I'm not sure what you mean by finding results. If you search using Google Scholar there is a lot of references of studies having used BSRI and also some reviews of the scale. For instance this one: http://www.ekgp.ugent.be/pages/nl/vragenlijsten/Validity_BEM.pdf
But also this one which examines the validity of the scale around 2000. (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1007119516728?LI=true) We have also recently used the scale in a Danish context but my bid would be that the scale needs an update to capture relevant traits that are sex-typed in a contemporary Danish setting. It would probably be the same in other contexts as well.
Thank you Claus. I have had a bit of success since posting the question and I am grateful for your links. I agree with the need to update. I also read a study which suggested items like 'childlike' and 'gullible' are not really 'feminine' traits but rather a sign of immaturity :-) And there are critical reviews of the single items' 'feminine' and 'masculine' where people show those responses are inconsistent with the other trait items and responses tend to be more based on gender. Cheers.
In our Danish study we used only a selection of 10 and 5 items respectively and we did not include 'femininity'. As part of the piloting the scale for the Danish context we actually conducted the same use of judges that Bem describes in one of her first papers on the scale. We used students to randomly evaluate to what extent each of the 60 original traits were appropriate or desirable for men and women respectively. We found that there we're still some of the traits that the judges deemed to be more desirable for men and women respectively but it was under 10 where there was a statistically significant difference in the evaluation.