Pub Date : 2021-01-18DOI: 10.1332/239788220X16076181041680
Nicola Sharp-Jeffs
The term ‘economic abuse’ was first introduced into discourse when it was identified as a tactic used by perpetrators within the Duluth Power and Control Wheel. Yet it is only recently that researchers have turned their attention to defining and understanding it. This article draws on a review of the global and UK specific academic research literature to assess the suitability of the definition of economic abuse put forward within the Westminster government’s Domestic Abuse Bill. It recommends that a) the term ‘any behaviour’ within the definition is understood to include controlling tactics which sit under the constructs of economic restriction, exploitation and/or sabotage, b) the definition recognises perpetrators will also prevent a partner from using/maintaining goods or services and, c) attention is given to the suggestion that single incidents of economic abuse would not fall under this definition. While the focus of this article is on Westminster policy in the UK, the case for ‘naming’ and defining economic abuse in statute has wider resonance, not least because it provides a framework within which to report on prevalence, hold perpetrators accountable and for services (statutory and voluntary) to respond.Key messagesThis article critically assesses the definition of economic abuse within the Westminster government’s Domestic Abuse Bill and argues that there is ‘room for improvement’.The term ‘any behaviour’ within the definition of economic abuse should be understood to include controlling tactics which sit under the constructs of economic restriction, exploitation and/or sabotage.A clear understanding of the constructs of economic abuse is vital if the Westminster government is to report on prevalence (as required by the Istanbul Convention) and frontline practitioners are to understand and meet the complex needs of victim-survivors.
{"title":"Understanding the economics of abuse: an assessment of the economic abuse definition within the Domestic Abuse Bill","authors":"Nicola Sharp-Jeffs","doi":"10.1332/239788220X16076181041680","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239788220X16076181041680","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The term ‘economic abuse’ was first introduced into discourse when it was identified as a tactic used by perpetrators within the Duluth Power and Control Wheel. Yet it is only recently that researchers have turned their attention to defining and understanding it. This article draws on a review of the global and UK specific academic research literature to assess the suitability of the definition of economic abuse put forward within the Westminster government’s Domestic Abuse Bill. It recommends that a) the term ‘any behaviour’ within the definition is understood to include controlling tactics which sit under the constructs of economic restriction, exploitation and/or sabotage, b) the definition recognises perpetrators will also prevent a partner from using/maintaining goods or services and, c) attention is given to the suggestion that single incidents of economic abuse would not fall under this definition. While the focus of this article is on Westminster policy in the UK, the case for ‘naming’ and defining economic abuse in statute has wider resonance, not least because it provides a framework within which to report on prevalence, hold perpetrators accountable and for services (statutory and voluntary) to respond.Key messagesThis article critically assesses the definition of economic abuse within the Westminster government’s Domestic Abuse Bill and argues that there is ‘room for improvement’.The term ‘any behaviour’ within the definition of economic abuse should be understood to include controlling tactics which sit under the constructs of economic restriction, exploitation and/or sabotage.A clear understanding of the constructs of economic abuse is vital if the Westminster government is to report on prevalence (as required by the Istanbul Convention) and frontline practitioners are to understand and meet the complex needs of victim-survivors.\u0000","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47326066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021X16171870951258
Rosanna Bellini, N. Westmarland
Domestic violence perpetrator programmes are a frequently used intervention to respond to perpetrators of domestic violence. However, there is considerable concern about the use of ‘online’, ‘virtual’, or ‘digital’ programmes delivered remotely. Policy and practice have developed at pace through the COVID-19 pandemic and research is lacking. This exploratory research examined the challenges and opportunities associated with a pilot online programme in Minnesota, US, for court mandated men. It took place before the COVID-19 pandemic, making it the first study to investigate a ‘live’ online programme.A mixed method design was used, consisting of 40 hours of observational data (covering 25 sessions); four interviews with programme facilitators, 12 interviews with programme observers, and six perpetrators enrolled on the programme. We did not investigate the experiences of partners or ex-partners or of partner organisations, which is a limitation.We found that while the online format solved some long-established issues with programme delivery (for example, providing an intervention for rural communities, a lack of transport, continuity of intervention for those who travel as part of their job), different issues arose in connection to the online programme. These problems included access to necessary broadband speeds, technical hardware and a private place to participate in the sessions.Key messagesOnline, remote delivery of a Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programme (DVPP) was found to solve some of the problems associated with in-person delivery, however new problems arose in their place including access to technology, broadband, a private and safe space to participate, and learning new facilitation techniques.Remote access programmes can be useful as an option where no in-person group is available, but adaptions are needed to facilitation style and programme curricula.The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the importance of researching this mode of programme delivery, although research with victim-survivors and community partner organisations are necessary to confirm the safety mechanisms required.
