Week 6 - Intersectionality & IPV Flashcards
What has traditional IPV research focused on?
Primarily on heterosexual relationships with male perpetrators and female victims.
How have feminist models of IPV been valuable?
By highlighting patriarchal dynamics but unintentionally excluding non-heteronormative relationships (LGBT individuals, female perpetrators).
What are some criticisms of the feminist paradigm in IPV research?
Focuses on heterosexual relationships
Overlooks IPV in same-sex relationships and female perpetrators
Fails to capture the full range of motivations outside traditional gender roles
Which group has been shown by statistical evidence to experience more IPV?
Lesbian and bisexual women experience more IPV than any other group.
What does the critique of the gender paradigm in IPV research suggest?
It assumes IPV as male expressions of patriarchal dominance, limiting understanding of the complexity of IPV.
Why is there a need for more inclusive approaches in IPV research?
To address the specific needs of LGBT individuals, women of color, and those of low socioeconomic status, who are often marginalized by feminist models.
What are the limitations of the Duluth model in IPV treatment?
Focuses on heterosexual male batterers
Takes a gendered approach
Displays heteronormative bias
Leads to inadequate policy interventions
What are some reasons women may perpetrate IPV?
For control, retaliation, communication, and anger; they may have different treatment needs, such as higher rates of personality disorders and financial stress.
What does the Illinois model suggest for IPV treatment?
It suggests gender-segregated groups for treatment but still relies on feminist Duluth interventions and fails to address the specific needs of LGBT populations.
What biases do current IPV treatment models often have?
They are heteronormative and based on models like Duluth, CBT, and couples counseling, which may not fully address the needs of all populations.
What are some unique treatment needs for LGBT individuals experiencing IPV?
Issues such as threats to reveal sexual orientations and the role of shame in motivation for violent behavior.
What is the connection between intergenerational trauma and IPV in Indigenous women?
Intergenerational trauma from the residential school system is linked to higher rates of IPV, but there is limited research on this connection.
What is intergenerational trauma in the context of residential schools?
Trauma experienced by survivors is passed down through generations, exacerbated by social structures, affecting family life, substance abuse, and IPV.
How is substance abuse linked to intergenerational trauma and IPV?
Substance abuse, often a coping mechanism, is linked to higher IPV rates and increases the severity of physical assaults.
What socioeconomic challenges do Indigenous women face that contribute to IPV?
Unemployment, poverty, low education, and one-parent households.
What is the relationship between PTSD and substance abuse in residential school survivors?
PTSD is prevalent among survivors, and substance abuse is often used as a coping mechanism, creating a reciprocal relationship.
What impact did residential schools have on parenting and family dynamics?
The absence of parenting role models and trauma contributed to dysfunction, affecting parenting skills and family life.
How did addiction and neglect manifest in Indigenous families affected by residential school trauma?
Parental addiction led to child neglect, children taking on parental roles, and witnessing domestic violence.
What is the cycle of abuse observed in families affected by intergenerational trauma?
Violence witnessed in the home became normalized, leading to repeated behaviors and a cycle of abuse across generations.
How did trauma from residential schools affect participants’ relationships and sense of safety?
Trauma led to sexual abuse, IPV, and challenges with relationships, often resulting in withdrawal to avoid being hurt.
What psychological and emotional abuse tactics were used in dysfunctional relationships?
Manipulation, intimidation, threats of suicide, name-calling, harassment, and mind games.
What barriers prevented Indigenous women from leaving abusive relationships?
Threats of violence against family, lack of support, and becoming complacent or accepting of abuse.
What role did the normalization of violence in families and communities play in IPV?
Gradual escalation of violence made it difficult to recognize its seriousness, and the cycle of abuse continued through generations.
What were some of the long-term impacts of residential schools on family lives and IPV?
Lack of role models, normalization of violence, and role confusion contributed to difficulties in forming healthy relationships and increased IPV.
Why Consider Alternative Perspectives?
IPV affects all groups, regardless of: Age, Gender, Sexuality, Ethnicity, Background
Similar impact across groups, but:
Different experiences can create unique vulnerabilities.
IPV may manifest differently in various populations.
Importance of Tailored Interventions
One-size-fits-all approach may overlook important risk factors.
