Beyond mean girls

This country experienced a dramatic rise in youth violence in the early '80s, initially concentrated among urban poor, minority males. Society's most vulnerable children were tragically affected in what was the first wave of America's epidemic of violent youth. Unfortunately, significant national attention followed only after the second wave -- involving middle-class, suburban, and rural America, epitomized by the massacre at Columbine High School.

For more than 20 years, we have traveled throughout the country addressing youth violence as a public health problem. We started hearing occasional stories about girls fighting some 15 years ago. Ten years ago the stories became more frequent; we started getting an earful about girls fighting. The more we listened, the more we appreciated the approaching third wave of the epidemic, girls fighting.

Turning to the numbers, our fears were confirmed. Not only were school personnel anecdotally reporting that girls were fighting more, but girls were also getting arrested for violent crimes at all-time increasingly higher rates as well. National data were beginning to show the increase.

There are those who discount the facts and figures and explain away the changes in girls' behavior by saying, ''It's about time they fight back," or ''girls' behavior hasn't changed, police are just arresting girls more," or just not believing that girls could do such things. But why wouldn't girls' behavior change in this area, as it has in so many others? Statistics may not tell the whole story, but when coupled with real life stories from throughout the country, the picture is clearer. The third wave is here; is America paying attention?

Girls and women continue to break down barriers and close the gaps between their behaviors and achievement levels compared to that of boys and men in many areas. Tragically, violent behavior is no exception. As society has changed, the differences between the ways girls and boys display anger and aggression have as well. Today, American girls are showing their mean streaks. They are fighting, and not just in self-defense. They are fighting other girls. They are not yet fighting as much as boys, and less often with guns, but the similarities are striking.

While it may be too unsettling to acknowledge that the increasing violence among girls, we must admit the problem in order to dedicate ourselves to preventing it. Defensive explanations of gender-based victimization only delay a focus on prevention. Analytically based attempts to show bias in police arrest practices are a denial of the obvious that won't serve us well.

Girls are different! In addition to the obvious biological differences, society socializes girls and boys differently. The gender inequality in America creates circumstances where girls and young women are vulnerable to violent victimization in their families, intimate relationships, and the larger community. We must take these differences into account. Girls must learn how to be nonvictim and nonviolent.

Girls are not different! Girls are clearly demonstrating their similarities with boys with increased participation in sports, enhanced academic accomplishments, and expanded career achievements. When socialization and opportunity are coupled, girls' behavior has changed.

Two decades ago, psychologist Leonard Eron suggested that to prevent youth violence in America we should ''socialize our boys more like we socialize our girls." We have done the opposite. We are socializing girls more like boys, and it is clear that girls are genetically and biologically capable of similar levels of violence. Like boys, girls report fighting to prove a point, get respect, gain a reputation, and for status. They report enjoying a good fight as well -- just like boys.

We believe that socialization and cultural changes explain the changes in girls' behavior. Specifically, the entertainment media (movies, television, music, teen magazines) are depicting girls in roles a male superhero could play with hardly a script change. The female superhero has the same ''make-my-day" attitude and uses the same level of violence as the male superhero. The differences have disappeared, and ''superheroes" abound. Beautiful, violent, and often sexy, they are portrayed regularly in the movies and children's cartoons. We are teaching girls, as we have for decades with boys, that fighting is appropriate and acceptable when dealing with hurt, pain, anger, and conflict.

The socialization of children and the cultural influences around them determine how children behave and respond. Much like James Garbarino's findings published in his book ''Raising Children in a Socially Toxic Environment," we conclude that society sets the parameters within which children behave. As we market violence to girls, the parameters around girls' behavior have changed and their repertoire of responses to problems and pain expands.

The major risk factors for violence include: gun availability, poverty, alcohol and drug use, biological factors, witnessing/victimization, and social/cultural influences. Historically, these risk factors have lined up for girls no different than for boys. The notable recent exception is the change in the social and cultural influences on girls.

Traditionally, high-risk girls acted out with self-destructive behaviors (using alcohol or drugs, running away, suicide attempts, prostitution, and cutting), not violence against others. Boys more typically externalized their risks with fighting, bullying, and violence. Now, violence and physical aggression are being marketed to our daughters in the same way as clothing, make-up, and other products, as it has been to our sons. We equate power with physical aggression and fighting for girls as for boys-- and the girls are catching on.

Predictably, school is where much of this plays out. Students and faculty are reporting more hazing resulting in physical harm and illegal activity. Reports of girls fighting with serious physical injury are becoming more common. We hear about girls being mean-spirited and aggressive toward other girls and recently toward teachers. Standard responses to these occurrences consist of disbelief, uncertainty, and expansion of ''no tolerance" policies predicated on the threat of severe punishment -- expulsion in particular -- as the primary deterrent. But it is not working -- in the same way it has not worked with boys. Threat of punishment alone is not an adequate deterrent to violence for girls any more than it has been for boys.

The problem rests in our ''Rambo" hearts and ''Terminator" minds. Equality is not the problem. Our values are. America has tolerated the epidemic of violence among boys for far too long. Maybe this third wave will wake us up to the impact of a toxic environment that is now affecting even the most resilient.

No parent wants a wimp for a child. It is not just poor inner city parents in high violent crime areas who are telling their children to go back and fight to gain respect and not be pushed around. Parents don't want anyone to take advantage of their children, even more so for girls. However, there is a sad irony in the fact that often parents allow or even encourage children to do things in the name of self-respect that actually increase their risk of harm. Certainly there are other options for a child. Certainly a parent can protect a son or daughter from the corner fight with help in figuring out what else they can do to defuse a situation.

Without a society, community, and school that value negotiation, compromise, forgiveness, and other conflict-resolution skills, it is even harder for parents to raise nonviolent children. This is where the entertainment media, the schools, and the larger society all have a role and are important stakeholders in supporting parents in the raising of safe and healthy children. Concentric circles of influence that affect their values and behaviors surround children. These layers -- family, peers, school, community, media, nation -- need to line up to promote values that deemphasize or discourage risky and dangerous behaviors. As parents, we need to raise our children by creating a supportive and healthy community around them. All adults, whether we have children or not, have this responsibility.

Are the changes in girls' behavior permanent? We really don't know. But we do believe in individual and collective action. We have seen the impact of deliberate and sustained community action in reducing youth homicide rates in Boston in the recent past.

We have experienced the consequences of delay and inaction and do not want to follow that path again. The change in girls' behavior is significant enough to issue a warning that requires action. The stories are accumulating. The data are evolving. As Boston gears up to redouble its violence prevention efforts in response to a recent upswing in youth violence, our cry: Don't forget the girls!

Dr. Deborah Prothrow-Stith is a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health. Dr. Howard Spivak is a professor at Tufts University School of Medicine. They are co-authors of ''Murder Is No Accident: Sugar and Spice and No Longer Nice."