{"title":"A problem solved is a problem created: the opportunities and challenges associated with an online domestic violence perpetrator programme","authors":"Rosanna Bellini, N. Westmarland","doi":"10.1332/239868021X16171870951258","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021X16171870951258","url":null,"abstract":"Domestic violence perpetrator programmes are a frequently used intervention to respond to perpetrators of domestic violence. However, there is considerable concern about the use of ‘online’, ‘virtual’, or ‘digital’ programmes delivered remotely. Policy and practice have developed at pace through the COVID-19 pandemic and research is lacking. This exploratory research examined the challenges and opportunities associated with a pilot online programme in Minnesota, US, for court mandated men. It took place before the COVID-19 pandemic, making it the first study to investigate a ‘live’ online programme.A mixed method design was used, consisting of 40 hours of observational data (covering 25 sessions); four interviews with programme facilitators, 12 interviews with programme observers, and six perpetrators enrolled on the programme. We did not investigate the experiences of partners or ex-partners or of partner organisations, which is a limitation.We found that while the online format solved some long-established issues with programme delivery (for example, providing an intervention for rural communities, a lack of transport, continuity of intervention for those who travel as part of their job), different issues arose in connection to the online programme. These problems included access to necessary broadband speeds, technical hardware and a private place to participate in the sessions.Key messagesOnline, remote delivery of a Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programme (DVPP) was found to solve some of the problems associated with in-person delivery, however new problems arose in their place including access to technology, broadband, a private and safe space to participate, and learning new facilitation techniques.Remote access programmes can be useful as an option where no in-person group is available, but adaptions are needed to facilitation style and programme curricula.The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the importance of researching this mode of programme delivery, although research with victim-survivors and community partner organisations are necessary to confirm the safety mechanisms required.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315413","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021X16153783053180
Jama Shelton, K. Kroehle, Emilie K. Clark, Kristie L. Seelman, S. Dodd
The enforcement of the gender binary is a root cause of gender-based violence (GBV) for trans people. Disrupting GBV requires that we ensure that ‘gender’ is not presumed synonymous with White cisgender womanhood. Transfeminists suggest that attaining gender equity requires confronting all forms of oppression that police people and their bodies, including White supremacy, colonialism and capitalism (Silva and Ornat, 2016; Simpkins, 2016). Part of this project, we argue, includes confronting the structures of GBV embedded within digital technologies that are increasingly part of our everyday lives. Informed by transfeminist theory (Koyama, 2003; Stryker and Bettcher, 2016; Simpkins, 2016; Weerawardhana, 2018), we interrogate the ways in which digital technologies naturalise and reinforce GBV against bodies marked as divergent. We examine the subtler ways that digital technology can fortify binary gender as a mechanism of power and control. We highlight how gendered forms of data violence cannot be disentangled from digital technologies that surveil, police or punish on the basis of race, nationhood and citizenship, particularly in relation to predictive policing practices. We conclude with recommendations to guide technological development to reduce the violence enacted upon trans people and those whose gender presentations transgress society’s normative criteria for what constitutes a compliant (read: appropriately gendered) citizen.Key messagesViolence against trans people is inherently gender-based.A root cause of gender-based violence against trans people is the strict reinforcement of the gender binary.Digital technology and predictive policing can fortify binary gender as a mechanism of power and control.Designers of digital technologies and the policymakers regulating surveillance capitalism must interrogate the ways in which their work upholds the gender binary and gender-based violence against trans people.