Tailored treatments are often limited by:
Lack of understanding
Resource constraints
Is Current Practice Too Narrow?
Current literature focuses mostly on:
Heterosexual relationships
Male perpetrators, female victims
A lens of misogyny, power, and control
Broadening the Perspective
Critics argue this view is too narrow.
Need to consider:
Female perpetrators in heterosexual relationships
Same-sex IPV
IPV in LGBTQ+ relationships
Mainstream Perception vs. Reality - female perpetrators
feminist theory frames female violence as:
Self-defense or less significant than male-perpetrated IPV.
Women report being more aggressive in some studies.
Mutual violence is common, with women striking first more often (Stets & Straus, 1989).
Lesbian relationships may involve higher violence levels than gay male or heterosexual relationships.
Types of Abuse and Severity - women perpetrators
Non-physical abuse (psychological, financial, controlling):
Often seen as less serious than physical violence.
Less likely to be seen as requiring intervention.
Physical abuse:
Considered more serious when impact and severity increase.
Psychological and physical abuse:
Both genders perpetrate equally (Swan et al., 2008), but:Men suffer fewer injuries, making female-perpetrated violence seem less serious.
Bidirectional Violence
60% of IPV was bidirectional.
Unidirectional violence: ~17% male-on-female, ~23% female-on-male.
Mutual violence leads to:
Worse outcomes and more severe violence.
Sexual violence: Mostly unidirectional, with men as primary perpetrators.
Implications for Intervention - women perpetrators
Mainstream interventions often focus on educating men about patriarchy, power, and control.
Alternative approach: Focus on:
Conflict management.
Attachment styles.
Addressing aggression in both partners, especially in bidirectional violence.
General Model of Aggression - psychological abuse
Female violence linked to similar predictors as male violence, suggesting a general aggression model
Parental Rejection
Borderline Personality Disorder
Trauma
Anger
Emotional Dysregulation
associated with psychological abuse - more in women
Predictors of Physical Assault
slapping, throwing things
Anger – Stronger correlate for women (Spencer, Keilholtz, & Vail, 2024).
Antisocial & Borderline Personality Traits
Relationship Conflict (increases stress)
Communication Problems (increases stress)
Dominance
Negative Attributions about the Partner
Substance Abuse
Predictors of Severe Assault men vs women
Sexual Abuse Victimization History, Relationship Conflict, Violence Approval (stronger for men).
Substance Abuse and PTSD were risks for men but not women.
Dominance, anger, antisocial traits, communication problems, jealousy, negative attributions, criminal history, neglect history, stressful conditions.
Why do crime statistics support the feminist model of IPV?
Crime statistics show more men being charged and convicted of IPV offenses than women, reinforcing the feminist model of IPV
Criticism: This fails to consider stigma and barriers to reporting for male victims.
How does society react to male-on-female violence compared to other forms of IPV?
Male-on-female violence is the most likely form to be condemned by third parties, leading to the perception that male victimization “matters less” to the average person.
What is coercive control, and how does it challenge the feminist perspective?
Coercive control is often seen as gendered and linked to patriarchy, but research (Bates & Graham-Kevan, 2016) shows men and women perpetrate it equally.
Women were found to be more physically aggressive and controlling than men in some cases.
How are male victims of IPV perceived compared to female victims?
Male victims receive more negative attitudes than female victims
Men are more likely to minimize violence and less likely to seek help.
Their victimization is seen as less important due to typically experiencing less severe violence.
How is IPV against men viewed when the perpetrator is female?
IPV against men is often seen as more acceptable and even funny when the perpetrator is female.
Male victims are more likely to be blamed for the violence
What impact does the gendered approach to IPV have on male victims?
The gendered approach has led to a “cycle of silence” around male victimization, where men are:
Not considered victims.
Ignored by society.
This leads to inappropriate responses to male victimization.
Do professionals exhibit biases in IPV cases involving male victims?
Yes, professionals such as psychologists and judges have been found to hold gender biases when dealing with IPV cases, often overlooking male victimization
How do masculine and patriarchal values impact male victims’ willingness to seek help?
Masculine values teach men to be self-reliant, show little emotion, and maintain power and control
view help seeking as weak or shameful
How are male victims treated when defending themselves?
Men who defend themselves may be charged with IPV or mocked by police.
How does IPV impact male victims’ mental health and identity?
