Sexualised violence in adolescence – A comparison of three representative studies

This article summarises the key findings of three representative studies conducted under the name “Speak!” by the Universities of Giessen and Marburg in Hesse between 2016 and 2021 and funded by the Hessian Kultusministerium (Ministry of Education and Cultural Affairs).

The studies comprised surveys done at mainstream, special-education and vocational schools. Pupils were surveyed on a class-by-class basis using standardised questionnaires. The first study was conducted in grades 9 and 10 at all general-education schools in Hesse (excluding special-education schools) in 2016/2017; 2,718 (unweighted) adolescents between 14 and 16 participated in this first survey (Maschke & Stecher, 2018). The first extension study – “Speak! Förderschulen” (Speak – Special-Education Schools) – took place in various special-education schools in Hesse in 2017/2018; it included 248 adolescents with special educational needs (SEN) in learning (n = 153; 62 %), hearing and vision (n = 50; 20 %), language support and emotional/social development (n = 45; 18 %). As in the survey from mainstream schools, most respondents were between 14 and 16. The third study was conducted at vocational schools in 2020 using the same design as the two previous studies in Hesse; 1,118 adolescents and young adults (mostly) between 16 and 19 took part. In total, almost 4,100 adolescents from 109 schools took part in the studies. 

We used an identical instrument in all three “Speak!” studies to survey the prevalence of experiences of sexualised violence. This instrument is partly based on or adopted from previous studies (Averdijk, Müller-Johnson & Eisner, 2012) and partly newly developed to differentiate between various physical and nonphysical forms of experience.

The questions regarding nonphysical forms of experience cover three different areas: verbal and/or textual forms (e.g., “Someone made sexual comments, insults, jokes or gestures about me"), victimisation on the internet (e.g. “I was sexually propositioned or harassed on the internet – on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, etc.") and confrontations with sexual acts (e.g., “Someone made me look at his/her genitals even though I didn’t want to” – exhibitionism). The questions regarding experiences of sexualised violence encompass the entire previous lifespan of the adolescents, i.e., they reflect lifetime prevalence.

Table 1 shows that roughly half of the 14- to 16-year-olds surveyed from mainstream schools and half of those from special-education schools had experienced at least one form of nonphysical sexualised violence (48 % and 52 %, respectively). The prevalence rate is significantly higher among 16- to 19-year-olds from vocational schools (66 %). In general, most of those who report having experienced forms of nonphysical sexualised violence state that they had experienced several forms and had experienced them repeatedly.

Table 1 also shows that, in all three studies, female adolescents are significantly more frequently affected by nonphysical forms of sexualised violence than their male peers. The differences lie between 15 (for adolescents from mainstream schools) and 24 percentage points (for older adolescents from vocational schools).

Regarding physical forms of experience, the questionnaire distinguishes between three different areas of experience: sexualised violence with indirect physical contact (e.g., “Someone pressured or forced me to undress [completely naked or partially]"), sexualised violence with direct physical contact (e.g., “Someone touched my body against my will in a sexual way ["groped”, e.g., buttocks or breast]"), and sexualised violence with (attempted) penetration ("Someone tried to force or coerce me into sexual intercourse [but sexual intercourse did not take place]” and “Someone tried to force or coerce me into sexual intercourse [sexual intercourse took place]").

The prevalence rates for forms of physical sexualised violence are lower than for nonphysical forms (see Table 2). 23 % of the adolescents surveyed from mainstream schools stated that they had experienced such violence at least once. Among their peers who attend special-education schools, the rate is 30 %, and among older adolescents from vocational schools it is 41 %.

Regarding physical forms of sexualised violence, the finding reported above applies here as well: Female adolescents are affected significantly more than males. Indeed, the differences in the prevalence rates are even higher, ranging from 25 (among pupils from mainstream schools) to 44 percentage points (among older adolescents from vocational schools). Regarding physical sexualised violence, note that most of those affected state that they had already experienced several forms of violence and that they had experienced them repeatedly.