性别二分法的强制执行是跨性别者遭受性别暴力的根本原因。打破性别暴力要求我们确保“性别”不被认为是白人顺性别女性的同义词。变性女性主义者认为，要实现性别平等，就需要面对各种形式的压迫，包括白人至上主义、殖民主义和资本主义(Silva and Ornat, 2016;辛普金斯,2016)。我们认为，该项目的一部分内容包括直面数字技术中嵌入的性别暴力结构，而数字技术正日益成为我们日常生活的一部分。受跨女性主义理论影响(Koyama, 2003;Stryker and Bettcher, 2016;辛普金斯,2016;Weerawardhana, 2018)，我们探讨了数字技术如何将性别暴力自然化并强化，以对抗被标记为分歧的身体。我们研究了数字技术可以加强二元性别作为权力和控制机制的微妙方式。我们强调，性别形式的数据暴力无法与基于种族、国籍和公民身份的监控、警察或惩罚的数字技术分开，特别是在预测性警务实践方面。最后，我们提出了指导技术发展的建议，以减少对跨性别者和那些性别表现违反社会规范标准的人的暴力行为，这些标准构成了一个顺从的(即:适当的性别)公民。针对跨性别者的暴力本质上是基于性别的。针对跨性别者的性别暴力的根本原因是性别二元的严格强化。数字技术和预测性警务可以强化二元性别作为权力和控制机制的地位。数字技术的设计者和监管监控资本主义的政策制定者必须审视他们的工作是如何维护性别二元对立和针对跨性别者的性别暴力的。
{"title":"Digital technologies and the violent surveillance of nonbinary gender","authors":"Jama Shelton, K. Kroehle, Emilie K. Clark, Kristie L. Seelman, S. Dodd","doi":"10.1332/239868021X16153783053180","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021X16153783053180","url":null,"abstract":"The enforcement of the gender binary is a root cause of gender-based violence (GBV) for trans people. Disrupting GBV requires that we ensure that ‘gender’ is not presumed synonymous with White cisgender womanhood. Transfeminists suggest that attaining gender equity requires confronting all forms of oppression that police people and their bodies, including White supremacy, colonialism and capitalism (Silva and Ornat, 2016; Simpkins, 2016). Part of this project, we argue, includes confronting the structures of GBV embedded within digital technologies that are increasingly part of our everyday lives. Informed by transfeminist theory (Koyama, 2003; Stryker and Bettcher, 2016; Simpkins, 2016; Weerawardhana, 2018), we interrogate the ways in which digital technologies naturalise and reinforce GBV against bodies marked as divergent. We examine the subtler ways that digital technology can fortify binary gender as a mechanism of power and control. We highlight how gendered forms of data violence cannot be disentangled from digital technologies that surveil, police or punish on the basis of race, nationhood and citizenship, particularly in relation to predictive policing practices. We conclude with recommendations to guide technological development to reduce the violence enacted upon trans people and those whose gender presentations transgress society’s normative criteria for what constitutes a compliant (read: appropriately gendered) citizen.Key messagesViolence against trans people is inherently gender-based.A root cause of gender-based violence against trans people is the strict reinforcement of the gender binary.Digital technology and predictive policing can fortify binary gender as a mechanism of power and control.Designers of digital technologies and the policymakers regulating surveillance capitalism must interrogate the ways in which their work upholds the gender binary and gender-based violence against trans people.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021x16286662118554
Jane Bailey, Jacquie Burkell
Technologically-facilitated violence (TFV) can take many shapes and forms, In this thought piece, we reflect on TFV from structural and intersectional perspectives, examining how these might change our understanding of TFV, with particular attention to gender-based TFV. We are motivated to engage in this reflection for two main reasons. First, traditional understandings of violence, including gender-based violence, tend to prioritise physical acts (whether in word or in application), contributing to a trivialisation of the kinds of harms effected through digitised communications networks (Dunn, 2021). Second, if TFV is understood primarily in terms of individual interpersonal acts, our ability to understand how intersecting oppressions such as sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, colonialism affect the likelihood of being targeted and the experience of violence will be compromised. As Black feminist and critical race scholars such as Crenshaw (1991), Hill Collins (2017), and Jiwani, Berman and Cameron (2010) have ably demonstrated, individualistic single axis accounts of violence outside of technologised contexts have resulted in exclusionary and dangerous outcomes that selectively harm members of equality-seeking communities. The result of these individualised understandings of violence is that structural oppressions are ‘erased, trivialised, or contained within categories that evacuate the violation of [structural] violence’ (Jiwani, 2006, xi–xii). Among other effects, such erasure risks rendering invisible opportunities to intervene with respect to violence not carried out by individuals, often resulting in ‘remedies’ that emphasise interventions by the state against individual actors (for example, through criminal law), powers that already disproportionately target members of equality-seeking communities, and misses the potential need to intervene on capitalistic corporate systems and behaviours. In both cases, the prospect of achieving justice recedes.Key messageEssential to understand TFV through structural and intersectional lenses to better ensure just policy approaches and support mechanisms for all.
