformation/mark-greene/why-manning-up-is-worst-thing-we-can-do


Why manning up is the worst thing we can do

Can we cure the toxicity of male trauma and the resulting illnesses it creates?
Image credit: YES! Magazine. All rights reserved.
The traditional rules about how to be a ‘real man’ in America are breaking down. Economic upheaval has shifted wage earning from men to their wives or partners. The rise of men as primary caregivers of their children is challenging our most fundamental assumptions about gender. The gay rights and trans rights movements are creating expansive new definitions of masculinity. Millennials are leading a much broader acceptance of diversity.
This generation is witness to a collision between traditional masculinity and a new wave, one that values intimacy, caregiving, and nurturing. But many of us have spent our lives under immense pressure to stifle emotional expression of any kind. And we’re learning there’s a cost: Men are suffering higher rates of life-threatening disease, depression, and death. Simply put, the suppression of emotional expression in men is damaging their health and well-being.
If you’ve grown up in the United States, then you’re familiar with the Man Box, the longstanding rules of how to walk, talk, and sound like a man in America:
1. Real men don’t express a wide range of emotions. They limit themselves to expressing anger or excitement. 
2. Real men are breadwinners, not caregivers. 
3. Real men are ‘alphas’ and natural leaders. 
4. Real men are authoritative and make all final decisions. 
5. Real men are physically tough and sexually dominant. 
These rules take hold early in our lives. Boys four and five years old are told to shake it off, man up, don’t be a crybaby, and, worst of all, don’t be a girl. This is because the Man Box devalues any form of emotional expression traditionally deemed to be feminine. A devastating result of this anti-feminine bias is that women, gays, and trans people face epidemic levels of bullying, rape, misogyny, homophobia, and violence. 
The Man Box robs our sons of a lifetime of opportunities to develop their emotional capacities. Instead, they grow into emotionally isolated men who wall themselves off from the social connectivity central to healing and creating community. The resulting health effects are undeniable.
One in three men aged 45 or older reported himself to be lonely or socially isolated according to a 2010 survey conducted by AARP. The consequences of that social isolation can be fatal. Between 1999 and 2010, suicide among men aged 35–64 rose by nearly 30 percent, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Although rates have been rising for both sexes, the study found that middle-aged men are three times likelier than women to end their own lives—27.3 deaths versus 8.1 (per 100,000).
But the risks of social isolation are not just psychological; the absence of robust social relationships has a direct measurable impact on men’s physical health. A 2004 medical study based in Sweden showed that for middle-aged men, having a strong social network and sense of belonging lowered their risk of heart attack and fatal coronary heart disease; inversely, low social support predicted a risk. 
The study further confirms that the risk of mortality for poor social relationships is comparable to risk factors like smoking and alcohol consumption, writes Niobe Way, author of Deep Secrets and professor of applied psychology at New York University. “This point underscores the fact that friendships are not simply a feel-good issue—they are a life-or-death issue.”  
Add to this epidemic of emotional isolation the physical impact of unresolved trauma in men’s lives, and the combined effects are devastating. In The Body Keeps the Score, psychiatrist and PTSD researcher Bessel van der Kolk explores his decades-long work in treating victims of catastrophic trauma. In 1978, he joined the Boston Veterans Administration Clinic as a staff psychiatrist. There, working with veterans of the Vietnam War, van der Kolk began to see the patterns that mark our modern-day understanding of trauma. 
He learned that the human body, when confronted with trauma, can etch horrific memories in the brain, literally reorganizing our perceptions and imagination. The most harmless sounds can trigger flashbacks. One veteran, upon hearing a baby crying, “found himself suddenly flooded with unbearable images of dying children in Vietnam.” He was stuck, in effect, in a terrible loop, revisiting the events over and over again.
One of the many physiological responses to trauma can be seen in a region of the brain called Broca’s Area, which freezes up during flashbacks. This region of the brain is where we construct language to define and interpret our experience of the world. Is it any wonder people find it deeply challenging to put their experiences of trauma into words? Our own physiology is telling us it’s better to remain silent, making trauma all the harder to share or process.
And what exactly qualifies as trauma? Is it only present after catastrophic events, or can it also take hold in the smaller brutalities of daily life, on playgrounds or in locker rooms? How much unresolved trauma do men carry after decades of emotional suppression?
I can recall, as a seven-year-old, seeing my home disappear out the back window of a car as a bitter divorce and my mother’s new marriage drew me away. I recall my brother taking out his shock and rage on me for 15 years afterwards. I still flash back to the suffocating bullying and violence that ran rampant throughout my years of school and Scouts. And yet, when is any man encouraged to share such stories?
For generations, talking about such things was antithetical to our culture’s insistence on male toughness. Thankfully, this is changing. As an editor for theGood Men Project, a website devoted to modern masculinity, I see thousands of men’s stories being told. But we need to hear more—millions more.
Trauma and the Man Box are mutually reinforcing. If, as men, we do not share our feelings, we will accrue decades of painful hidden stories, some of which will play over and over, triggering depression, fear, and unresolved anger toward ourselves and those we love. 
Van der Kolk writes, “Everything about us—our brains, minds, and our bodies—is geared toward collaboration in social systems. This is our most powerful survival strategy, the key to our success as a species, and it is precisely this that breaks down in most forms of mental suffering.” 
If we are to empower our sons and improve men’s lives—and their health—we must tear down the walls of the Man Box, encouraging boys and men to express their full emotional range. The path forward begins in our homes. In small, ongoing daily conversations, we can encourage our sons to explore their internal emotional landscapes, sharing those profound discoveries of life. The result will be countless authentic human moments, strung out across decades, each one growing the rich tapestry of human connection and capacity.
The cost of failing to do so is incalculable. Without the robust social networks that emotional expression creates, men will continue to suffer social isolation and shorter, sicker lives.  
Van der Kolk defines humans as powerfully resilient and resourceful creatures, able to move beyond the challenging events of our lives and heal. But to do so, men must collaborate, connect, and share our stories, no matter how difficult they may be to tell.

