Where Do We Go from here?: Examining Intimate Partner Violence by Bringing Male Victims, Female Perpetrators, and Psychological Sciences into the Fold

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (8) ◽  
pp. 959-966 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reginaldo Chase Espinoza ◽  
Debra Warner
2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 636-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E. Storey ◽  
Susanne Strand

Research and management efforts in the area of intimate partner violence (IPV) have primarily focused on male perpetrators and female victims, resulting in more limited knowledge of female IPV perpetrators and their male victims. In the current study the violence risk assessments of police officers were examined in order to outline the characteristics of female perpetrators of IPV and their male victims. In addition, the officers’ assessments of violence risk and proposed risk management strategies are presented. Results reveal some similarities between the female perpetrators and male victims and their more studied counterparts. However, differences appear to be present in the perceived violence risk posed by the perpetrators and the violence risk management strategies proposed to reduce that risk and protect the victim. The results suggest a need for further research in the area, particularly with respect to the violence risk assessment and management of female IPV perpetrators.


2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (11) ◽  
pp. 1515-1527
Author(s):  
Caryn Gerstenberger ◽  
Richard Stansfield ◽  
Kirk R. Williams

Research on intimate partner violence (IPV) among same-sex couples remains relatively rare. Moreover, few studies examine risk and the likelihood of reoffending among such couples. The present study utilized a large sample of people ( N = 6,711) arrested for IPV to explore the risk, likelihood, and timing of reoffending, including 332 perpetrators in same-sex relationships. Analyses revealed that male perpetrators in same-sex relationships had lower assessed risk than males in heterosexual relationships, and a smaller percentage were rearrested for a new violent offense. Although female perpetrators in same-sex relationships were no more likely to have higher assessed risk compared with perpetrators of female to male violence, female perpetrators in same-sex relationships had a higher likelihood and rate of reoffending, more closely resembling male-to-female violence. Female perpetrators with male victims were identified as the lowest risk to reoffend and indeed were the least likely to reoffend.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arlene Walker ◽  
Kimina Lyall ◽  
Dilkie Silva ◽  
Georgia Craigie ◽  
Richelle Mayshak ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052110014
Author(s):  
Doris F. Pu ◽  
Christina M. Rodriguez ◽  
Marina D. Dimperio

Although intimate partner violence (IPV) is often conceptualized as occurring unilaterally, reciprocal or bidirectional violence is actually the most prevalent form of IPV. The current study assessed physical IPV experiences in couples and evaluated risk and protective factors that may be differentially associated with reciprocal and nonreciprocal IPV concurrently and over time. As part of a multi-wave longitudinal study, women and men reported on the frequency of their IPV perpetration and victimization three times across the transition to parenthood. Participants also reported on risk factors related to personal adjustment, psychosocial resources, attitudes toward gender role egalitarianism, and sociodemographic characteristics at each wave. Participants were classified into one of four IPV groups (reciprocal violence, male perpetrators only, female perpetrators only, and no violence) based on their self-report and based on a combined report, which incorporated both partners’ reports of IPV for a maximum estimate of violence. Women and men were analyzed separately, as both can be perpetrators and/or victims of IPV. Cross-sectional analyses using self-reported IPV data indicated that IPV groups were most consistently distinguished by their levels of couple satisfaction, across gender; psychological distress also appeared to differentiate IPV groups, although somewhat less consistently. When combined reports of IPV were used, sociodemographic risk markers (i.e., age, income, and education) in addition to couple functioning were among the most robust factors differentiating IPV groups concurrently, across gender. In longitudinal analyses, sociodemographic vulnerabilities were again among the most consistent factors differentiating subsequent IPV groups over time. Several gender differences were also found, suggesting that different risk factors (e.g., women’s social support and men’s emotion regulation abilities) may need to be targeted in interventions to identify, prevent, and treat IPV among women and men.


2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (01n02) ◽  
pp. 51-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
WALLACE WAI-HUNG TSANG

Based on a systematic review of 32 articles on help-seeking by male victims of intimate partner violence (IPV), this study attempts to understand why men tend not to seek help in IPV. The review of the selected literature establishes that male victimization in IPV is a real problem. However, men tend not to seek help for a variety of reasons, most of which are attributable to either psychological factors or external service barriers. Based on the findings of this study, the implications of the failure to deliver social services to men suffering various forms of domestic violence are discussed.


2020 ◽  
pp. 088626051990096
Author(s):  
Sihyun Park ◽  
Su-Hyang Bang ◽  
Jaehee Jeon

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is defined as physical, psychological, and sexual violence that occurs in an intimate relationship. For the victims, it often leads to devastating consequences such as physical injuries and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Research on IPV has been extensively conducted for several decades. However, most studies have focused on male-to-female perpetration, and men’s victimization has been relatively neglected. This study aims to explore men’s IPV experiences within the context of Korean society, which is characterized by strong gender norms that may impede efforts to understand how men are victimized. Eleven Korean male IPV victims participated in semi-structured phone or in-person interviews lasting 1 to 2 hr, all of which were audio-recorded and transcribed. The transcriptions were qualitatively analyzed using a phenomenological method suggested by Giorgi. In total, six themes were revealed in the data: (a) living with violence, (b) enduring the violent relationship, (c) feeling helpless, (d) ending the relationship, (e) suffering from trauma, and (f) perceiving male victimization in society. Our findings are meaningful in terms of demonstrating how masculinity in one society can shape the thoughts, emotions, reactions, and behaviors of male victims. These findings can be used to tailor outreach efforts and interventions to the unique experiences of Korean men.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-197
Author(s):  
Matthew Nicosia

Typically, the narrative surrounding intimate partner violence (IPV) involves men as perpetrators not victims. This is in part due to both low reporting from men and heteronormative expectations of masculinity. Furthermore, gay male victims are even less frequently discussed. In this autoethnographic article, I reflect on the power structure within violent same-sex relationships and the resulting loss of agency, self-worth, and personal identity victims experience. Because the conversation regarding IPV is often focused on the perpetrator rather than the victim, I intentionally leave the perpetrators anonymous and these experiences vague to instead focus attention on the trauma experienced by gay men. It is my hope this approach will render more intelligible the negotiations of agency, silence, and the performance of queer masculinity that victims experience. This article is neither about the act nor the perpetrator; rather it is about the response by and to the victim.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document