{"title":"Tech-facilitated violence: thinking structurally and intersectionally","authors":"Jane Bailey, Jacquie Burkell","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16286662118554","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16286662118554","url":null,"abstract":"Technologically-facilitated violence (TFV) can take many shapes and forms, In this thought piece, we reflect on TFV from structural and intersectional perspectives, examining how these might change our understanding of TFV, with particular attention to gender-based TFV. We are motivated to engage in this reflection for two main reasons. First, traditional understandings of violence, including gender-based violence, tend to prioritise physical acts (whether in word or in application), contributing to a trivialisation of the kinds of harms effected through digitised communications networks (Dunn, 2021). Second, if TFV is understood primarily in terms of individual interpersonal acts, our ability to understand how intersecting oppressions such as sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, colonialism affect the likelihood of being targeted and the experience of violence will be compromised. As Black feminist and critical race scholars such as Crenshaw (1991), Hill Collins (2017), and Jiwani, Berman and Cameron (2010) have ably demonstrated, individualistic single axis accounts of violence outside of technologised contexts have resulted in exclusionary and dangerous outcomes that selectively harm members of equality-seeking communities. The result of these individualised understandings of violence is that structural oppressions are ‘erased, trivialised, or contained within categories that evacuate the violation of [structural] violence’ (Jiwani, 2006, xi–xii). Among other effects, such erasure risks rendering invisible opportunities to intervene with respect to violence not carried out by individuals, often resulting in ‘remedies’ that emphasise interventions by the state against individual actors (for example, through criminal law), powers that already disproportionately target members of equality-seeking communities, and misses the potential need to intervene on capitalistic corporate systems and behaviours. In both cases, the prospect of achieving justice recedes.Key messageEssential to understand TFV through structural and intersectional lenses to better ensure just policy approaches and support mechanisms for all.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315742","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021x16290304343529
L. Tanczer, Isabel Lopez-Neira, S. Parkin
Technology-facilitated abuse or ‘tech abuse’ in intimate partner violence (IPV) contexts describes the breadth of harms that can be enacted using digital systems and online tools. While the misappropriation of technologies in the context of IPV has been subject to prior research, a dedicated study on the United Kingdom’s IPV support sector has so far been missing. The present analysis summarises insights derived from semi-structured interviews with 34 UK voluntary and statutory sector representatives that were conducted over the course of two years (2018–2020). The analysis identifies four overarching themes that point out support services’ practices, concerns and challenges in relation to tech abuse, and specifically the Internet of Things (IoT). These themes include (a) technology-facilitated abuse, where interviewees outline their experiences and understanding of the concept of tech abuse; (b) IoT-enabled tech abuse, focusing on the changing dynamics of tech abuse due to the continuing rise of smart consumer products; (c) data, documentation and assessment, that directs our attention to the shortcomings of existing risk assessment and recording practices; and (d) training, support and assistance, in which participants point to the need for specialist support capabilities to be developed within and beyond existing services.Key messagesUK statutory and voluntary support services do not feel well equipped to respond to tech abuse.Shortcomings in documentation and assessment practices make it difficult to estimate the full scale and nature of tech abuse.Tech abuse training and other support mechanisms are needed to amplify the UK sector’s ability to assist IPV victims/survivors.
