Black girls in the U.S. experience high levels of discrimination and adversity. Resilience is a term used within social work, psychology, and health professions to indicate positive adaptation to adversity, trauma, or stress. This article examines traditional and alternative models of resilience through analyses of quantitative and qualitative data from an evaluation of a year-long empowerment program for 33 Black girls (mean age ¼ 14.97 years). Based on critical consciousness theory and Black feminism, this program was designed to empower participants through critical reflection and development of positive gendered racial identity. Quantitative analyses found no change over time in traditional measures of individual resilience. However, alternative measures of collective resilience show positive change. Specifically, quantitative analyses reveal that participants developed increased awareness of structural inequalities faced by Black girls/women and decreased adherence to neoliberal ideologies of personal responsibility and individual striving. Additionally, qualitative analyses show that participants critically reflected on their experiences of oppression, developed mutual support and positive gendered racial identity, and engaged in collective action. These findings demonstrate positive effects of empowerment-based programing, challenge the utility of traditional, individually-focused models of resilience, and reframe Black girls' resistance to injustice as an alternative, collective form of resilience.

This study examined 104 undergraduate college students (mean age = 19) from the Western United States regarding gender differences in their experiences of gender prejudice. Women (N=81) and men (N=22) responded to an online diary for 14 days, resulting in 1008 descriptions of events. Women reported significantly higher levels of negative affect than men during the experiences. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze event descriptions and three main themes emerged including target of the event, perpetrator and setting. Significant differences were found for target and perpetrator based upon the gender of the participant. There were also significant differences in the distribution of the type of event (gender role stereotypes, sexual objectification or demeaning events) based on the setting and target.

This study examines gender-based bullying from the perspective of targets and bystanders. A total of 64 children (36 boys and 28 girls; 67% African American) in grades 3-5 were given hypothetical gender-based bullying situations and answered questions regarding their appraisals, intended responses, and barriers to responding. Findings indicated there were significant differences in intended responses and perceived barriers among targets and bystanders. There were also gender differences such that bystander girls reported greater distress and more confidence than bystander boys. Implications for developing anti-bullying programs that offer more effective strategies that are tailored toward targets and bystanders of gender-based bullying are discussed.

When experiencing gender prejudice, college women engage in a dynamic decision making process about whether and how to respond. We examined the discrepancy between how college women wanted to respond and how they actually responded to gender prejudice events and explored their reasons for not using a desired response. In this study, 81 college women from the Western United States responded to a qualitative online daily diary about gender prejudice. In 34% (N=265) of the events, the women reported there was a discrepancy between what they wanted to do and how they actually reacted, with the most common discrepancy being a desire to utilize a confrontational response (91%, N=242). Over the two week period, women reported significantly more events during which they considered the use of a confrontational response (N=242) than they actually used one (N=199). Women's reported reasons for not using their desired response included: not being cost effective (25%), concern about social norms (37%), setting limitations (19%), personality characteristics (9%) and not being bothered enough by the event (10%). We also found that when women considered using a confrontational response but decided not to, they reported using all other response types instead. In these cases, women who did nothing during the event reported lower levels of distress during the event than women who used a psychological response or a different confrontational response. Implications and future research directions are discussed.