Social representation of masculine and feminine sports among Saudi adolescents.

Introduction: This study examined how certain sports are represented as masculine or feminine in Saudi adolescents, namely, which sports adolescents associate with males and which sports they associate with females. Previous research aligned with this concern was conducted within Western culture; however, there is a need to shed light on how the issues of social representation of masculine and feminine sports affect other cultures such as Middle Eastern cultures. Methods: A survey was completed by 280 Saudi adolescents, aged between 12 and 17 (M = 13.5, SD = 1.3). The survey contained open-ended recall questions that asked participants to name three masculine, feminine, and natural sports. Results: Most participants were familiar with using feminine and masculine terminology to describe sports, and nearly half had personally used gendered terms to describe sports. Overall, the participants generated 2,195 names of various sports, with the majority classified as natural (appropriate for both men and women), many masculine, and the fewest feminine. Discussion: The connection between specific sports and masculinity or femininity can restrict the activities of adolescents who do not conform to traditional gender roles. Also, adolescents who are interested in sports that are not typically associated with their gender may experience social stigma or exclusion, which can discourage their participation. Therefore, it is important to establish inclusive environments in sports, regardless of the gender.

Women Should Stay Home: Saudi Children's and Adolescents' Reasoning About Husband's Authority Over Wife.

This study focused on Saudi children's and adolescents' reasoning about the authority of husband over wife. Fifty-eight children and adolescents were interviewed. They were read two vignettes in which a husband asks his wife to stay home and leave work in two situations: first, a family with newborn baby and, second, a newly married couple. Participants were asked to judge the acceptability of the authority of the husband over the wife and justify their judgment. In general, children were more accepting of a husband who ordered his wife to stay home when the family had a newborn baby than in the case of a newly married couple, and boys were more accepting than girls. In regard to justifications, boys applied conventional social reasoning and girls tended to use moral reasoning. Finally, adolescents invoked moral reasoning in both situations more than children did, and children invoked pragmatic reasons more often than adolescents did.

Saudi Arabian children's reasoning about religion-based exclusion.

This study examined how Saudi Arabian children (M = 10.50 years, SD = 1.61, Range = 8-10 years) evaluate peer exclusion based on religion when the perpetrator of exclusion was a peer or a father. Children believed that it was more acceptable for fathers than for peers to enforce exclusion and were more likely to use social conventional reasons to justify exclusion when the perpetrator was a father. The discussion focuses on how social domain theory needs to take children's cultural community into account. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Research suggests that children do not defer to authority in making decisions about peer exclusion. Children tend to believe that authority figures should not order peer exclusion because it is a moral decision. What does this study add? Unlike children in other collectivist countries, children in Saudi Arabia support peer exclusion ordered by a father more than a peer. Saudi children use social conventional reasoning to justify fathers' support for peer exclusion.