19 Aralık 2015 Cumartesi

MY DISSERTATION WRITE UP - VERY WELL-WRITTEN AND JUSTIFIED DECISIONS IN THIS DISSERTATION

Indicators of threat to masculinity. To reduce socially desirable responses in
participants, I assessed the threatening nature of the party gang rape scenarios indirectly by
asking participants to report on perceptions the offenders and a typical college male bystander
might have rather than their own.

from:

Darnell, D. A. (2010). Examination of Perceived Norms and Masculinity Threat as Predictors of College Men's Behavioral Intentions as Bystanders

THREAT PARADIGM - I can use for my masculinity threat over the computer in Qualtrics alone

THE ROLE OF SEXUALIZED REJECTION IN MEN’S BODY SHAME AND MALE
SEXUAL AGGRESSION
by
KRIS MESCHER


Procedure
Participants signed up for a study ostensibly about “the interpersonal factors that
build effective teamwork,” in which they believed they would compete as a dyad with a
partner over a networked computer in teamwork building tasks, with the most effective
teams earning a chance to be entered into a lottery to win $50.00. As each participant
arrived at the lab, a research assistant escorted him to a private cubicle with a computer
and provided basic instruction, indicating that computer program would provide further
information. The assistant started the program and left the participant alone to complete
the measures. The program administered the items for each measure in random order.
After consenting to the study, participants were told that their mood would be
assessed at various times throughout the study, and they completed the I-PANAS-SF
(Time 1). They were then informed that the computer would randomly assign one
member of the potential partnership to view the other’s complete personality profile and
judge whether they will continue on to perform tasks together. All participants were
“randomly assigned” to the condition in which their partner (in fact, a phantom
confederate) evaluated their materials. They then completed a bogus personality profile
(e.g., “If you could have a superpower, what would it be? and “What do you consider
your worst trait?”). This profile has been used successfully in the past as a basis for peer
rejection (Rudman et al., 2007). While participants ostensibly waited for their materials
to be evaluated by the phantom, they completed the narcissism measure and 16 filler
items to afford more time (e.g., “ I have more energy than most people” and “People say
I’m a good listener”). Once completed, they were either informed that their partner had
rejected them, or that the computer had malfunctioned and could not connect them to
their partner (control condition). In the experimental condition, their partner provided
feedback indicating that they believed the participant to be gay, and thus they would not
be an effective team (see Appendix C for a transcript). In a second control condition, the
phantom provided no reason for their rejection. Participants were then automatically
enrolled in a “second study” in order to complete their experimental obligation.
Following the rejection manipulation, the program administered the self-esteem
IAT. Participants were then informed that they were being moved to a new study and
were presented with a new consent form. They then completed a second, postmanipulation
I-PANAS-SF (Time 2), the SSES, the ARVS, HATW, rape proclivity, body
shame, the LSH, and Explicit Sex Power Beliefs Scale. The RBA was administered last
to be consistent with its cover story. Participants were then thoroughly debriefed, thanked
for their participation, and credited.


Appendix C
Sexual Shaming Rejection Feedback:
I don’t think we have anything in common and won’t be a good team. It would be a waste
of time to work on an experiment together if we can’t win the money I’d rather work with
someone else, or complete the survey for my RPUs than work with this guy on friendship
tasks. Looking at his profile, I get the impression he is gay. We won’t work well together
if he likes men

STUDY THIS: Değer Deniz davasında ‘sevgili’ savunması: Sözleri erkekliğime dokundu, öldürdüm

http://www.diken.com.tr/deger-deniz-cinayetinde-sevgili-savunmasi-sozleri-erkekligime-dokundu-oldurdum

BURCU KARAKAŞ
Müzisyen Değer Deniz’in öldürülmesine ilişkin davada ilk kez hakim karşısına çıkan sanık C.M., sevgili olduklarını ve cinayeti‘erkekliğine hakaret edildiği’ için işlediğini savundu.
Deniz, 5 Mayıs 2015’te İstanbul Beyoğlu’ndaki evinde katledilmiş, önce bir hırsızlık vakası olarak kayda geçen cinayetin bir cinsel saldırı sonucunda işlendiği ortaya çıkmıştı. Dahası Diken’in ulaştığı iddianamede, Deniz’in, sabah saay 05:40 sularında evine giren C.M.’nin ayak sesleri üzerine çığlık atarak uyandığı, Deniz’i boynunu sıkarak bayıltan C.M.’nin ellerini telefon şarj kablosuyla ve boynunu çanta askısıyla bağlamasının ardından genç kadına tecavüz ettiği belirtiliyor.
İddianamede ayrıca, Değer Deniz’e uyguladığı cinsel saldırı ve fiziksel şiddetin ardından cep telefonuyla klarnetini alarak kapıya yönelen C.M.’nin, evi terk ederken Deniz’i yerde baygın biçimde, ayaklarıyla kollarını oynar ve titrer halde gördüğü de ifade ediliyor.