The studies asked the adolescents not only whether they had experienced sexualised violence themselves but also whether they had ever observed such things. Without going into detail here, the vast majority of young people had already observed acts one could classify as sexualised violence. 70 % of the 14- to 16-year-olds from mainstream schools, 58 % of their peers from special-education schools and 78% of the 16- to 19-year-olds from vocational schools state that they have observed at least one form of nonphysical or physical sexualised violence. These are often verbal and/or written forms (i.e., nonphysical forms) of sexualised violence. However, 34 % of young people from mainstream schools, 23 % of young people from special-education schools and 48 % of young people from vocational schools also state that they have observed another person being touched in a sexual manner against their will (e.g., “groped” on the buttocks or breast). Note that, in this regard, we did not include items on attempted/completed forced sexual intercourse to avoid any feelings of guilt among the observers (keyword: failure to provide assistance).

The adolescents from mainstream schools and vocational schools were also asked whether they had ever heard of acts of sexualised violence. 37 % of the younger adolescents from mainstream schools and 56 % of the older adolescents from vocational schools replied positively. Our studies show that such hearsay experiences can be very distressing for those affected; in most cases, acquaintances or friends from their personal environment have experienced the story.

Where or in what context does sexualised violence take place? The respondents could select up to six places (multiple answers possible) from a list of 34 (there was an additional option to write in places not included in the list) and thus indicate where they had experienced nonphysical or physical sexualised violence. This allowed us to identify which contexts and places are particularly risky from the perspective of young people. The following percentages refer to the number of cases (persons affected) and not to the number of places mentioned.

Let us first look at nonphysical sexualised violence (see Table 3). Of the adolescents from mainstream schools who had experienced nonphysical sexualised violence, most cite the school as the place of the event (51 %); high-risk places lay within the school, the classroom and the playground in particular. High-risk places and contexts are also the internet – 44 % of the affected adolescents from mainstream schools had experienced nonphysical forms of sexualised violence there – and public spaces (41 %). This is followed by a party or another home (22 %) and their own home (15 %).

“I am constantly afraid of being harassed. Whenever it’s dark, and when I’m alone. It’s worst before and after parties.” 
O-Ton »Speak!«

The profile of risk locations is very similar for adolescents who attend special-education or vocational schools. However, it is striking that “another home/party” is mentioned significantly more frequently as the context of the offence by those from vocational schools – and thus obviously represents a specific risk location for older adolescents, perhaps because of their greater mobility, among other things.

The order of high-risk contexts looks different regarding experiences of physical sexualised violence: Public spaces (streets, railway stations, squares, etc.) and, in the case of adolescents from mainstream schools and vocational schools, “another home/party” are the most risky places. In contrast, significantly fewer affected adolescents located their experiences of physical sexualised violence at school, on the internet or in their own homes.

Clearly, the risk of experiencing sexualised violence is particularly pronounced in the places/contexts where young people meet people of the same age: at school (a social arena), at “another home” (a private area), at a party or in public spaces, which together encompass a large part of young people’s social lives, from the street to the cinema to public spaces. Without pre-empting the following results, our analyses show that primarily peers appear as perpetrators in these places.

6 % of those affected by sexualised violence cite the workplace context as the crime scene or crime context. If we consider only those affected in company-based (dual) training (not shown), this rate rises to 9 % regarding nonphysical experiences and 8 % regarding physical experiences.

“Groping, i.e., touching the buttocks or breast, as well as unwanted kissing, [has] almost become normal at festivals and fairs.” 
O-Ton »Speak!«

From a list of 39 specified persons or groups of persons (male and female persons listed separately), the respondents could select up to six perpetrators or perpetrator groups regarding nonphysical sexualised violence and up to four regarding physical sexualised violence (multiple answers were possible; see table 4). An additional option was to write in persons not included in the list.