Damages masculine identity, leads to relationship loss, mental health issues, and feeling the world is against them.
How do stereotypes affect male victims?
Masculinity is linked to perpetration, making female-on-male violence seen as less serious and men expected to control the situation.
How do female perpetrators use gender stereotypes?
Women use stereotypes to cast men as perpetrators, leading to low reporting and secondary victimization.
less likely to suffer consequences from protection orders
How does societal treatment impact male victims?
Negative treatment leads to aggression, while support leads to positive outcomes.
feel blamed because of their gender
How does IPV affect masculinity?
Shatters masculine identity, causes confusion, leads to hiding or not reporting abuse.
confused to whether they are a victim
How do male victims express sadness and depression?
Male victims may express sadness and depression as anger and aggression, which is seen as more socially acceptable.
Why might male victims become violent?
Feelings of powerlessness or thinking, “If I’m going to be victimized, I may as well become violent.”
Intense emotions like anxiety and anger increase the risk of perpetrating violence.
What are the legal consequences for male victims who become perpetrators?
Male victims who perpetrate violence face legal consequences and often receive blame for the situation.
How does IPV impact male victims’ mental health?
PTSD - sleep disturbances, nightmares, chronic fear, and anxiety
Depression - suicidal thoughts, social withdrawal, and a loss of pleasure and relationships, including with children.
PTSD and depression create opportunities for the perpetrator to exert coercive control over the male victim.
What can be done to better support male victims of IPV?
More training to believe victims, thorough investigations, and expanding victim services like shelters and housing for men.
How can research improve the treatment of male victims?
Research on men should have the same impact as it did for women, shifting away from gendered language in IPV.
What is the current state of research on LGBT relationships?
lack
some challenges gendered paradigm
Evidence of violence in these relationships complicates the argument that IPV is solely gendered.
What does “Two-Spirit/2S” mean?
Two-Spirit/2S is a culturally-specific identity used by some Indigenous people to describe someone whose gender identity, spiritual identity, and/or sexual orientation comprises both male and female spirits.
How recent is the acceptance of LGBT identities?
Acceptance is relatively recent, leading to feelings of isolation and a lack of belonging.
Support services have improved social, legal, and political prospects and have aided in the fight for equal human rights.
What types of violence are prevalent in LGBT populations?
High levels of violence including bullying, harassment, and physical violence
violating gender norms face even higher levels of violence.
Discrimination and stigma heighten the risk of violence
How does general violence affect LGBT individuals?
more likely to experience general violence and abuse, such as being thrown out of homes, losing family support, and facing employment loss.
How does living situation impact LGBT individuals?
Moving in with someone can provide support and financial assistance.
However, living with a violent partner creates vulnerability and power imbalances, leading to coercive control and homelessness risk if they leave.
What is the impact of general violence on relationships?
General violence can strain relationships and increase the risk for IPV, even if substance use is used to cope with the violence.
What are the IPV rates in LGBT relationships?
IPV rates in LGBT relationships range from 25% to 50%.
There is a prevalence of bidirectional violence.
What types of abuse are common in LGBT relationships?
financial abuse, coercive abuse, shaming, threatening, emotional abuse, and physical abuse
Women report higher rates of physical abuse, coercion, shame, and threats
What behaviors are commonly seen in same-sex relationships?
jealousy and controlling behaviors in same-sex relationships.
How does coercive control manifest in LGBT relationships?
Highly controlling individuals in same-sex relationships are more likely to be violent, often displaying dominance and emotional control.
What is a unique form of coercive control in LGBT relationships?
Outing—threatening to reveal a partner’s sexual orientation—is a unique form of coercive control.
How does HIV status relate to coercive control in LGBT relationships in Canada?
about half of the HIV-positive population are gay or bisexual men.
This creates opportunities for coercive control through manipulation or threats of revealing one’s status
How can an abusive partner affect support systems?
If a partner is the only trusted support and becomes abusive, the victim loses support and faces increased violence.
Why is IPV reporting in LGBT relationships underreported?
IPV in same-sex relationships is often filed as not IPV by police due to assumptions or if the relationship is kept secret.
What barriers do LGBT victims face in reaching out for help?
fear of outing
lack of lgbt services
What factors contribute to a lack of trust in authorities among LGBT individuals?
historical context of unfair treatment, persecution, and harm from police, leading to a lack of trust.