Yazılı savunma

deger deniz
Değer Deniz.
Davada ilk duruşma bugün görüldü. 14.00’te görüleceği açıklanan duruşma, üç saat gecikmeli olarak 17.00’da başladı.
Mahkeme heyeti, basına kapalı yapılacağı söylenen duruşmanın açık yapılmasına karar verirken, sanık 17 yaşındaki C.M., yazılı olarak savunma verdi.
Değer Deniz’e şiddet uygulayan ve tecavüz eden C.M., savunmasında şunları söyledi: “Beni birkaç kere sokakta bali çekerken görmüştü. Arkadaşımın köpeklerini gezdirirken tanıştık. Bir gün ‘Burada içme, evime gel’ diye beni çağırdı. Evde uyuşturucu kullandım. Sevgili olduk. Biri tarafından 15 gün kaçırıldım. O süre boyunca görüşemedik. Geri dönünce kendisini görmek istedim. Pencereyi açık görünce evde olduğunu anladım. Evde olmadığında mutlaka pencereleri kapalı tutuyordu. Zili çaldım, açmadı. Eve tırmanarak çıktım. Beni görünce şaşırdı. Eve nasıl girdiğimi sordu ama sonra, ‘İyi yaptın pencereden girmekle’ dedi. Odada tek taş yüzük gördüm, ne olduğunu sordum. ‘Sen 15 gün yoktun, bir arkadaşımın hediyesi’ dedi. Kıskandım. Sözleri erkekliğime dokundu. Dayanamadım, öldürdüm.”

Avukat sanığın savunmasına hiç şaşırmadı

Deniz ailesinin avukatlarından Çiğdem Hacısoftaoğlu, “Sanığın savunmasının bizleri şaşırtmasını beklerdik ama maalesef şaşıramadık. İstisnasız tüm kadın cinayetleri davalarında artık sanıklar bu yönde savunma yapıyor. ‘Erkekliğime laf söyledi’. ‘Beni aldatıyordu, bir erkek olarak kaldıramadım’. Böyle söylüyorlar çünkü bu savunmaları ile haksız tahrik indirimi alabileceklerini düşünüyorlar. Ki bu kanıya kendiliğinden varmadılar. Yargı pratiği bu yönde cinsiyetçi pek çok kararla dolu. Bu davada da sanığın ‘Erkekliğime laf söylediğini iddia edersem kurtulurum cezadan’ düşüncesine kapılmasının tek nedeni, kendinden önceki kadın katillerinin benzer savunmalarla az cezalar almaları. O yüzden artık yargının yıllardır dillendirdiğimiz bu hususları ciddiye alıp kadın cinayetleri davalarında haksız tahrik indiriminden vazgeçmesi gerekmektedir” dedi.
Dosyaya getirilen gizlilik kararıyla gerçekler kamuoyundan gizlenmek istenmiş, ancak savcılığın, C.M. hakkında ‘bir suçu gizleme veya başka bir suçun delillerini gizlemek ya da işlenmesini kolaylaştırmak amacıyla öldürme’‘konutta yağma’ ve ‘mağduru öldürecek şekilde cinsel saldırı’suçlamalarıyla dava açtığı anlaşılmıştı.

Duruşma, 25 Aralık’a ertelendi.

16 Aralık 2015 Çarşamba

Honor, Reputation, and Reciprocity in Early Modern Ottoman Times - Leslie Peirce

https://ejts.revues.org/4850

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=1eaZAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA1881&lpg=PA1881&dq=reputation+%2B+honor+%2B+rape&source=bl&ots=y2OYnARV-U&sig=qQ7agKKI9rDgXYiiNo5TFCPR_aE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijoZr88eDJAhVB7w4KHeBBBwUQ6AEINjAG#v=onepage&q=reputation%20%2B%20honor%20%2B%20rape&f=false


https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=TwreCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT243&lpg=PT243&dq=reputation+%2B+honor+%2B+rape&source=bl&ots=KHP_iJz-pu&sig=2KtiYcdMcIrKEsnfSwJimbzkAjQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijoZr88eDJAhVB7w4KHeBBBwUQ6AEIJjAB#v=onepage&q=reputation%20%2B%20honor%20%2B%20rape&f=false


https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=UHymAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA602&lpg=PA602&dq=reputation+%2B+honor+%2B+rape&source=bl&ots=VB5nRPhT98&sig=5mu9BScHmehOuwM9DN_q1x67Y4c&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwijoZr88eDJAhVB7w4KHeBBBwUQ6AEIKzAD#v=onepage&q=reputation%20%2B%20honor%20%2B%20rape&f=false

8 Aralık 2015 Salı

COMPOSITE SCORES FROM VARIABLES MEASURED IN DIFFERENT SCALES

***How to convert 5-point scale to 7-point scale:

 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21482329.


*** How to create composite scores (2 ways)

http://jeromyanglim.blogspot.co.uk/2009/03/calculating-composite-scores-of-ability.html.

6 Aralık 2015 Pazar

Development of a Short Version of the Gender Role Beliefs Scale Abstract Reference Full-Text PDF

The results of our studies suggest that the 10-item GRBS is a psychometrically sound measure of gender role beliefs. The 10-item GRBS has strong test-retest reliability and repeatedly demonstrated strong internal consistency and a multidimensional factor structure. Based on our findings, the 10-item GRBS can provide researchers with a reliable and shorter measure of gender role beliefs, especially when the 10-item GRBS is embedded in a series of questionnaires or when gender roles beliefs do not serve as the primary dependent variable, without sacrificing the construct validity of the original scale.
By treating the two factors of the scale as subscales, researchers can also differentiate between different types of traditional gender role beliefs: Those relating to women’s roles in the household and the workplace, and those related to protectionism and chivalry toward women. Understanding individuals’ prescriptive beliefs about these roles might help us better understand the dynamics involved in hostile and benevolent sexism. Our findings attest to the strong psychometric properties of the 10-item GRBS, and we encourage the use of the scale in future research.


http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.ijpbs.20120205.05.html

Brown, M. J., & Gladstone, N. (2012). Development of a Short Version of the Gender Role Beliefs Scale. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences2(5), 154-158.