{"title":"‘I feel like we’re really behind the game’: perspectives of the United Kingdom’s intimate partner violence support sector on the rise of technology-facilitated abuse","authors":"L. Tanczer, Isabel Lopez-Neira, S. Parkin","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16290304343529","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16290304343529","url":null,"abstract":"Technology-facilitated abuse or ‘tech abuse’ in intimate partner violence (IPV) contexts describes the breadth of harms that can be enacted using digital systems and online tools. While the misappropriation of technologies in the context of IPV has been subject to prior research, a dedicated study on the United Kingdom’s IPV support sector has so far been missing. The present analysis summarises insights derived from semi-structured interviews with 34 UK voluntary and statutory sector representatives that were conducted over the course of two years (2018–2020). The analysis identifies four overarching themes that point out support services’ practices, concerns and challenges in relation to tech abuse, and specifically the Internet of Things (IoT). These themes include (a) technology-facilitated abuse, where interviewees outline their experiences and understanding of the concept of tech abuse; (b) IoT-enabled tech abuse, focusing on the changing dynamics of tech abuse due to the continuing rise of smart consumer products; (c) data, documentation and assessment, that directs our attention to the shortcomings of existing risk assessment and recording practices; and (d) training, support and assistance, in which participants point to the need for specialist support capabilities to be developed within and beyond existing services.Key messagesUK statutory and voluntary support services do not feel well equipped to respond to tech abuse.Shortcomings in documentation and assessment practices make it difficult to estimate the full scale and nature of tech abuse.Tech abuse training and other support mechanisms are needed to amplify the UK sector’s ability to assist IPV victims/survivors.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021x16363614118227
Ola Kattoura
Despite the abundant literature concerning domestic violence against women, very little is known about battered Arab women in Israel. Using intersectionality as the overarching conceptual lens, this study drew from in depth-interviews with 36 battered Arab women and adopted a narrative approach to reveal how battered Arab women in Israel are trapped in abusive relationships within a conflicted society. Drawing from discourse analysis, the findings revealed that participants used the same words to describe themselves and to describe Arab society. This use of metaphorical language revealed the additional meaning of societal patriarchy. It illustrated Arab society’s way of dealing with its entrapment through projecting its difficulties onto Arab women who served as the society’s scapegoats, causing many to suffer not only from multiplied oppressions, but also to face life threatening situations.Key messagesThis article explores how the historical loss of land and the resulting contemporary circumstances for Palestinians in Israel who are known by the term ‘Israeli Arabs’ have affected men’s attitudes towards what they believe is left of their honour, which is now primarily symbolised by feminine chastity.Understanding the contradiction of perceiving Arab society as oppressive towards women, yet at the same time being oppressed, is achieved through exploring psychoanalytical lenses such as projection, identification and split mechanisms.Arab society’s mechanism to cope with its entrapment and traumas is mainly conducted through splitting and projecting its difficulties and losses onto a weaker target – the woman.
