‘I’m a red-blooded male’: Understanding men’s experiences of domestic abuse through a feminist lens

The ways in which gendered expectations of women are used to maintain power and control by male perpetrators of domestic abuse are now well understood. It is also increasingly recognised that men can be victims of domestic abuse. This has led to calls to de-gender theories of violence and abuse, and arguments that the feminist theories which underpin many interventions are outdated. We draw on the experiences of 344 men using a helpline for male victim–survivors of domestic abuse to show that patriarchal constructions of relationships, femininity and masculinity, which underpin women’s experiences of domestic abuse by men are also central to understanding men’s experiences of domestic abuse by women. We propose that men’s victimisation by women perpetrators is not incompatible with feminist understandings of domestic abuse. Rather, that the influence of patriarchal norms in men’s victimisation accentuates the importance of gender in understanding and responding to domestic abuse

Domestic violence perpetrator programmes : an historical overview. Briefing note 2

Since the 1970s, the feminist movement has campaigned to bring the issue of domestic violence to the social agenda. Yet, all too often, the men who perpetrate violence and abuse against their partners have remained absent, and left to continue their abusive regime. The need to address this absence was the basis upon which domestic violence perpetrator programmes (DVPPs) emerged

Responding to Child and Adolescent to Parent Violence and Abuse from a Distance: Remote Delivery of Interventions during Covid-19

Working with families living with child and adolescent-to-parent violence raises a number of challenges which were compounded during the Covid-19 pandemic. In this article, UK umbrella organisation ‘Respect’ is used as a case study to explore how 10 practitioners navigated social, emotional, and safeguarding concerns that occurred when transitioning to remote working. Engagement with children and young people proved difficult, especially for those with special education needs and/or disabilities. However, parental engagement with services increased. Practitioners were quick to adapt to the changing landscape of remote working; continually adapting their practice to otherwise unforeseen safeguarding and/or practical challenges

Rape and human rights : a feminist perspective

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Dialogue on the Impact of Coronavirus on Research and Publishing: Monday 22nd June 2020

This roundtable took place via Microsoft Teams on Monday 22nd June 2020 to discuss the impact of COVID-19 on Research and Publishing in the U

Like gold dust these days’: domestic violence fact-finding hearings in child contact cases

Fact-finding hearings may be held to determine disputed allegations of domestic violence in child contact cases in England and Wales, and can play a vital role for mothers seeking protection and autonomy from violent fathers. Drawing on the author’s empirical study, this article examines the implications for the holding of fact-finding hearings of judges’ and professionals’ understandings of domestic violence and the extent to which they perceive it to be relevant to contact. While more judges and professionals are developing their understanding of domestic violence, the ambit of when and how it is considered relevant to contact has grown increasingly narrow, which suggests that many disputed allegations of domestic violence are disregarded and women and children continue to be put at risk from violent fathers. This bifurcated approach is likely to have significant implications for recent developments in this area of family law which are considered in this article

Domestic violence perpetrator programmes : steps towards change. Project Mirabal final report

As we complete this study there is more conversation about what is to be done with perpetrators of domestic violence than for some time - a conversation which ricochets across police, social services, women’s support services, multi-agency groups, policymakers, commissioners, media commentators and academics. At issue are two key questions: - Do domestic violence perpetrator programmes (DVPPs) actually work in reducing men’s violence and abuse and increasing the freedom of women and children? - How do we hold more perpetrators to account, since even if DVPPs do work, their limited capacity means the majority of men do not access them and criminal justice interventions alone are clearly not creating the change that all stakeholders seek? This report can offer evidence with respect to the first question and will engage with the second. The starting point for Project Mirabal was our contention that we had reached an impasse in both research and policy on perpetrator programmes. On the one hand are repeated calls for interventions that call perpetrators to account, whilst on the other a deep scepticism about both routes for so doing - perpetrator programmes and criminal justice sanctions. This scepticism results in such programmes being held to far more stringent levels of scrutiny and measures of success than criminal justice interventions, intensified in the era of outcomes and cost led public policy. This is the context in which this report is set

Rape's a real crime

Rape has been seen as a 'woman's problem' for far too long and we urgently need more men to publicly condemn sexual violence, writes Dr Nicole Westmarland

The Quantitative/Qualitative Debate and Feminist Research: A Subjective View of Objectivity