I moved away from using ASI and used GRBS because factor 1 is about women's roles in the household and workplace (about traditional roles), and factor 2 is about chivalry towards women. GRBS items do not imply hostility as in Hostile Sexism items or imply Heterosexual Intimacy or Complementary Gender Differentiation like in the Benevolent Sexism items. For that reason, I think ASI is confusing and a problematic gender role ideology measure.


Mahalik’s Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (CMNI)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2562885/
Participants also completed portions of Mahalik’s Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (CMNI).These inventories required participants to evaluate a series of statements in the context of their own actions, feelings, and beliefs, with a 4-point response scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). I reverse-coded individual items as necessary so that higher response values corresponded to stronger endorsement of conventional masculine gender norms. I calculated Cronbach α, an index of reliability to test how well the components measure the same construct, for each subscale.
I used 5 CMNI subscales: Playboy, Winning, Dominance, Risk Taking, and Violence. The 12-item Playboy subscale (α= .88) included items such as “If I could, I would frequently change sexual partners” and “Emotional involvement should be avoided when having sex.” Ten items such as “In general, I will do anything to win” and “The best feeling in the world comes from winning” made up the Winning subscale (α= .81). The Dominance subscale (α= .69) included 4 items such as “I make sure people do as I say” and “I should be in charge.” The 10-item Risk Taking subscale (α= .84) included items such as “Taking dangerous risks helps me to prove myself” and “I frequently put myself in risky situations.” Last, the 8-item Violence subscale (α= .81) included items such as “Sometimes violent action is necessary” and “I like fighting.” I constructed a global Masculine Norms scale (α= .67) by calculating the mean across all 5 CMNI subscales.
I also constructed new measures to measure actual risk-taking behavior. Participants indicated whether they had engaged in a series of activities in the past 12 months, such as “done something dangerous on a dare (like taking a risk or breaking a law) that you would not have done otherwise,” “participated in an ‘extreme’ sport (like snowboarding or bungee jumping),” “been in a serious physical fight,” or “had unprotected sexual intercourse (without using a condom).” Responses were dichotomous (no = 0, yes = 1). The alpha reliability coefficient for the 10-item Risk-Taking Behavior scale was .57.

26 Kasım 2015 Perşembe

Honor (what it means to be a man) and condom use of men

Prevention programs are least succesful in situations in which a person's personal or cultural values prevent them from engaging in safe sex practices (Herdt and Lindenbaum, 1992). These values generally involve misconception of what safe sex means. Some men refuse to wear condoms because doing so would detract from their conception of what it means to be a man.

23 Kasım 2015 Pazartesi

STUDY TO DO (A MUST): Which Part of Masculinity???

EXAMPLE ABSTRACT:
Two studies distinguished between aspects of traditional masculinity (gender role conformity versus sexism) in predicting sexual risk behavior among heterosexual males. Hostile sexism was associated with sexual risk taking indirectly, through temptation for unsafe sex. Masculinity and benevolent sexism did not predict temptation for unsafe sex.


Run a correlational study:

- Masculine and Feminine Honour endorsement
- Gender role beliefs (gender conformity/equality)
- Sexism (hostile and benevolent sexism)
- masculinity

Which scale predict masculine honour and feminine honour?
- is it Gender role beliefs(gender conformity)? or Sexism? Or both?


- Also test the strength of correlations between honour and ASI in Turkey vs. UK
- Test the strength of correlations between honour and Gender role beliefs in Saudi vs. UK



Gender expression/conformity scales here:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3783339/

I had already looked at BSRI (as gender conforming personality traits) and honour!



Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory. The Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (CMNI) measures the extent to which a male individual conforms to traditional masculine norms (Mahalik et al., 2003). The CMNI consists of 94 items, including “It bothers me when I have to ask for help”, “I tend to keep my feelings to myself”, “I like fighting, and “In general, I must get my way”. The CMNI contains 11 Masculinity Norms subscales: Winning, Emotional Control, Risk-Taking, Violence, Dominance, Playboy, Self-Reliance, Primacy of Work, Power Over Women, Disdain for Homosexuals, and Pursuit of Status. Male participants rated their agreement with items on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree). Scores on the CMNI were computed by averaging subscale items, and then summing subscale means for a total CMNI, with higher total scores indicating higher conformity to masculine norms. In developing the scale, Mahalik et al. (2003) found that internal consistency for the Masculinity Norms subscales ranged from .72 to .91, with a Cronbach’s a of .94 for the CMNI Total score, with a sample of 752 men. Scores on the CMNI were related significantly and positively to the Gender Role Conflict Scale and Male Gender Role Stress Scale, indicating strong construct validity (Mahalik et al., 2003). In the present sample, Cronbach’s a was .92, indicating strong internal consistency reliability.
            Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory. The Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory (CFNI) measures women’s conformity to an array of traditional feminine norms (Mahalik et al., 2005). The CFNI consists of 84 items, including “Being thin is important”, “I would feel extremely ashamed if I had many sexual partners”, “Caring for children adds meaning to one’s life” and “I try to be sweet and nice”. The CFNI contains 8 Femininity Norms subscales: Nice in Relationships, Thinness, Modesty, Domestic, Care for Children, Romantic Relationship, Sexual Fidelity, and Invest in Appearance. Participants rated their agreement with items on a 4-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 3 (strongly agree). Scores on the CFNI were computed by averaging subscale items, and then summing subscale means for a total CFNI score, with higher scores indicating higher conformity to feminine norms. In developing the scale, Mahalik et al. (2005) obtained a Cronbach’s a of .88 for the CFNI Total score, and a range from .77 to .92 for the Femininity Norms subscales, with a sample of 733 women, indicating strong internal consistency reliability. Scores on the CFNI correlated significantly and positively with the Bem Sex Role Inventory Femininity scores and Feminist Identity Composite Passive Acceptance subscale scores, indicating strong construct validity (Mahalik et al., 2005). In the present sample, Cronbach’s a was .87, indicating strong internal consistency reliability.

