Men's experiences of violence and abuse from a female intimate partner: Power, masculinity and institutional systems (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Journal of Men’s Health, 2009
Concepts of intimate partner abuse and violence are shifting, complex, situational and multifaceted. Whilst women's narratives of abuse have provided much needed insights into the subjective experience of intimate partner abuse, men's accounts of female perpetrated abuse have been slower to emerge, generating much controversy and hostility. This paper seeks to add to a small, but developing qualitative literature on male victims' accounts of intimate abuse and violence. Drawing on case study data, the article charts some of the salient themes emerging from a series of in-depth interviews and the personal diary of an abused heterosexual male victim. It explores the congruence with elements of other accounts of intimate abuse and violence. The paper concludes with a discussion of the ways in which male victims of intimate abuse might be understood within contemporary frameworks of masculinity. Keywords intimate partner violence (IPV), domestic violence, male victims, female perpetrators"
Tanzania Journal of Sociology
The subject of intimate violence and abuse has piqued the interest of different groups of people, including psychologists, scholars, and human rights activists over the past 45 years. Even though the epidemiological literature has consistently shown that at least one out of every three people who experience intimate partner violence is a male partner, current initiatives have chosen to ignore this fact. Instead, the phenomenon has been described by most of its advocates as a gender-cockeyed social issue, with a man penned in an “offender”position and a woman in that of a “helpless victim”. Consequently, the exploited man and the abusing woman have been overly overlooked in the therapeutic processes, academic research, and legislative domain. This analytical paper, therefore, is an attempt to counter this position by showing how abuse and violence to intimate male partners happen and the milieu that gave rise to the misconceptions which have led to this unfortunate standpoint. Findin...
Social Policy and Society
In this article, drawing on interviews with women and men in same sex relationships who have experienced domestic violence, we explore the ways in which recognition of domestic violence can be hampered by public stories about the phenomenon and practices of love. Public stories construct domestic violence as a gendered, heterosexual phenomenon that is predominantly physical in nature. Victims of domestic violence are also constructed as ‘other’, weak and passive. In addition, we argue that practices of love obfuscate practices of violence; and can also result in victim/survivors constructing themselves as stronger than the perpetrator who needs their care.
Men, Masculinities and Intimate Partner Violence
2020
Men, Masculinities and Intimate Partner Violence examines how gender and other social identities and inequalities shape experiences of, and responses to, violence in intimate relationships. It provides new insights into men as both perpetrators and victims of violence, as well as on how to involve men and boys in anti-violence work. The chapters explore partner violence from the perspectives of researchers, therapists, activists, organisations, media as well as men of different background and sexual orientation. Highlighting the distinct and ambivalent ways we relate to violence and masculinity, this timely volume provides nuanced approaches to men, masculinity and intimate partner violence in various societies in the global North and South. This book foregrounds scholarship on men and masculinities in the context of intimate partner violence. By doing so, it revitalises feminist theorising and research on partner abuse, and brings together the fields of masculinity studies and studies of intimate partner violence. The book will be a vital resource for students and scholars in criminology, gender studies, psychology, social work and sociology, as well as those working with men and boys.
Social Problems, 2021
The notion of intimate partner violence (IPV) as gender-based has been widely questioned by advocates of antifeminist men’s rights movements, who have claimed that societal disregard for men’s victimization in intimate relations is a central component of discrimination against men in contemporary societies. Similar views have been expressed by researchers as part of a gender-neutral discourse articulated in opposition to feminist, or gender-sensitive, understandings of IPV. To date, the views of helping professionals who work with IPV in terms of men’s victimization have been underexplored. This study traces the discursive process of problem construction concerning gender and IPV in social and crisis workers’ (N=21) talk about men’s victimization through focus group interviews conducted in Finland. The analysis shows that social and crisis workers’ sense-making closely aligns with talk about men’s victimization by men’s rights advocates; they construct and justify men’s victimizatio...