What are the unique mental health outcomes for LGBT victims of IPV?
Victims may experience internalized homophobia or transphobia, leading to negative self-concept, depression, and self-harm.
These factors create barriers to help-seeking due to fear of outing.
What forms of violence do transgender individuals face?
violence and hostility from family, friends, strangers, and even within the LGBT community.
Trans women are often viewed as a threat to women’s spaces and are not considered “real” women.
How does the risk of IPV compare for transgender individuals versus cisgender individuals?
face a greater risk of IPV than cisgender individuals, with IPV rates ranging from 16% to 38%.
They are more likely to experience physical and sexual IPV.
What is notable about research on transgender IPV?
remains unreported or underrepresented in discussions on IPV.
There is no significant difference in IPV rates between those assigned female or male at birth.
What are some unique forms of IPV experienced by transgender victims?
Inappropriate pronouns, deadnaming, told they aren’t a “real” man or women, ridiculing gender, denying access to hormones, stealing/hiding things (binders, makeup), threatening to out them
What barriers do transgender individuals face in accessing support?
Limited understanding among professionals about tailored support for
transgender victims.
Stigma and embarrassment regarding one’s sexuality and gender identity, particularly for gay men.
How do systemic inequalities affect transgender individuals seeking care?
Refusal of care due to bias.
Trans women and men being denied assistance outright.
Fear of discrimination and concerns that support services are linked to government and harmful authorities
What is meant by “visible minority” in Canada?
non-Caucasian in race or non-white in color.
It is a term used by the Canadian government but has been criticized for being narrow and vague.
How does IPV prevalence differ for visible minority women?
higher rates of IPV, with rates being even higher for Indigenous women.
This pattern is consistent across a lifetime and for various forms of violence and abuse.
How do IPV rates compare between immigrant and non-immigrant visible minority women?
Non-immigrant visible minority women have higher rates of IPV than immigrants.
Age differences play a role, as non-immigrant women tend to be younger.
are there significant differences in IPV outcomes across ethnicities?
there are minimal differences in IPV outcomes across ethnicities.
Ethnicity itself is not a risk factor, but is associated with other factors like socioeconomic status, class, and wealth disparities.
What challenges do immigrants face that can contribute to IPV?
limited support, small social circles, language barriers, employment issues, housing struggles, and the stress of adjusting to a new environment.
Conflicts can arise between new and old cultural expectations for family dynamics and gender roles,
What unique coercive control do immigrant IPV victims face?
experience social isolation and financial dependency on their partner, as well as reliance on their abuser for immigration status.
Abusers may use threats of deportation or leaving the victim unsupported
How do cultural values affect IPV in immigrant families?
strict cultural values around gender roles may have a higher risk of violence, as perpetrators may feel their values are threatened and resort to controlling behaviors or violence
How do immigrant women perceive and respond to IPV?
define IPV differently based on cultural backgrounds and experiences - viewing abuse as normal.
prioritize family well-being over individual needs, leading to self-blame or religious problem-solving.
informal supports, and if those fail - remain silent or self-harm
What barriers prevent immigrant women from reporting IPV?
negative expectations or experiences with support services, cultural values that discourage separation, and reliance on their partner
What is honour-based violence (HBV)?
motivated by beliefs about honour, where individuals are encouraged to use violence to address perceived injustices, dishonour, or shame.
categories of HBV
Patriarchal
hierarchical, traditional (honouring past)
collective (value needs of group)
avoidant of uncertainty (little tolerance for diverse opinions)
restrained (value control over needs)
How does honour-based violence relate to IPV?
not IPV-specific but can occur within intimate relationships
extend to family violence, where violence is used to reclaim honour by punishing family members who bring shame to the family.
This may involve collective violence, where the community helps cleanse the dishonour.
What are some examples of honour-based violence in IPV?
sexual transgressions (e.g., adultery), social transgressions (e.g., failing to observe religious practices), or defied authority
What are the statistics on violence against Indigenous peoples?
higher sexual and physical violence in youth, indigenous children more likely to experience violence
higher homicide, sexual assault, robbery
How does colonization contribute to violence against Indigenous peoples today?
significantly increased the risk of violence for Indigenous peoples.