18 Kasım 2015 Çarşamba

Comparing 2 correlations

http://psych.unl.edu/psycrs/statpage/biv_corr_comp_eg.pdf

Comparing bivariate correlations across populations Another common question is whether two variables are equally correlated in two different populations. In this example we will ask if the correlation between depression (BDI) and family social support (FASS) is the same for males and females. To do this in SPSS we must first split the file into two subfiles (males and females) and obtain the desired correlation from each subfile. Data  Split File Move the variable or variables into the “Groups Based on:” window and click “OK”. All subsequent analyses we request will be performed and presented separately for each of the resulting groups.

A significance test will require that we find the difference between these two correlations, relative to the expected variability in correlations for this sample size. The common Z-test is useful for this, but assumes that the values being compared are normally distributed, and we know that r is not normally distributed. Fisher, however, determined a way to transform r-values so that they will be normally distributed -- called Fisher's Z-transformation. Z1 - Z2 Z-critical is 1.96 for p < .05 The Z-test is computed as Z = ---------- 2.58 for p < .01 SEZD SEZD =  [1 / (n1-3) + 1 / (n2-3)] On the right is the portion of the FZT program used for Fisher’s Z-test, with the values for this group comparison shown. As with other correlation comparisons, you must decide if you want to test for “correlation differences” (including the sign of the correlations) or the “predictive utility differences’ (using |r| for both correlations). In this case, the results from comparing the “utility” of the predictor for this criterion in the two groups was Z=1.258, p > .05. Remember, the tests are equivalent if the signs of the two correlations are the same. Family social support was correlated with depression for females, r (168) = - .289, p < .001, for women, but not for men, r(64) = .111. The difference between these correlations was statistically significant, Z = 2.776, p < .01.

Comparing two correlation coefficients & Multiple regression with 2 IVs and a moderator

comparing two correlation coefficients

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.soft-sys.stat.spss/hMtXkcCIDYM

Testing two correlations coefficients within the same sample:

I need to compare two correlation coefficients within the same correlation matrix of
a single group. For example, is the correlation between beliefs and behavior
significantly different than the correlation between attitudes and behavior in
a single group of teenagers? Any help would be greatly appreciated.


In SPSS, standardize all of the variables using DESCRIPTIVES,
so that testing slope equalities will imply testing
correlations, then either use beliefs and attitudes as
dependents in a repeated measures ANCOVA with behavior as
the covariate and look at the interaction term, which will
test the null of equal correlations, or take a difference
variable using the standardized values of those two, and
regress it on the standardized behavior variable, which
will give the same test.






Multiple regression with 2 IVs and a moderator in SPSS



http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/141325/multiple-regression-with-2-ivs-and-a-moderator-in-spss

I am running a multiple regression with 2 continuous independent variables and one continuous dependent variable and a categorical moderator. I am doing this in SPSS. I am not sure how to proceed. Please help!! My question is how do (1st continuous variable) and (2nd continuous variable) differentially predict (Continuous Dv) for (categorical variable split into it's 2 categories.



Likely what you want to do is to test whether the 'interaction term' is significant. This will test whether the slopes are significantly different from each other in the two groups.
In SPSS go to Analyze-->General Linear Model-->Univariate.
Put your DV in the DV slot. Put your continuous variables in the 'Covariates' box and put your categorical variable in the 'fixed factor' box. Click on the 'Model' tab and choose 'Custom'. Then move all of your IV over from the left to the right box. Then choose the 'interaction' option and move the continuous IV, together with the categorical IV over to the right hand box.
When you run your model the output will include the interaction term.
Here is a nice walkthrough that looks at various ways of checking if the relation between two continuous variables is the same or different for two different groups (it's all brought together on the last page so you might want to skim through that first):

11 Kasım 2015 Çarşamba

Masculinity of STEM + stats from the UK, female numbers in HE

http://contexts.org/articles/what-gender-is-science/

https://www.hesa.ac.uk/intros/stuintro1213


http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674955394&content=toc

  • THE WOMEN THAT NEVER EVOLVED
  • Preface, 1999: On Raising Darwin’s Consciousness
  • 1. Some Women That Never Evolved
  • 2. An Initial Inequality
  • 3. Monogamous Primates: A Special Case
  • 4. A Climate for Dominant Females
  • 5. The Pros and Cons of Males
  • 6. Competition and Bonding among Females
  • 7. The Primate Origins of Female Sexuality
  • 8. A Disputed Legacy
  • Afterword
  • Taxonomy of the Primate Order
  • Notes
  • Bibliographical Updates, 1999
  • Index

9 Kasım 2015 Pazartesi

sexual promiscuity,female agression

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://psych.mcmaster.ca/vaillancourt/Selected_Publications.html

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/368/1631/20130080.full

http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674955394&content=toc

28 Ekim 2015 Çarşamba

Perceived Masculine Gender Role Norms (MRNS) - Argument for the relevant of my Honour scales