Intimate partner violence is often thought of as a feminized issue that only affects women, though there are also male victims. Unfortunately, a significantly large majority of nonprofit organizations do not acknowledge male victims and they do not provide services for them. The perpetrator-victim dyad used by the nonprofit anti-domestic violence sector is influenced by gendered perceptions of victimhood which influences how masculinity is constructed in society. Victimhood is feminized while violent perpetration is masculinized, when in reality the nuanced and shifting power and control dynamics in a relationship can easily change someone’s role. Male victims have a challenging time breaking norms of masculinity and femininity. Males are known to initiate violence to control and manipulate their partners; thus, they are often (always) viewed to be the perpetrator in cases of intimate partner violence, though some of them may actually be victims. Male victims of intimate partner violence are an underserved and ignored population in the nonprofit anti-domestic violence sector. This paper explored factors that prevent heterosexual male victims of intimate partner violence from reporting their cases. Data was gathered through interviews with nonprofit professionals and scholarly articles found in academic research databases. The findings reveal that stigmatizing social conditions based on perceived gender roles and the language used in nonprofit informational material prevent heterosexual male victims from reporting their cases and seeking help, which results in heterosexual male victims not receiving assistance from the nonprofit system. Heterosexual male victims need to have services that acknowledges their needs and allows them to develop and promote healthy models of masculinity.
Woman Abuse: The Construction of Gender in Women and Men's Narrative of Violence
South African Journal of Psychology, 2004
Violence against women is a widespread social problem affecting millions of women. For more than three decades, researchers have explored the experiences of women in abusive relationships. Victims' accounts have been the main focus, often deflecting attention away from men who are most frequently the perpetrators. Consequently, woman abuse has come to be regarded as a 'woman's problem'-blaming women and rendering them responsible for change. The literature on perpetrators and victims of violence seems to be developing independently of each other and commonly provide one-sided accounts (mostly from victims and less often from perpetrators). This article reports on an ongoing research project that aims to explore how both partners in a violent heterosexual relationship understand and attach meanings to their experiences. In-depth interviews were conducted with five couples. An analysis of the narratives revealed that women and men's understandings of violence are both similar and different. They construct particular forms of gendered identities, which are sometimes contradictory and ambiguous. In their talk about violence and relationships, they 'perform' gender and enact hegemonic constructions of femininity and masculinity. The analysis also shows that women's and men's talk about violence is linked to broader socio-cultural mechanisms that construct woman abuse as a serious social problem in South Africa.
Gay men and intimate partner violence: a gender analysis
Sociology of Health & Illness, 2014
Though intimate partner violence (IPV) is predominately understood as a women's health issue most often emerging within heterosexual relationships, there is increasing recognition of the existence of male victims of IPV. In this qualitative study we explored connections between masculinities and IPV among gay men. The findings show how recognising IPV was based on an array of participant experiences, including the emotional, physical and sexual abuse inflicted by their partner, which in turn led to three processes. Normalising and concealing violence referred to the participants’ complicity in accepting violence as part of their relationship and their reluctance to disclose that they were victims of IPV. Realising a way out included the participants’ understandings that the triggers for, and patterns of, IPV would best be quelled by leaving the relationship. Nurturing recovery detailed the strategies employed by participants to mend and sustain their wellbeing in the aftermath o...
What has masculinity to do with intimate partner violence?
2020
pointed out by a facilitator working in a perpetrator programme in Sweden during Gottzén’s fieldwork in 2010. The facilitator wondered if a focus on masculinity really could contribute to interventions on intimate partner violence. The programme was one of the first in the country working with partner-violent men and combined a feminist perspective with therapeutic and cognitive behavioural interventions. Despite his own feminist standpoint, and despite the fact that the majority of the perpetrators they worked with were men, the programme had in recent years started to refer to their clients in gender-neutral terms. They were called ‘perpetrators’, ‘users of violence’ or ‘clients’, but never ‘violent men’ and definitely not ‘woman batterers’. The semantic change expressed a desire to make the programme more LGBTQ inclusive, but it also indicated a wish to offer abusive heterosexual cis women treatment. As a consequence, not only did this obfuscate the fact that their perpetrators w...
A Radical ReVision of Domestic Abuse1: Making the Case for a Non-Gendered, Empathic Approach
The dominant, state funded interventions for domestic abuse in the USA (Duluth model) and the UK (Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme - IDAP) are based on ‘a ludicrous political ideology’ (Pizzey, 2004) and is ‘less like therapy than like thought reform (Dutton, 2006; Lifton, 1989). The theory that underpins these programmes stems from a solitary event in Duluth, Minnesota in 1981 where a husband killed his spouse; the dynamics of this single crime have subsequently been adopted as a universal model of male behaviour in all domestic violence incidents. Men are profiled as ‘patriarchal terrorists, culturally conditioned to subjugate women’ (Johnson, 2008), executing ‘deliberate, calculated and conscious behaviour intended to control and intimidate a carefully chosen female target’ (Parker Hall, 2008).