Forschungsmethoden sind "Verfahren der ... Datenerhebung" (HARDING 1986) und werden in der Regel in entweder qualitative oder quantitative dichotomisiert. Einige Autor(inn)en vertreten die Position, dass Methodologien grundsätzlich geschlechtsspezifisch geprägt sind (OAKLEY 1997; 1998). Dabei sind quantitative Methoden traditionell mit Begriffen wie Positivismus, wissenschaftlich, Statistik und Maskulinität assoziiert, während qualitative Methoden mit Begriffen wie Interpretation, unwissenschaftlich, Subjektivität und Femininität verbunden sind. Diese Assoziationen haben dazu geführt, dass einige feministische Forscherinnen den quantitativen Ansatz kritisieren (REINHARZ 1979; GRAHAM 1983; PUGH 1990) oder sogar ganz verwerfen (GRAHAM & RAWLINGS 1980), und zwar mit der Begründung, er stehe in unmittelbarem Konflikt mit den Zielen feministischer Forschung (GRAHAM 1983; MIES 1983). Qualitative Methoden, so die Argumentation, seien feministischer Forschung dagegen insofern angemessener, als sie subjektives Wissen (FOX KELLER 1980; DEPNER 1981; DUELLI KLEIN 1983) und eine in höherem Maß gleichberechtigte Beziehung zwischen Forscher(inne)n und den erforschten Personen ermöglichen (OAKLEY 1974; JAYARATNE 1983; STANLEY & WISE 1990). Dieser Beitrag befasst sich zunächst mit der Kluft zwischen qualitativen und quantitativen Forschungsansätzen sowie der epistemologischen Diskussion, die dieser Debatte zugrunde liegt. Anschließend werden zwei Forschungsmethoden, die Umfrage mittels Fragebogen sowie das halbstandardisierte Interview, im Hinblick auf ihren Nutzen für die feministische Forschung genauer betrachtet. Der Beitrag schließt mit dem Argument, dass unterschiedliche feministische Fragestellungen unterschiedliche Methoden erfordern. Sofern diese aus einer feministischen Perspektive eingesetzt werden, besteht keine Notwendigkeit für dichotomisierende Debatten nach dem Prinzip "wir gegen sie" oder "quantitativ gegen qualitativ".Research methods are "technique(s) for ... gathering data" (HARDING 1986) and are generally dichotomised into being either quantitative or qualitative. It has been argued that methodology has been gendered (OAKLEY 1997; 1998), with quantitative methods traditionally being associated with words such as positivism, scientific, objectivity, statistics and masculinity. In contrast, qualitative methods have generally been associated with interpretivism, non-scientific, subjectivity and femininity. These associations have led some feminist researchers to criticise (REINHARZ 1979; GRAHAM 1983; PUGH 1990) or even reject (GRAHAM & RAWLINGS 1980) the quantitative approach, arguing that it is in direct conflict with the aims of feminist research (GRAHAM 1983; MIES 1983). It has been argued that qualitative methods are more appropriate for feminist research by allowing subjective knowledge (DEPNER 1981; DUELLI KLEIN 1983), and a more equal relationship between the researcher and the researched (OAKLEY 1974; JAYARATNE 1983; STANLEY & WISE 1990). This paper considers the quantitative/qualitative divide and the epistemological reasoning behind the debate before investigating two research methods, the statistical survey and the semi-structured interview, in respect of their use to feminist researchers. It concludes by arguing that different feminist issues need different research methods, and that as long as they are applied from a feminist perspective there is no need for the dichotomous "us against them", "quantitative against qualitative" debates.Los métodos de investigación son "técnicas para ... la búsqueda de nuevos datos" (HARDING 1986) y generalmente se hallan dicotomizados entre ser cualitativos y cuantitativos. Se ha argumentado que la metodología fue relacionada (OAKLEY 1997, 1998) con métodos cuantitativos que tradicionalmente fueron asociados con palabras tales como: positivismo, científico, objetividad, estadísticas y masculinidad. Por el contrario, los métodos cualitativos fueron asociados con: interpretacionismo, no científico, subjetividad y feminidad. Estas asociaciones llevaron a algunos investigadores feministas a criticar (REINHARZ 1979, GRAHAM 1983, PUGH 1990) y hasta rechazar los acercamientos cuantitativos (GRAHAM & RAWLINGS 1980) argumentando que se encuentra en conflicto directo con las metas de la investigación feminista (GRAHAM 1983, MIES 1983). Se ha argumentado que los métodos cualitativos son más apropiados para la investigación feminista ya que aluden al conocimiento subjetivo (FOX KÉLLER 1980, DEPNER 1981, DUELLI KLEIN 1983), y a una relación más ecuánime entre el investigador y el investigado (OAKLEY 1974, JAYARATNE 1983, STANLEY & WISE 1990). Previo a la investigación de los dos métodos (encuesta estadística y entrevista semiestructurada) respecto a su uso por parte de los investigadores feministas, este artículo considera que es necesario revisar las lógicas epistemológicas que están detrás del debate que divide lo cuantitativo y lo cualitativo. Concluye argumentando que cada tema feminista diferente necesita de diferentes métodos de investigación y mientras tanto sean aplicables desde una perspectiva feminista, no hay necesidad de la dicotomía "nosotros contra ellos", "cualitativo contra cuantitativo"

The Rape Crisis crisis

Nine Rape Crisis Centres have closed in the last five years, 69% describe themselves as unsustainable. This is a crisis and the movement needs money before it crumbles, writes Dr Nicole Westmarland