Perceived masculine gender role norms. Participants’ perceptions of the degree to which the men in the scenario adhere to traditional beliefs about the masculine gender role was assessed using a modified version of the Male Role Norms Scale (MRNS; Thompson & Pleck’s 1986). The MRNS consists of three subscales to assess men’s adherence to prescriptive and proscriptive norms for the male gender role. The three subscales include norms for status (e.g., “A man should always try to project an air of confidence even if he really doesn’t feel confident inside;” “It is essential for a man to always have the respect and admiration of everyone who knows him”), toughness (e.g., “I think a young man should try to become physically tough, even if he’s not big;” “A real man enjoys a bit of danger now and then”), and antifemininity (e.g., “It bothers me when a man does something that I consider ‘feminine’;” “It is embarrassing for a man to have a job that is usually filled by a woman”). The MRNS does not include items that compare men to women or beliefs about gender in general, making this scale specific to beliefs about how men should be. A confirmatory factor analysis found support for the factor structure of the MRNS and evidence for the discriminative and predictive validity of the scale in a primarily Caucasian sample of undergraduates (Sinn, 2002). 

3 Ekim 2015 Cumartesi

STUDY IDEA - THREAT OF UNEMPLOYMENT ON MEN'S REACTIONS IN AN HONOUR CULTURE.

MANIPULATE UNEMPLOYMENT THREAT for men and look at certain DVs that are inspired from

http://www.milliyet.com.tr/erkegin-korkusu-es-parasi-/gundem/gundemdetay/23.12.2012/1645532/default.htm


Beril Turkoglu - Fay Hattında Erkeklikler/ Manhood on the Fault Line: Examining Manhood under the Frame of Working and Unemployment

Erkeğin korkusu ‘eş parası’

http://www.milliyet.com.tr/erkegin-korkusu-es-parasi-/gundem/gundemdetay/23.12.2012/1645532/default.htm
Sabancı Üniversitesi Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Kadın Çalışmaları Forumu tarafından akademisyen Dicle Koğacıoğlu adına bu yıl üçüncüsü düzenlenen makale ödülünün birincisi “Fay Hattındaki Erkeklikler: Çalışma ve İşsizlik Ekseninde Erkekliğe Bakış” makalesiyle Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Psikoloji yüksek lisans öğrencisi Beril Türkoğlu oldu. Türkoğlu, Ankara ve çevresinde 20-68 yaş arası 21 erkekle yüz yüze görüşmeler gerçekleştirerek yaptığı araştırmasında, “erkeklik algısı”, “kazanılan erkeklik” ve “işsizliğin erkekliğe yönelik tehdidi” başlıklarını inceledi. Makaleden satırbaşları şöyle:

ERKEKLİK SORUMLULUĞU
-  Genel olarak erkeklik “hem ahlaki hem de sorumluluklar yükleyen” bir durum olarak değerlendiriliyor. Erkeklik “ev geçindirmek, baba olmak, ayakta durabilmek” veya “aile reisliği, kol kanat açma, o kanatlar altına aile ve çocuklarını yerleştirme“ olarak tanımlanıyor.
-  Erkekler sorumluluk altında zaman zaman ezildiklerini hissettiklerinde, kendi deyimleriyle “başkalarının bakımı ve koruması altında yaşamak” kolay geldiğinden kadın olmayı düşündüklerini söylüyorlar. Ancak yine de erkeği erkek yapanın bu sorumluluğu taşıyabilmek olduğu görüşündeler.
-  Çalışmak, erkeklerin kendilerini ispatlayabilecekleri yegane alan olarak görülüyor. Bir kadının evlenerek veya ailesinin yanında kalarak böyle bir sorumluluktan sıyrıldığı fakat erkeklerin istemese bile toplum baskısı yüzünden çalışmaya zorlandığı dile getiriliyor.
-  Erkeğinin fiziksel gücünün yerini günümüz koşullarında para ve aklın gücünün aldığı söyleniyor. İşçi sınıfı erkekliklerinde statü ve saygıyı getiren para olurken , sermayeyi yönetenler erkekliklerde ise bu, liderlik ve zekâya tekabül ediyor. Üniversite yıllarına kadar fiziksel güç gösterisiyle ispatlanan erkeklik, çalışma hayatına yaklaştıkça paranın gücünü elde etmeye yöneliyor.

İŞSİZ KALMA KORKUSU
-  Erkekliğin dikenli yolundaki en büyük korku, iş bulamama veya işsiz kalma. İş sahibi olarak kazanılan erkeklik işin kaybedilmesiyle her an gözden düşme tehlikesiyle karşılaşabilir. İşsizlik yaşamış olanlar, durumun erkeklik açısından hassasiyetini “Etraf ne der” ve “Karı parası yemek” deyimlerini dillendirerek belirtiyor.
-  Kadın-erkek eşitliğini destekleyenler bile ev içi kazanç söz konusu olduğunda erkeklerin bir adım daha yukarıda olması gerektiğini düşünüyor. Kadın daha fazla para kazanıyorsa bu durum açıkça “erkekliği zedeleyen, yetersiz hissetme” olarak değerlendiriliyor. Erkek olarak çalışıp eve “ekmek” getirememe durumu oldukça dramatik ve korkulan bir hal alıyor. Bir görüşmeci, ailesinin sorumluluğunu taşıyamamaktansa ölmeyi bile göze alabileceğini söylüyor. Durum böyle olunca işsizliğin bazı erkeklerce çevreye veya aileye karşı şiddete kadar gidebileceği görülüyor.
-  Ekonomik seviyeye bakılmaksızın işsizliği erkekler için kritikleştiren diğer nokta tabiri caizse “Karı parası yiyor olmak”.
Kadından para almak erkeklik gururuna dokunan bir durum. İşsizlik döneminde açığa çıkan sinir ve şiddeti haklı gören erkekler, bunu yer yer kadınların kışkırttığını düşünüyorlar. Algılanan tehdide karşı verilen şiddet tepkilerini kırılan erkekliğin yeniden inşası olarak değerlendirmek mümkün.

