Feed consumption by minks of different behavioral types

The main goal of the work was to determine the attitude of the American mink to feed consumption, depending on the genotype and behavior. The object of research was American mink (Neovison vison) of cell breeding of three different genotypes: Standard dark brown (+/ +), Hedlundwhite (h/ h) and Black crystal (CR/ +). Groups of animals were initially assessed on aggressive and manual behavior using a special hand catch test method. The duration of the work was 30 days. All animals received a unified ratio according to the recommended norms. Daily feed was weighed before distribution (190 g per 1 head to females and 250 g to males) and the amount of feed consumed a day per group and per 1 head was determined from the remains. The feed consumption was assessed by the indicator of the feed consumed by males and females of different genotypes and behavior. Comparison of the data was carried out using Student t-test. As the temperature factor influences the feed consumption, the feed intake by minks of different genotypes was assessed over seven-day periods. It was found that in the first observation period there was no difference in the amount of feed consumed by females. However, in the second period, aggressive Hedlund females consumed more than females of the black crystal genotype. In the same period, the females of the black crystal genotype showed the lowest feed consumption in comparison with the standard and Hedlund females. In the third period, Hedlund females consumed the largest amount of feed among aggressor females in comparison with the genotypes Standard and Black Crystal. There are no differences in feed consumption by males of different genotypes for the same periods. Over the entire study period, female aggressors of genotypes Standard and Hedlund consumed more feed than females of the tame type of behavior. The tame males of the standard genotype consumed more feed than the aggressive ones. There were no differences in feed consumption by minks of different behavior of the black crystal genotype.

#HeToo? Men trivialize cases of sexual harassment by a female aggressor toward a male victim, but women do not

The #MeToo movement spurred a handful of corresponding #HeToo cases, in which men voiced their experiences of sexual harassment by female aggressors. The general public seemed to respond differently to #HeToo cases compared to the #MeToo cases. As the #HeToo and #MeToo cases differed in morally relevant ways, a direct comparison of public reactions cannot comprehensively explore whether peoples’ evaluation of sexual harassment is influenced by the gender of the aggressor and victim. We performed two experiments (total N = 260), in which participants read a description of sexual harassment from a manager toward an employee. For half of the participants, the manager was referred to as a man, and the employee was described as a woman; for the other half, the manager was described as a woman, and the employee was referred to as a man. We expected participants to judge the case as significantly more harmful and repugnant when the aggressor was a man and the victim was a woman compared to the opposite scenario. However, our analyses revealed a pattern of gender differences. Female participants perceived the case as equally bad whether the aggressor was male or female. Male participants reacted equally strongly to the case of sexual harassment performed by a male aggressor. By contrast, male participants viewed the case as far less serious and warranting milder reactions when the aggressor was female and the victim was male. This suggests the trivialization of sexual harassment of male victims by female aggressors is largely driven by men.

Family Violence

Using data from official statistics and surveys on victimization, this chapter aims to estimate the extent of domestic violence against men and examine the contraposition between female aggressors and male victims. More detailed knowledge both of women perpetrators and their male victims is believed to be useful for preparing appropriate programs of rehabilitation for the former as well as effective methods of intervention and help for the victims. The chapter reflects on the fact that, from the point of view of victimology, one of the risks to avoid is that of considering men as “second-class victims,” and from the criminological point of view, it is necessary to gain greater knowledge of the figure of the abusive woman, as well as focusing attention on the social representations of domestic violence.

Evaluations of Sexual Assault: Perceptions of Guilt and Legal Elements for Male and Female Aggressors Using Various Coercive Strategies

This study examines the extent to which verdict, guilt, and legal components associated with jury instructions of sexual assault differ as a function of aggressor gender, participant gender, and sexual strategy used (consensual, verbal coercion, alcohol, or physical aggression) to obtain sex. Participants (N = 423; 276 women and 147 men) read a vignette depicting either a couple having consensual sex (control), or a male or female aggressor who initiates sexual intercourse via verbal coercion, use of alcohol, or physical abuse. College students were provided with legal instructions of sexual assault then asked to provide a verdict, degree of guilt, and legal components. Female participants rated guilt and coercion higher than did male participants. Ratings of guilt were highest in the physical assault condition followed by the alcohol, verbal, and control conditions. Female aggressors were rated less guilty than male aggressors. Results are explained in relation to sexual scripts and legal decision making. Lack of significance in verdict decisions and interaction effects suggests male and female aggressors are evaluated similarly using coercive strategies; yet, consent for sex was assumed and attributions of guilt was lower when the aggressor was female. Implications for jury instructions and future research are discussed.

Evaluations of Aggressive Women: The Effects of Gender, Socioeconomic Status, and Level of Aggression

Research finds gender differences in aggression and suggests that female violence is viewed differently from male violence. Participants were 94 female and 38 male students from a mid-size public university in the Southeast. Participants read a mock trial and answered questions about their attitudes concerning an aggressor in the scenario. The study was a 2 (male or female) by 2 (high socioeconomic status or low socioeconomic status) by 2 (verbal aggression or physical aggression) between-subjects factorial design. The participants responded to a revised version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (Nelson, 1988). As hypothesized aggressive women were evaluated more negatively than aggressive men and participants evaluated the female aggressor who used physical aggression more negatively than the female who used verbal aggression. The hypothesis that the female aggressor would be perceived as more in need of counseling than the male aggressor was not supported. Contrary to another hypothesis, respondents did not evaluate higher socioeconomic status aggressors more negatively than those of lower status. As hypothesized people with traditional views of women evaluated the female aggressor more negatively than people with more liberal views of women, and liberal participants evaluated the male and female aggressors similarly. The more negative evaluation of female aggressors and, in particular, females who use physical aggression, may result in unfair treatment of such females. These social biases may cloud perceptions of aggressive females, suggesting that their actions are more inappropriate than those of a male who committed the same act.