Project 2 Ta1

Harry Ta

Human Sexuality 425

Project 2

Professor Matza

California State University, Long Beach

 Project 2 Ta2

Dating violence has been a lasting problems in relationships for a long time, affecting

both men and women, and as young as middle school and high school. However, there seems to

be difference between men and women when it comes to who is the victim, who is the

perpetrator, and outcomes of these abusive relationships. The factors that are strongly connected

to the gender differences dating violence are sexual orientation, age, abuse perspectives,

injuries, and anger. Dating violence is a large problem, and it should not happen to anyone.

Dating violence is interpreted and defined in many ways. Doctor Feijun Luo defines

dating violence as actions related to stalking, psychological, physical or sexual violence a partner

has done to or received from a current or former dating partner (Luo, Stone, and Tharp, 2014).

According to data done by the Youth Risk Behavior Surveys, Doctor Luo reminded readers that

from 2013 to 2014 physical dating violence ranged from 6.1% to 13.8% among heterosexual

students, from 19.1% to 29.2% among gay or lesbian students, and 17.7% to 28% among

bisexual students (Luo, Stone, and Tharp, 2014). Along with the Youth Risk Behavior

Surveillance System (YRBSS), Doctor Luo and colleagues conducted cross sectional surveys of

local public high schools using two samples. At the end of the study the results were that

heterosexual high school students experienced the lowest rates of physical dating violence

(10.7%), 19.1% of high school students that were ensured about their sexual orientation

experienced dating violence, 21.5% of bisexual students experienced dating violence, and the

highest percentage was 24.6% of lesbian or gay students had experienced dating violence (Luo,

Stone, and Tharp, 2014).

The study that Luo, Stone and Tharp had done has revealed very surprising results.

Physical dating violence occurred to about 10.7% of heterosexual high school students, but non-

heterosexual high school students had nearly doubled the rate of dating violence as heterosexual
 Project 2 Ta3

students. There was also a difference in rates among ethnicities. Black students had the highest

rates of being victims of physical dating violence (12.2%), 11.4% of Hispanic students, and 7.6%

of White students (Luo, Stone, and Tharp, 2014). Luo, Stone and Tharp explained a few factors

that leads to high rates of dating violence among the non-heterosexual students. One of these

reasons were their gender identity and sexual orientation being stigmatized. The idea that their

gender identity and sexual orientation being disdained and not seen as positive in their friends,

family, and community can produce negative behaviors and result in dating violence (Luo, Stone,

and Tharp, 2014). Another reason that was stated was because non-heterosexual people have not

discover their gender identity and conflicting gender norms. For heterosexual people that are

stuck in violent relationships, there is fear and embarrassment, especially for males, to come out

and ask for help. For non-heterosexual relationships, there is a fear of rejection because of the

stigmatized view of non-heterosexual relationships. Doctor Luos, Stones and doctor Tharps

study presents a new lens to examine the differences between gender and sexual orientation, and

its correlation to dating violence.

While doctor Luo and colleagues researched the prevalence of dating violence among

high school students, Audrey Hokoda, Miguel Martin Del Campo and Emilio Ulloa researched

the relationship of age and gender to dating violence. According to their findings on teen

violence, dating violence rates rises as individuals become older (Hokoda, Del Campo, Ulloa,

2012). This is so because of the number of partners and the level of commitment in relationships

are higher as one grows up. Although girls and women seem to be identified as victims of

violence in relationships more than men, there are many studies that Hokoda, Del Campo, and

Ulloa listed that there are many boys and men that have been victims of girls and women in

relationships. For example, adolescent boys have been found to be more likely to report more
 Project 2 Ta4

aggressive behavioral reactions to dating situations than girls (Hokoda, Del Campo, Ulloa,

2012). One suggestion for why there is a difference in gender in violent dating relationships is

because females and males have different ideas of the severity of abuse (Hokoda, Del Campo,

Ulloa, 2012). The reason that was listed was that boys report that abusive actions did not bother

them as much as it does for girls.

For their study, a total of 204 students from 7th-, 9th-, and 11th grade classes participated.

Students were informed about the research and handed a survey to complete. The results show

that there is a difference in dating violence in age and gender. Results indicates that both boys

and girls have the similar rates of being verbally and physically abused. Comparing 7th and 9th

graders, the verbal-emotional abuse rates rises from 7th to 9th graders, but stabilizes from 9th to

11th graders. The comparison between girls and boys show another difference. Boys show higher

scores for committing sexual abuse than girls, but girls show higher scores for committing

physical and emotional abuse (Hokoda, Del Campo, Ulloa, 2012). Although the results from the

research indicate that both boys and girls are almost equal in dating violence, there seems to be a

difference in the kind of abuse between males and females. Also, as one grows older dating

violence increases in the form of verbal abuse. This shows how age and gender related to dating

violence.