{"title":"Trapping yet trapped: the ‘I-society’ discourse","authors":"Ola Kattoura","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16363614118227","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16363614118227","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the abundant literature concerning domestic violence against women, very little is known about battered Arab women in Israel. Using intersectionality as the overarching conceptual lens, this study drew from in depth-interviews with 36 battered Arab women and adopted a narrative approach to reveal how battered Arab women in Israel are trapped in abusive relationships within a conflicted society. Drawing from discourse analysis, the findings revealed that participants used the same words to describe themselves and to describe Arab society. This use of metaphorical language revealed the additional meaning of societal patriarchy. It illustrated Arab society’s way of dealing with its entrapment through projecting its difficulties onto Arab women who served as the society’s scapegoats, causing many to suffer not only from multiplied oppressions, but also to face life threatening situations.Key messagesThis article explores how the historical loss of land and the resulting contemporary circumstances for Palestinians in Israel who are known by the term ‘Israeli Arabs’ have affected men’s attitudes towards what they believe is left of their honour, which is now primarily symbolised by feminine chastity.Understanding the contradiction of perceiving Arab society as oppressive towards women, yet at the same time being oppressed, is achieved through exploring psychoanalytical lenses such as projection, identification and split mechanisms.Arab society’s mechanism to cope with its entrapment and traumas is mainly conducted through splitting and projecting its difficulties and losses onto a weaker target – the woman.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315964","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021x16317122802413
Viveka Enander, G. Krantz, S. Lövestad, K. Örmon
This article puts intimate partner homicide (IPH) into a process perspective, and describes the latter two stages of the IPH process, that is, ‘changing the project’ and ‘the aftermath’. The focus of analysis is on the moment when the perpetrator chooses to kill the victim, and what s/he does and says in the wake of the killing. Fifty court files, from cases involving 40 male and 10 female perpetrators, underwent thematic analysis. Regarding the final trigger pertaining to changing the project, some situational factors that trigger male-perpetrated IPH seem to differ from the corresponding factors in female-perpetrated IPH. Feelings of rejection and jealousy seemed to be more common as triggers to kill for men than for women, while some cases of female-perpetrated IPH were linked to self-defence in response to IPV. Moreover, as noted previously, no female perpetrators displayed possessiveness.Regarding the aftermath, after the homicide the perpetrators generally contacted someone and admitted to having killed their partners. Only a few perpetrators denied culpability and even fewer, mainly male, perpetrators concealed their crimes and denied knowledge of them. However, even in cases where the perpetrator admitted to having killed their victims, their courtroom narratives were apparently constructed to minimise resposibility.Key MessagesThe IPH process can be described as threefold, consisting of the following stages: the build-up before the killing, changing the project into killing one’s partner and the aftermath to the killing. Similar triggers exist in the first two stages, and the boundaries between them are blurred, but a final trigger seems to precede the killing.IPH perpetrators may contact someone after the killing and admit to having committed it, but still attempt to minimise their responsibility.The IPH process is gendered, with different features in the respective cases of male and female perpetrators. It is often, but not always, preceded by male-to-female intimate partner violence (IPV).
{"title":"The killing and thereafter: intimate partner homicides in a process perspective, part II","authors":"Viveka Enander, G. Krantz, S. Lövestad, K. Örmon","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16317122802413","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16317122802413","url":null,"abstract":"This article puts intimate partner homicide (IPH) into a process perspective, and describes the latter two stages of the IPH process, that is, ‘changing the project’ and ‘the aftermath’. The focus of analysis is on the moment when the perpetrator chooses to kill the victim, and what s/he does and says in the wake of the killing. Fifty court files, from cases involving 40 male and 10 female perpetrators, underwent thematic analysis. Regarding the final trigger pertaining to changing the project, some situational factors that trigger male-perpetrated IPH seem to differ from the corresponding factors in female-perpetrated IPH. Feelings of rejection and jealousy seemed to be more common as triggers to kill for men than for women, while some cases of female-perpetrated IPH were linked to self-defence in response to IPV. Moreover, as noted previously, no female perpetrators displayed possessiveness.Regarding the aftermath, after the homicide the perpetrators generally contacted someone and admitted to having killed their partners. Only a few perpetrators denied culpability and even fewer, mainly male, perpetrators concealed their crimes and denied knowledge of them. However, even in cases where the perpetrator admitted to having killed their victims, their courtroom narratives were apparently constructed to minimise resposibility.Key MessagesThe IPH process can be described as threefold, consisting of the following stages: the build-up before the killing, changing the project into killing one’s partner and the aftermath to the killing. Similar triggers exist in the first two stages, and the boundaries between them are blurred, but a final trigger seems to precede the killing.IPH perpetrators may contact someone after the killing and admit to having committed it, but still attempt to minimise their responsibility.The IPH process is gendered, with different features in the respective cases of male and female perpetrators. It is often, but not always, preceded by male-to-female intimate partner violence (IPV).","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66316262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021x16231534981819
