Re:Gender works to end gender inequity and discrimination against girls and women by exposing root causes and advancing research-informed action. Working with multiple sectors and disciplines, we are shaping a world that demands fairness across difference.
Researchers have shown in the past that women and teens think of themselves in sexually objectified terms, but the new study is the first to identify self-sexualization in young girls. The study, published online July 6 in the journal Sex Roles, also identified factors that protect girls from objectifying themselves.
Psychologists at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill., used paper dolls to assess self-sexualization in 6- to 9-year-old girls. Sixty girls were shown two dolls, one dressed in tight and revealing "sexy" clothes and the other wearing a trendy but covered-up, loose outfit.
Using a different set of dolls for each question, the researchers then asked each girl to choose the doll that: looked like herself, looked how she wanted to look, was the popular girl in school, she wanted to play with.
Across-the-board, girls chose the "sexy" doll most often. The results were significant in two categories: 68 percent of the girls said the doll looked how she wanted to look, and 72 percent said she was more popular than the non-sexy doll.
Even as women have moved up the economic ladder and outpaced men in earnings growth over the last decade, they are lagging behind in a crucial area — getting new jobs.
Since the recession ended in June 2009, men have landed 80% of the 2.6 million net jobs created, including 61% in the last year.
One reason: Male-dominated manufacturing, which experienced sharp layoffs during the recession, has rebounded in recent years, while government, where women hold the majority of jobs, has continued to be hit hard.
But there's something else at work. Men are grabbing a bigger share of jobs in areas, such as retail sales, that typically have been the province of women, federal data show.
That's not necessarily good news for women or men. So-called women's work often pays less and offers skimpier benefits and less opportunity for advancement than the jobs men previously held.
In 1981 Hardy became the first female firefighter at the Purdue University Fire Department. “At the time it was unheard of,” she said. “But it is not as unusual now as it was 30 years ago for me to be in a fire department.”
Recent trends reiterate Hardy’s statement, with reports that not only do women make up almost 60 percent of the workforce in America, but they are increasingly entering jobs in fields previously dominated by men.
According to a recent NBC news story as well as a study by the Center for Women’s Business Research, women are taking on jobs that have been traditionally held by men.
From ownership and professional positions all the way to the physical labor in industries such as construction, manufacturing, transportation and repair jobs, a woman’s presence is becoming less uncommon.
How does that data translate locally? Greater Lafayette Commerce’s CEO and President Joe Seaman says that’s a question not many people have asked. “The job may have the same name,” Seaman said, “but the skill sets are different. In the past strength was utilized, but now we are utilizing education.”
A University of Cambridge and University of Oxford study discovered that children who suffered from mathematics anxiety performed worse on math problems, affecting their performance. Girls suffered more math anxiety, even when they performed well.
In a University of Cambridge and University of Oxford study that looked at 433 British schoolchildren, researchers discovered that those who suffered from mathematics anxiety performed worse on math problems, affecting their performance. The study was published in Behavioral and Brain Functions on July 9.
Overall, more girls were affected by math anxiety than the boys. However, there were no gender differences in performance even if the girls dreaded doing math more. Researchers concluded that girls may be able to do even better in math if it wasn't for their anxiety levels.
"These results might suggest that girls may have had the potential to perform better than boys in mathematics, however, their performance may have been attenuated by higher levels of (mathematics anxiety)," the study authors wrote.
The study of more than 9000 women found those who worked more than 49 hours a week gained an average of about 1.9 per cent of their weight over a two-year period – or about 1.3 kilograms for a 69-kilogram woman. Those who worked part-time had an average weight gain of 1.5 per cent – or about 1 kilogram.
"These findings suggest that not working may have some protective effect against weight gain and may help promote weight loss," says the study, published in the International Journal of Obesity.
"This may be related to those women having more time to spend on maintaining a healthy body weight." The study, which examined women aged 45 to 50, found those who worked long hours, defined as 41 to 48 hours a week, or very long hours, more than 49 hours a week, were also far more likely to smoke, drink at unhealthy levels, sleep less and not exercise.
About 65 per cent of those who worked long hours drank at risky levels, compared with 42 per cent of those who were not in the workforce and 53 per cent who were unemployed.
The study said employed women may be more likely to gain weight because they have less time for exercise, sleeping and preparing home-cooked meals.
The lead author, Nicole Au, from Melbourne's Monash University, said the impact of long work hours was particularly evident among the women who gained the most weight.
But what's $10,000 to you if you're a female Republican congressional staffer? It's about how much less you'd make than the men in your office, according to salary data from LegiStorm.
As Catherine Hollander notes as part of this week's National Journal magazine cover story, these numbers aren't a perfect science. Additionally, the salary divergence can be largely explained by thegender disparity in high-level congressional jobs--especially among Republicans. Women working in Congress tend to have lower-ranking jobs and thus lower salaries. But the salary contrasts are striking when matched to congressional salary data on the whole.
The Olympics have not even started, yet their faces are already inescapable. Step on to the London Underground, open a newspaper, turn on the television, and the women of 2012 are staring out at you.
Jessica Ennis, Rebecca Adlington, Victoria Pendleton: their names are becoming as familiar as those of Premiership footballers. The queen is Ennis, the heptathlete who is already the unofficial face of the Games, and whose lucrative sponsorship deals are expected to bring her riches of close to £1m before she even steps on to the track.
It is already being whispered about by sports pundits and Olympic officials alike: our female competitors look set to do the unthinkable and claim more medals than our male athletes for the first time, toppling them from the top of the British podium.
The story in the pan-Arab daily newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat – an important media tool for Saudi rulers – said Saudi male athletes have qualified to compete in track, equestrian and weightlifting at the games that start in less than three weeks.
There is no "female team taking part in the three fields," the report said Sunday, quoting an unidentified Saudi official. He said no female athlete had taken part in qualifying events in Saudi Arabia, which severely restricts women in public life.
Saudi leaders have been under pressure to end the practice of sending all-male teams to international competitions. They could face IOC sanctions after the London Games if women are excluded from the country's Olympic team.
The Saudi Embassy in London said two weeks ago that women who qualify will be allowed to compete. Last week, IOC President Jacques Rogge said he remains optimistic the Gulf kingdom will send women to the games for the first time.
A new study suggests that "herd immunity" -- the idea that once enough people in a population get vaccinated, the protective benefits extend to those who can't or won't -- may help decrease rates of human papillomavirus.
The HPV vaccine doesn't just help prevent infection among women who get the shot. It may also protect those who don't.
A new study suggests that "herd immunity" -- the idea that once enough people in a population get vaccinated, the protective benefits extend to those who can't or won't -- may help decrease rates of human papillomavirus, the most common sexually transmitted infection in the U.S. The virus affects more than half of sexually active people at some point in their lives.
"Rates of HPV fell by about 50 percent, even in the unvaccinated," said researcher Dr. Jessica Kahn, of the Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center. "That surprised us. We didn't expect that significant a change."
Kahn's research, published in the journal Pediatrics, involved recruiting two groups of approximately 400 women from ages 13 to 26 from two community clinics in Ohio, all of whom reported genital-to-oral or genital-to-genital contact with a male or female partner. Some 60 percent of the women received at least one dose of the HPV vaccine, which protects against many types of the virus, but not all.