‘GURURUMA YEDİREMİYORUM’
Çalışmaya katılan erkeklerin anlatımlarından örnekler:
BEKAR-ÇALIŞAN: Erkeğim dediğim anlarda benim sorumlu olmam gerekir. Mesela bir kız arkadaşım varsa onun işinden ailesine, psikolojisinden gelirine her şeyine bir şekilde yön verebiliyor, kontrol edebiliyor olmam lazım.
EVLİ-İŞÇİ: Para varsa güçlüsün, yoksa hiçsin. Bir şekilde paran olacak ki güçlü olacaksın. Güçlü değilsindir paran yoksa. Bir yumrukta bir adamı devirmek güçlü olmak anlamına gelmiyor bence.
BEKAR-ÖĞRENCİ: Etrafındaki kızlar, özellikle güzel kızlar, yapabilecekleri şeyleri erkeklere yaptırabiliyorlar. Ama erkeksen onu kendin yapmak zorundasın, mecbursun. Kendin yapacaksın ki bir kıza yardım edebilesin, gözüne girebilesin. Zor ama bir yandan da kendini geliştirmene teşvik ediyor diye güzel.

‘Manevi sıkıntı’
EVLİ-ÇALIŞAN: Manevi olarak sıkıntı duydum, eşim çalışıyor ben evde yatıyorum. Akşam olacak hanım sigara getirsin de ben içeyim. Etrafa fazla sızdırmadım. Başka bir mahallede arkadaşlarımla oturur, akşam işten çıkmış gibi eve dönerdim. Tabii ki bizim kültürümüzde bayan çalışıp erkeğin evde yatmasını gururuma yediremiyorum. Huzursuz olurum. Manevi olarak sıkıntıdaydım. Komşular adam öğlen çıkıp nereye gidiyor diye sorarlar. Bir iki sefer kulağıma geldi, aldırış etmedim ama bir yere kadar çekebilirsin. Baktım olacak gibi değil evimi değiştirdim. Bu şekilde dedikodu edene kadar ya gidip gırtlağına çökeceksin ya da değiştireceksin kulağıma gelmesin diye.
EVLİ-ÇALIŞAN: Bir erkek erkekliğini kaybetsin ama işini kaybetmesin. O kadar zehir bir dönem olamaz. Etrafta bakıyorlar işsiz bu adam. Bilmezler sormazlar ki neden çalışmıyor. Zehir gibi zehir.
EVLİ-ÇALIŞAN: O insan nasıl bir psikolojide olabilir diye düşünüyorum. Hani ev geçindirme sorunu olduğu için, ekonomik kaynaklı kavga, şu bu oluyor ve erkek eşinin bununla ilgili ters bir şey söylemesini kaldıramıyor. ‘Sen beni geçindirmek zorundasın’ diyebiliyor mesela. Kaldıramıyor o lafları, e sürekli şiddet empoze edildiği için de...
 
http://mulkiyedergi.org/article/view/5000000776
Abstract
This article examined masculinity as performative, socially constructed phenomena and the role of working on this social construction.  The purpose of this article is to understand how men situate themselves as a subject in the patriarchal system, emphasize the value of working as a constituent of masculinity and discuss the threat of unemployment for men’s authority in the society. In this context, the discussion is mainly based on the assumption that Hegemonic Masculinity (Connell, 2005) which defines ideal man as working, powerful, physically strong, successful, heterosexual, urbanite, unemotional and breadwinner, is only achieved by working, earning money and being visible in the society. It also differentiates men in the eyes of other men and bring them societal respect and power.

As a sample, 21 men from Ankara-Çankaya were interviewed and asked questions under three titles. In that sense, the questions were focused on the way how they define and idealize masculinity, the importance of working for them and the possible constrains of being unemployed as a man. Qualitative research and purposeful sampling were used as a method of the study. According to the interviews, they defined masculinity on the basis of taking responsibility and working as an only way of it. However, the main role of working on masculinity construction determined the responsibility perception. Married men taking the first order, both married and single men produced performance to attain ideal masculinity. On the other hand, the societal expansion of power is only possible by working since it creates macro-power zones in the family. Single men, on the other hand, defined working as a way of differentiation from other men as well as women. The importance of working was different for low and middle class masculinities. Specifically, middle class men who have both economical and social resources defined themselves as being smart and having ability of managing others. However, working class men who relatively deprived from economic and social resources defined masculinity on the basis of leading a family and taking responsibilities.

Masculinity depends on taking responsibility so that working. This showed a precarious and performative nature of masculinities as well. Manhood has to learn standing and dominating the weak in the name of not being dominated and it becomes meaningful compared to other masculinities. Married men try to keep their breadwinner status alive to gain and preserve their respectful status in patriarchy. On the other hand, single men give continuous effort to gain respect of women and charm them. Although this effort is needed to gain manhood and gives proud, it becomes conscious play for some of the participants. Lastly, unemploymentand its threatening nature leaded ambiguous situation for masculinity. Regardless of class or age, losing a job means a failure and degradation in the eyes of others. Other’s opinions and asking wives for money create shame so that they search for other means to maintain their masculinity. This indicated the vitality of working for masculinity and importance for reproducing patriarchal power.

30 Eylül 2015 Çarşamba

STUDY IDEA - HONOUR CONCERNS AND RETALIATION IN THE WAKE OF SEXUAL OR EMOTIONAL ADULTERY

Cultural Differences and Honour Concerns in Relationship Revenge

Research Questions: Are people from honour cultures more likely to take revenge in the face of adultery? Are certain types of revenge seen more appropriate in honour cultures than others? Do honour concerns actually explain likelihood of revenge in the case of adultery?