Murray A. Straus and Kristi L. Gozjolko further study the gender differences in dating

violence by comparing the severity of physical injuries. Although studies such as Hokoda, Del

Campo, and Ulloa indicate that males and females are both likely to be assaulted by their dating

partner, Straus and Gozjolko examines the differences in juries from physical assaults. Straus and

Gozjolko reported that women are victims of more severe injuries. As stated in their study,

attacks by men cause more injury, both physical and psychological, more deaths, and more fear
 Project 2 Ta5

(Straus and Gozjolko, 2014). Furthermore, Straus and Gozjolko stated that there even injuries

vary when a there is a relationship with one person that is violent compared to a relationship

where both persons are violent, and when a partner was situationally violent with a non-violent

partner in a relationship. In relationships between a violent male and non-violent female, the

non-violent female partners experienced four times more injury than non-violent male in a

relationship with a violent female (Straus and Gozjolko, 2014). In addition, a higher percentage

of women are injured than men when they are non-violent with a situationally violent partner.

However, in relationships where both the male and female are violent, the percent of men and

women injured were similar.

The research by Straus and Gozjolko further shows the differences in gender in relation

to dating violence. Although both men and women reported similar physical injury rates in

relationships, the severity and number of injuries differ between males and females in these

abusive relationships. Even though in a relationship where one partner is violent and the other is

not compared to a partner that is situationally violent have the same result that women are more

injured than men, there is a significant difference when compared to a relationship where both

partners are violent because the severity of injuries are about equivalent.

Another study that examines the difference in gender is the article by Lauren Rutter,

Robin Weatherrill, Casey Taft, and Robert Orazem. Their research was on the difference of anger

responses of men and women in violent relationships. More specifically the internal responses

defined by high negative emotionality and low positive emotionality and external responses

defined by impulsivity, high negative emotionality, and aggression (Rutter, et al., 2012). In a

survey of 200 college students, men are more likely than women to express external anger and

women are more likely than men to express internal anger. The results show that men externalize
 Project 2 Ta6

their anger when exposed to more physical and verbal abuse, while women tend to more silent

about their anger.

In this study about internal versus external anger between men and women, the difference

in gender is important. One factor that might have led to men externalizing their anger more than

women is because of gender stereotypes. Men are seen as more aggressive and more willing to

voice their anger. On the other hand, women are seen as more complacent and quiet when it

comes to expressing their anger. Once again, there is another gender difference when it comes to

dating violence.

In the four studies that were discussed the topics of sexual orientation, age, injuries and

violence play an important part in differentiating gender in violence in relationships and its

outcomes and effects. In the first study, the difference between heterosexual and lesbian or gay

relationships was significant. The rate of dating violence between lesbian and gay relationships

were more than doubled the rate of dating violence in heterosexual relationships. In the second

study, age is a factor of relationship violence. As an adolescent grows older, the abuse becomes

more prevalent in relationships. In addition, boys and girls report almost the same percent of

violence in heterosexual relationships, but boys and girls have different perspectives on abuse.

The third study different kinds of violent relationships have different amounts of injuries. Finally,

the last study focuses on how a male or female expresses his or her anger from a violent

relationship. Some recommendations that these researchers suggested to mitigate dating violence

problems were to implement more programs to prevent dating violence, raising awareness, using

gender-neutral language, anger classes. Some recommendations that researchers suggested to

continue the study is to involve more couples in the survey, using better scales and questions to
 Project 2 Ta7

find more detailed responses. Hopefully with these recommendations, future researchers can find

more trends and solutions to lower the rates of dating violence.

 Project 2 Ta8

References

1. Dank M, Lachman P, Zweig JM, Yahner J. DatingViolence Experiences of Lesbian, Gay,

Bisexual, andTransgender Youth.J Youth Adolesc. 2014;43(5):846---857.

2. Freedner N, Freed LH, Yang YW, Austin SB. Dating violence among gay, lesbian, and

bisexual adolescents: results from a community survey.J Adolesc Health. 2002;

31(6):469---474

3. Hokoda, A., Del Campo, M., & Ulloa, E. (2012). Age and Gender Differences in Teen

Relationship Violence. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 351-364.

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.csulb.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

sid=ada5b011-2088-4db2-8bcd-3647295c9118%40sessionmgr4005&vid=13&hid=4101

4. Luo, F., Stone, D., & Tharp, A. (2014). Physical Dating Violence Victimization Among

Sexual Minority Youth. American Journal of Public Health, 66-73.

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.csulb.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

sid=ada5b011-2088-4db2-8bcd-3647295c9118%40sessionmgr4005&vid=19&hid=4101
5. Rutter, L., Weatherill, R., Taft, C., & Orazem, R. (2012). Examining gender differences in

the relationship between dating violence victimization and anger in college students.

Violence & Victims, 70-77.

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.csulb.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

sid=ada5b011-2088-4db2-8bcd-3647295c9118%40sessionmgr4005&vid=17&hid=4101
 Project 2 Ta9

6. Straus, M., & Gozjolko, K. (2014). Intimate Terrorism and Gender Differences in Injury

of Dating Partners by Male and Female University Students. Journal of Family Violence,

51-65. http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.csulb.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

vid=14&sid=ada5b011-2088-4db2-8bcd-3647295c9118%40sessionmgr4005&hid=4101