V. Banyard, P. Greenberg, Katie M. Edwards, K. Mitchell, L. Jones
Author’s note: Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Victoria Banyard, Associate Director, Center on Violence Against Women and Children, Rutgers University. Victoria.banyard@rutgers.eduObjective: An emerging prevention strategy to reduce peer sexual violence among adolescents is bystander training (that is, actionism). The situational-cognitive model of actionism describes key variables that may promote action, the first of which is detecting the opportunity to help. The purpose of this study was to examine this first stage of action to better understand youth who report opportunity to respond to situations of sexual violence.Method: The current cross-sectional study examined a measure of youth bystander opportunity in a baseline sample of youth in school grades 7–10 in the Great Plains region of the US (N=2,225). Students indicated whether they witnessed four situations related to risk of peer sexual violence.Results: Opportunities for actionism varied based on the type of situation. Opportunities to intervene were most common for situations involving unwanted touching and sexual rumours. Older youth, girls and youth with self-reported risk factors such as alcohol use and internalising symptoms were more likely to report opportunities for actionism.Discussion: Further study of bystander opportunity and correlates of bystander opportunity could help better tailor prevention approaches to provide practice in strategies that are based on the range of opportunities which particular groups of youth may be most likely to encounter.Key messages:Adolescents have the potential to prevent peer sexual violence by being active bystanders when they are aware of risk.Youth reported more opportunities to respond to unwanted sexual contact and sexual rumours than sexual assault.Older youth, girls and youth who used alcohol were more likely to report response opportunities.
{"title":"Describing youth as actionists for peer sexual violence prevention: correlates of opportunity to act","authors":"V. Banyard, P. Greenberg, Katie M. Edwards, K. Mitchell, L. Jones","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16231534981819","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16231534981819","url":null,"abstract":"Author’s note: Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Victoria Banyard, Associate Director, Center on Violence Against Women and Children, Rutgers University. Victoria.banyard@rutgers.eduObjective: An emerging prevention strategy to reduce peer sexual violence among adolescents is bystander training (that is, actionism). The situational-cognitive model of actionism describes key variables that may promote action, the first of which is detecting the opportunity to help. The purpose of this study was to examine this first stage of action to better understand youth who report opportunity to respond to situations of sexual violence.Method: The current cross-sectional study examined a measure of youth bystander opportunity in a baseline sample of youth in school grades 7–10 in the Great Plains region of the US (N=2,225). Students indicated whether they witnessed four situations related to risk of peer sexual violence.Results: Opportunities for actionism varied based on the type of situation. Opportunities to intervene were most common for situations involving unwanted touching and sexual rumours. Older youth, girls and youth with self-reported risk factors such as alcohol use and internalising symptoms were more likely to report opportunities for actionism.Discussion: Further study of bystander opportunity and correlates of bystander opportunity could help better tailor prevention approaches to provide practice in strategies that are based on the range of opportunities which particular groups of youth may be most likely to encounter.Key messages:Adolescents have the potential to prevent peer sexual violence by being active bystanders when they are aware of risk.Youth reported more opportunities to respond to unwanted sexual contact and sexual rumours than sexual assault.Older youth, girls and youth who used alcohol were more likely to report response opportunities.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021x16231535098549
J. Levell
In this short piece the author uses the recent publication of an edited collection, Men, Masculinities and Intimate Partner Violence (Gottzen et al, 2021) as a springboard to focus on the pertinent questions this raises within feminist academic, policy and practitioner work. This book highlights a greater awareness of the multiplicity of masculinities and the impact this is having on work in the domestic abuse sector, particularly in perpetrator interventions. Focusing on individual experiences of masculinity and associated traumas humanises perpetrators, but the risk is that it individualises abuse perpetration away from a structural understanding of patriarchy. This is a tension within the movement, which raises questions about how we seek to understand men’s individual lives with respect, yet view masculinity through a feminist lens.
