Support for violence to resist feminism was highest among adolescent boys (28%), followed closely by adolescent girls (21%).
Perhaps most alarming: roughly 40% of boys aged 13 to 17 agreed that women lie about domestic and sexual violence.
These results raise crucial questions going forward. We don’t yet know how these views have changed over time, whether they are on the rise and what the links are between violent extremism and the negative treatment of women.



No, I just question the methodology and the message they’re trying to send
It would have been really great if they linked a detailed breakdown of the information gathered in the article. Swear to god every article that says “we did a study” never show the fucking study. Like come on let me see the data.
deleted by creator
Normally Conversation articles link to the study in question, but this one hasn’t been published (yet). Not sure why the editor(s) didn’t just wait for that first. I agree that it’s lacking detail/context and feels a bit incendiary without it.
I guarantee you this study gets absolutely shredded in review.
If anyone can link it to me when it’s public I will post my own review of it. Wouldn’t be the first time I get garbage retracted.
It’s probably paywalled eh.
If it is I wouldn’t be able to find out because it’s not linked to in the article .
I don’t follow
Not sure if this is what they’re referring but am also curious how this survey was conducted.
For example the question “do you believe women lie about DV/SV”. As someone who had a parent lie about related matters, I could answer yes, but is that what the question is actually asking? It seems to be asking if women, in general, lie about them. Obviously, no they don’t, but you can see how a question especially when posed to teenagers may lead to responses easily sensationalised by a news outlet. The inverse of this questions seems to be “do you believe women never lie about DV/SV?”
There’s a reason self reported surveys are a nightmares for academics to use for meaningful data. Worth pointing the rest of the article has a lot of valid and concerning material that isn’t somehow magically undone by the articles research methods.
Regardless thanks for the solid explanation.