Search

Sexting has been commonly defined as the sharing of sexually suggestive content via new technologies. The relationship between sexting motivations and both online and offline aggressive behaviors (i.e., sexual harassment, dating violence, and bullying) is still understudied. This study aimed to investigate the association between three sexting motivations—sexual purposes, instrumental/aggravated reasons, and body image reinforcement—and teen dating violence. Specifically, only instrumental/aggravated motivations—such as sexting in exchange for something, under pressure, or with harmful intentions—were expected to be related to dating violence perpetration and victimization. The participants were 171 adolescents aged from 13 to 20 years. Having sent sexts during the last year and having had a dating relationship were inclusive criteria. The Sexting Motivations Questionnaire and the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationship Inventory were administered via an online survey. Two hierarchical regression analyses were run to investigate whether the three sexting motivations (i.e., sexual purposes, instrumental/aggravated reasons, and body image reinforcement) predict, respectively, victimization and perpetration of teen dating violence, controlling for sex, age, and relationship duration. Dating violence perpetration was predicted by sexting for instrumental/aggravated reasons, as well as by sex and relationship duration. Dating violence victimization was predicted by sexting for instrumental/aggravated reasons, as well as by age and relationship duration. These findings expand literature about sexting motivations and aggressive behaviors suggesting that instrumental/aggravated reasons are an index of aggressive/exploitative tendencies, which also lead to dating violence. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

The massacres of the Armenians under Sultan Abdul Hamid II in the Ottoman Empire in the 1890s provoked reactions far abroad. In some societies, such as in Germany, where deeper connections with the Ottoman Empire existed, these reactions involved debates about foreign policy and morality. In Germany these debates continued in the years after the massacres, especially so with the German Emperor’s trip to the Ottoman Empire in 1898. It was around this trip that a new understanding of Germany’s role in the world in relation to ethics developed. Prominent among those discussing and developing ideas was the Protestant pastor and political thinker Friedrich Naumann. This article reexamines this debate and Naumann’s role in it. It shows how the Armenian massacres played a role in internal German debates and how coming to terms with them developed a special dynamic and created unfortunate precedents for Germany. Les massacres perpétrés contre les Arméniens de l’Empire ottoman sous le règne du sultan Abdülhamid II, dans les années 1890, ont provoqué des réactions nombreuses à l’étranger. Dans certains pays particulièrement liés à l’Empire ottoman, comme l’Allemagne, les massacres ont engendré des débats relatifs à la morale et à la conduite de la politique étrangère, qui eurent des échos plusieurs années après, comme lors du voyage de l’empereur Guillaume II dans l’Empire ottoman, en 1898. Dans ces débats, le pasteur et penseur politique Friedrich Naumann a eu une place importante, que cet article examine. Il s’agit de montrer quel rôle les massacres des Arméniens jouèrent dans les débats politiques internes en Allemagne et comment l’indifférence prônée au nom de la défense des intérêts allemands créa alors un précédent.

Past studies that have analyzed fear of victimization using samples composed of men and women have most frequently controlled for the effect of gender. This study not only controls for the effect of gender, but also examines how the predictors of fear of victimization may vary across gender. To do so, separate regression models for men and women were estimated and the corresponding z tests were calculated for the purpose of analyzing whether the differences between genders were significant. The results showed that women scored higher on the general fear of crime victimization scale, as well as for fear of becoming victims of each of the specific crimes under study. Religiosity had an equally significant effect on men and women’s fear of victimization. Also, younger participants were more likely to fear being victims in the cases of both men and women, although this effect was even more pronounced among women. In addition, respondents’ fear of victimization differed across gender based on sexual orientation. Finally, the results showed a few variables (political orientation and sexual victimization) that were only significant in the case of women, but not of men. The findings of this study confirm that fear of victimization and its predictors vary between women and men.