Gender representations of female perpetrators of intimate partner violence

Abstract

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to understand the constructions of female-perpetrated intimate partner violence (IPV) among postgraduate (PG) students studying and preparing for a career in forensic psychology. A social constructionist methodological framework was adopted in order to explore students' dominant discourses surrounding gender and IPV. Of particular interest was how female perpetrators of IPV within heterosexual relationships were constructed and subsequently positioned by students in terms of social and gender identity. Implications regarding future practice for graduates in relation to risk assessment and treatment interventions are discussed. Design/methodology/approach-Six female PG forensic students took part in a qualitative focus group and discussed their understanding of IPV and views regarding perpetration. Focus group members were also asked to discuss details of a vignette depicting a violent relationship where gender identity was purposefully removed. The focus group interview data were analysed using Foucauldian discourse analysis. Findings-The students constructed IPV as a behaviour that was predominantly perpetrated by men towards women. Students acknowledged that female-perpetrated IPV occurred; however, such behaviour was constructed as non-threatening, and subsequently, less serious than male-perpetrated IPV. Moreover, the analysis revealed that the overall discourses drawn on by the students projected a feminine representation of female IPV that positioned women as emotionally unstable, vulnerable and acting in self-defence. Research limitations/implications-Students' constructions of female-perpetrated IPV appeared to minimise aggression. It is argued that the positioning of women in terms of vulnerability serves to undermine any responsibility for perpetrating violence among this group of students. In terms of implications for practice, oversimplified assumptions in relation to gendered constructions have the potential to inhibit female IPV from being recognised as a serious form of aggression, and it is argued that this could potentially bias assessments of risk leading to an underestimation of threat. Female perpetrators of IPV may subsequently receive inadequate supervision and intervention and inadequate levels of victim safety planning may occur. These gendered constructions may also inhibit male victims from seeking help and help being offered. Originality/value-This paper highlights the importance of understanding constructions of IPV among students who are preparing for careers as a forensic psychology practitioner. Female IPV is clearly challenging. With respect to the social construction of IPV, the students in this study made many assumptions about female identity by linking this to feminine and essentialist ideas that constrain women as emotionally and biologically vulnerable. Such findings raise questions about whether future training and study programmes are equipped to critically challenge the dominant discourses and subsequent constructions of gender and IPV....

Dating Victimization Among Chilean University Students: Gender Roles and Christian Spirituality

“…The literature has responded to these incongruities between the sexes on the basis of societies settling into traditional GR. The greater male victimization is attributed to a greater tolerance of female violence ( Scarduzio et al, 2016 ; Walker et al, 2018 ). Chilean adolescents identify female DV as reaffirmation of woman and as a tool to demand respect ( Sanhueza & Geneviève, 2018 ).…”

“…For their part, Courtain and Glowacz (2018) state that men tolerate any type of violence more, and that female physical and sexual violence as well as male psychological violence are the most tolerated. However, the evidence suggests men and women have similar underlying motivations and factors for violence ( Walker et al, 2018 ). This points to the need to overcome the gender hierarchy and allows for bidirectional and reciprocal violence dynamics ( Archer, 2000 ; Arnoso et al, 2017 ; Courtain & Glowacz, 2018 ).…”

“…When he is recognized as a victim, he is ridiculed, so his search for help is impeded in order to maintain his male identity. As a result, the gender hierarchy has been favored in studies on DV: the tendency to assign the woman the role of victim and the man as the aggressor ( Aizpitarte Gorrotxategi & Rojas-Solís, 2019 ; Ferrer-Pérez & Bosch-Fiol, 2019 ; Moreno et al, 2016 ; Pereda & Tamarit, 2019 ; R. Rodríguez et al, 2018 ; Rojas-Solís et al, 2019 ; Santoro et al, 2018 ; Savage et al, 2016 ; Scarduzio et al, 2016 ; Walker et al, 2018 ; Wilchek-Aviad et al, 2019 ).…”

States of Mind With Respect to Adult Attachment and Reflective Functioning in a Sample of Men Detained for Stalking: Evaluation and Clinical Implications

“…using sociocostructionist frameworks (Walker et al, 2018), as well as cognitive (Beck & Deffenbacher, 2000;Murphy et al, 2007) and psychodynamic approaches (Hoffmann & Meloy, 2008) and neurobiological perspectives (Marazziti et al, 2015). Scholarly explanations of stalkers' motives for beginning their stalking behavior are informed by various approaches, such as the clinical (Nijdam-Jones et al, 2018), gender-based (Yanowitz, 2006;Yanowitz & Yanowitz, 2012), social-psychological (Pryor et al, 1995), and cultural approaches (Jagessar & Sheridan, 2004).…”

Auditory-Visual Perception Analysis Of Multimodal Content Associated With Aggressive Behavior

“…We extracted the stimuli (two discursive situations in Russian language, produced by males) out of the original database of multimodal content evaluated as aggressive behavior. As well as in many European cultures, in Russian linguaculture people lean on a stereotypical notion that, compared with females males are characterized by more aggressive biologically-related behavior, while females often play the role of victims (Araya, 2017;Capezza, D'Intino, Flynn, & Arriaga, 2017;Ermer, Roach, Coleman, & Ganong, 2017;Hammock, Richardson, Lamm, Taylor, & Verlaque, 2017;Krahé et al, 2015;Lepeltier & Fontaine, 2018;Orpinas, Mcnicholas, & Nahapetyan, 2015;Sharma, Kishore, Sharma, & Duggal, 2017;Teranishi, 2015;Turchik, Hebenstreit, & Judson, 2015;Walker, Ashby, Gredecki, & Tarpey, 2018;Valeeva, Litvinova, & Kulesza, 2016). We completed our test group out of females, and asked them to analyze aggressive behavior produced by males, supposing that by triggering the effect of stereotyping perception we would achieve more unambiguous evaluations of the stimuli.…”