在这篇短文中，作者使用最近出版的编辑集，男性，男性化和亲密伴侣暴力(Gottzen et al, 2021)作为跳板，专注于女权主义学术，政策和实践工作中提出的相关问题。这本书强调了对男性多样性的更大认识，以及这对家庭虐待部门工作的影响，特别是在肇事者干预方面。专注于男性的个人经历和相关的创伤会使施虐者人性化，但风险在于，它会使施虐行为个体化，远离对父权制的结构性理解。这是这场运动内部的一种紧张关系，它提出了一个问题，即我们如何在尊重男性个人生活的同时，通过女权主义的视角来看待男子气概。
{"title":"On masculinities: navigating the tension between individual and structural considerations","authors":"J. Levell","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16231535098549","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16231535098549","url":null,"abstract":"In this short piece the author uses the recent publication of an edited collection, Men, Masculinities and Intimate Partner Violence (Gottzen et al, 2021) as a springboard to focus on the pertinent questions this raises within feminist academic, policy and practitioner work. This book highlights a greater awareness of the multiplicity of masculinities and the impact this is having on work in the domestic abuse sector, particularly in perpetrator interventions. Focusing on individual experiences of masculinity and associated traumas humanises perpetrators, but the risk is that it individualises abuse perpetration away from a structural understanding of patriarchy. This is a tension within the movement, which raises questions about how we seek to understand men’s individual lives with respect, yet view masculinity through a feminist lens.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315463","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1332/239868021x16212648592069
Z. Knezevic, Anna Nikupeteri, M. Laitinen, K. Kallinen
This article offers a rethinking of protection based on synthesised data from Finland and Sweden on children’s and mothers’ experiences of post-separation stalking, and social workers’ case reports on children risking exposure to gender-based violence after separation. Drawing on critical childhood studies and a feminist approach to violence and security, we ask how children’s everyday lives can be incorporated in a rethinking of protection for children in post-separation contexts. Departing from identified limitations in protective solutions for children, we propose three ways of rethinking the issue of protection: (1) protection as gender- and power sensitivity, (2) protection as securitising the here and now, and (3) protection as social peace. Our findings call for some changes in professional practices, social policy and legislation.Key messagesProtective solutions to the problem of gender-based violence in post separation are limited, if existing at all, for exposed children.Orientation towards adults and therapy desecuritise childhoods and children’s social peace.
{"title":"Gender- and power sensitivity, securitisation and social peace: rethinking protection for children exposed to post-separation violence","authors":"Z. Knezevic, Anna Nikupeteri, M. Laitinen, K. Kallinen","doi":"10.1332/239868021x16212648592069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16212648592069","url":null,"abstract":"This article offers a rethinking of protection based on synthesised data from Finland and Sweden on children’s and mothers’ experiences of post-separation stalking, and social workers’ case reports on children risking exposure to gender-based violence after separation. Drawing on critical childhood studies and a feminist approach to violence and security, we ask how children’s everyday lives can be incorporated in a rethinking of protection for children in post-separation contexts. Departing from identified limitations in protective solutions for children, we propose three ways of rethinking the issue of protection: (1) protection as gender- and power sensitivity, (2) protection as securitising the here and now, and (3) protection as social peace. Our findings call for some changes in professional practices, social policy and legislation.Key messagesProtective solutions to the problem of gender-based violence in post separation are limited, if existing at all, for exposed children.Orientation towards adults and therapy desecuritise childhoods and children’s social peace.","PeriodicalId":42166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gender-Based Violence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66315455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：