Design:
2 (culture: Turkey vs. UK) x 2 (participant gender: male vs. female) x 2 (audience: public vs. private affair) x 2 (affair context: sexual vs. emotional)

Manipulations through scenarios: Imagine that your partner cheated on you...
vary the public vs. private
vary the sexual vs. emotional
So 4 scenarios in total

Hypotheses:
1) Main effect of culture on revenge: Turks (honour culture) would be more willing to take revenge of their partner than Brits (dignity culture)
2) Main effect of culture on forgiveness: Turks would be less likely to forgive their partner than Brits.
3) Main effect of culture on emotional reactions: No main effect of culture on emotional reactions expected or Turks may react more angrily and feel more shame and feel more honour threat (in line with literature on honour culture)
4) Main effect of gender will be explored: type of revenge and forgiveness might differ among males and females
5) Main effect of affair type (sexual vs. emotional) will be explored
5) All 2-way, 3-way, and 4-way interaction effects will be explored
6) Mediation: (masculine and feminine) Honour concerns would explain why Turks would be more willing  to take revenge and less willing to forgive than Brits. If any main effect of culture on emotional reactions are found, honour concerns can also be expected to mediate the relationship between culture and emotional reactions.


Dependent variables in order:

Emotional reactions
How much would this affair break the cheated partner's honour?
How much anger would the affair cause in the cheated partner?
How much shame would the affair cause in the cheated partner?
How hurt would the cheated partner feel?
How sad would the cheated partner feel?

Likelihood of revenge? How likely would you be to take revenge of your partner through... ?
(different kinds of revenge here)
a) (do nothing) doing nothing
b) (ignore) ignoring the person
c) (leave/break-up) husband should break up
d) (cheating back) he should take revenge by inviting another woman home
e) (verbal aggression) he should shout, scream and insult at her
f) (physical aggression ) he should hit and beat her
g) (sexual aggression) he should force her to have sex
h) (murder the partner) he should kill her
i) (murder the 3rd person) he should kill the 3rd party
j) (kill myself) I'd kill myself

Likelihood of forgiveness? How likely would you forgive your partner... ?

Likelihood of relationship future? Would you continue your relationship with your partner... ?


Multiple choice:
Among these revenge choice given above, which one would be the most appropriate one?

Open-ended question: What would you do if your partner has cheated on you?


Honour concerns - as mediator
masculine, feminine, family


References:
See Caffaro, F., Ferraris, F., & Schmidt, S. (2014)





20 Eylül 2015 Pazar

Study Idea: Can look at certain Love/Jealousy-related retaliation and see if Turkish men justify it more than British men.

Study Idea: Can look at certain Love/Jealousy-related retaliation and see if Turkish men justify it more than British men. Or if high honour justify it more than 

see for justification DV:

Cohen, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1997). Field experiments examining the culture of honor: The role of institutions in perpetuating norms about violence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1188-1199.

SOPHISTICATED VOCAB FOR MY WRITING

myriad: This attitude plays out in myriad ways in everyday life in Texas.

11 Ağustos 2015 Salı

Herding hypothesis is falsified

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/200904/is-southern-violence-due-culture-honor

27 Temmuz 2015 Pazartesi

Honour and men's unemployment

"The concept of masculinity is becoming more elusive in society as gender roles blur, with more women taking management positions and becoming the major breadwinners for their families," said lead researcher Ekaterina Netchaeva, an assistant professor of management and technology at Bocconi University in Milan, Italy. "Even men who support gender equality may see these advances as a threat to their masculinity, whether they consciously acknowledge it or not."

http://www.spsp.org/press_release/men-may-feel-more-threatened-by-female-bosses

http://www.milliyet.com.tr/erkegin-korkusu-es-parasi-/gundem/gundemdetay/23.12.2012/1645532/default.htm

Seeking
external help poses a direct risk to public image, and even
seeking help from family might be avoided if one’s identity
as a “real man” or “good woman” could be questioned. For
example, a man who has just lost his job might be reluctant
to disclose this to his family out of fear that they will see him
as an incompetent provider.

Violence against the self makalesinde. Eger ilgilenirse beryl onunla da birsey yapabilirsin ortak. O buraya doktoraya gelmeyi cok istedi, ama funding olmadigi icin odtu’de kaldi. 




"In an ideal world, men and organizations would be concerned by these findings and adjust their behavior accordingly. But if they don't, where does that leave women?" she said. "Given the strong societal norms surrounding masculinity, it may be difficult for men to recognize or change their behavior."
 
If men won't change their actions, then female supervisors may want to appear more proactive and less power-seeking to maintain smooth relationships in the workplace, Netchaeva said.

Hep ayni yeterince aciklayici olmayan gorus, societal norms surrounding masculinity yuzunden erkekler daha cok threatenned oluyolar eger kadinlar onlardan basariliysa (daha cok kazaniyorsa, daha yuksek pozisyondaysa) diye diyorlar. Veya bu bulgular cogunlukla power relationships uzerinden calisiliyor, iste erkekler status quo'larini korumak istedikleri icin falan. Kimse, bazi evolved mekanizmalardan konusmuyor. Societal norm'lar degisti, artik cogu erkek de kadin da bu equality discourse'undan haberdar ve political correctness norm'lariyla yasiyoruz zaten. Ama despite feminism which led to a fast cultural revolution of the female identity, evolved identity cannot change as fast. Throughout the history (thousands of years), menability to provide resources, protection of the women, family, clan from threats, rape, war, etc.)