The ranking list for nonphysical forms of sexualised violence is topped in all three studies by the male stranger or unknown person: 41 % of the affected (younger) respondents from mainstream schools, 39 % of the affected adolescents from special-education schools and 52 % of the affected (older) adolescents from vocational schools named this group of perpetrators. In contrast, the female stranger/unknown person was named by only 7 % and 8 % of the younger affected persons from mainstream and special-education schools, respectively, and by 14 % of the older affected persons from vocational schools, thus much less frequently. Next in the ranking of perpetrators, at some distance after the male stranger/unknown person, come classmates (35 % of those affected from mainstream schools), friends (28 %) and acquaintances (16 %). These four male perpetrator groups dominate in all three studies – with slightly differing proportions. Male partners and ex-partners rank next, at a greater distance; their female counterparts are mentioned much less frequently. Male family members are cited as perpetrators in almost identical proportions in the three studies – between 5 % and 6 % of those affected cite this group.

The perpetrators of physical sexualised violence are as follows: Again, in first place are male unknown persons: They are declared as perpetrators by 32 % (mainstream schools and special-education schools) and 38% (vocational schools) of the adolescents who have experienced physical sexualised violence. Next, after the unknown male perpetrator, come the boyfriend, classmate and acquaintance regarding physical sexualised violence. Further, the ex-partner is named as the perpetrator by 10–15 % of those affected. Of the adolescents from vocational schools affected by physical sexualised violence, 4 % stated that the perpetrators were male persons from the work/company context (0.3 % female). If we only consider those affected who are in company-based (dual) training, these rates rise to 9 % and 0.5 %, respectively (not shown).

In addition to the central finding that the perpetrators named are mainly male (with female perpetrators being named much less frequently), the findings of the “Speak!” studies (not illustrated) show that, despite the rather high figures for the unknown male, the vast majority of perpetrators are in fact known to those affected and come from their immediate environment, such as classmates, acquaintances, adults from institutional or company contexts, friends, ex-partners or family members.

Taken together, partners, ex-partners and acquaintances form a specific high-risk context for offences involving relationships and male acquaintances, especially for older adolescents (vocational schools) and regarding physical sexualised violence.

In this short article, we have only been able to outline some of the key findings of the “Speak!” studies. We have presented the results in more detail in our book publications (see bibliography). Regarding the excerpt of the findings presented here, note that most adolescents are aware of sexualised violence, either from their own experience or because they have observed it or heard about it in their close social environment. One of the main findings we want to emphasise is that female adolescents are exposed to a significantly higher risk than males. A look at the perpetrators makes it clear that they are predominantly male, and that the perpetrators are generally known to those affected. The overall picture is therefore one of pronounced female victimization, on the one hand, and pronounced male perpetration, on the other hand.

Our analyses of the perpetrators also show that most of those who perpetrate sexualised violence, whether nonphysical or physical, are roughly the same age (peers). All in all, adolescence can therefore be regarded as a high-risk phase in life for experiencing sexualised violence (including in connection with first romantic relationships). Regarding the risk posed by peers, those places or contexts where young people come together and meet are particularly high-risk; this includes public spaces, parties and, regarding nonphysical sexualised violence, schools in particular.

We want to emphasise two things at the end of this short article. Here, we have focused on experiences during adolescence, whereas in our book publications we have analysed the experience of sexualised violence in childhood as well (keyword: sexual abuse by adults). This article does not delve into that theme. Second, we would like to emphasise that the distinction between mainstream, special-education, and vocational schools does not allow us to make any statements about these types of schools as risk contexts. The differences we described between the three studies/school types primarily arise through the different ages of the young people – not the type of school attended (we also do not detail the differences between mainstream schools and special-education schools). Our studies did not show any systematic differences between the four German mainstream school forms (Hauptschule, Realschule, Gesamtschule, Gymnasium). Rather, age and gender are the two main factors that influence the prevalence of sexualised violence.