These events are part of a legacy of cultural genocide.
What is the cycle of intergenerational trauma among Indigenous peoples?
children exposed to violence grow up and continue the cycle through violent behaviors as adults
stems from violent colonial policies and varies based on experiences, such as direct exposure to the violence and abuse of residential schools.
How did abusive and coercive control affect Indigenous children?
forcibly removed from their homes and placed in residential schools or with violent parents, leading to psychological, physical, and sexual abuse.
disruption of family life and exposure to violent parenting shaped the children’s own violent behaviors as adults.
What is spiritual abuse, and how did it affect Indigenous children?
separation from culture and the prohibition of traditional practices, leading to resentment toward their culture
interrupted the passing down of family values, leaving many unequipped for parenting in adulthood.
What are the impacts of intergenerational trauma on Indigenous communities today?
family disruption, substance abuse and addiction, poverty, mental health issues, criminal activity, and family violence, including IPV.
What is the risk of IPV among Indigenous people?
Half of murdered Indigenous women were killed by a partner.
Indigenous men and women face a higher victimization risk.
theories and indigenous IPV
Colonization theory- internalized oppression and trauma are key factors, leading to thoughts, behaviors, and feelings that increase the risk of violence.
Social Learning Theory- children learn IPV by observing it as a conflict resolution method.
Developmental models indicate that growing up in violent environments disrupts social and emotional development, increasing the likelihood of violent behavior.
What are the risk factors for IPV in Indigenous communities?
Colonial and historical violence and trauma.
rural areas
young age, low education, unemployment, substance abuse, partner dominance, and family size.
Why is IPV more challenging to address in rural Indigenous communities?
isolated from assistance and support services - hide violence
fewer shelters, medical professionals, and hospitals, leading to less IPV screening.
distance to services (over 25 miles)
territories, seasonal travel limits access to support.
How does IPV affect 2S/LGBT Indigenous people?
heightened risk of IPV, especially those with visible LGBT gender identities or who are gender transgressing
IPV is the most common form of violence experienced by 2S and gender-diverse people.
What risk factors increase IPV for Indigenous 2S/LGBT individuals?
Adverse childhood experiences, being under government care, poverty, homelessness, living in rural areas, and substance abuse
Why might Indigenous people not report IPV?
Lack of trust in the government and authorities.
Fear stemming from historical treatment and poor government response
Many view government authority as illegitimate and prefer self-governance.
Reaching out for help may seem pointless or dangerous to Indigenous people.
Why is reporting IPV difficult for Indigenous people?
tight knit communities
disclosing to someone who knows the perpetrator.
perpetrator is a respected figure
Informal support may protect but could also lead to shame, disbelief, or advice to stay in the relationship.
What barriers prevent Indigenous people from reporting IPV?
Desire to maintain the family unit.
Lack of awareness of services, fear of repercussions, and concern about children
Shame, cultural and language barriers, fear of judgment or mistreatment,
Many only contact services when the violence escalates to a crisis.
What factors can protect Indigenous people from IPV?
Economic mobility, education, and employment.
Access to services and positive social connections
.
A strong sense of cultural identity
adolescent age cateogories
Early adolescence: 11-13 years.
Mid-adolescence: 14-16 years.
Late adolescence: 17-19 years.
How does adolescent IPV relate to adult IPV?
A history of abusive behavior in adolescence is a predictor of future IPV.
30-50% of adult IPV cases began before age 18.
Even if adolescent perpetrators stop, they may still face negative mental and physical health outcomes and social challenges
How does adolescent IPV differ in its manifestations?
Digital IPV is more common, using texting and social media, sometimes involving group violence.
What other forms of violence are linked to adolescent IPV?
Exposure to family violence, bullying, neighborhood violence, racial/ethnic/gender discrimination, and socio-economic segregation
How does violence in adolescence evolve over time?
increases with age, peaking in late adolescence/early adulthood and generally decreasing afterward.
Psychological violence is the most reported form, followed by physical and sexual violence
Why are opportunities for adolescent IPV more limited?
less independence, fewer relationships
but relationships tend to be short-term and less stable, leading to increased risk after breakups.
Why is adolescent IPV underreported?
school-based samples, missing at-risk youth who are not in school (e.g., those expelled or chronically absent).
There is also an overlap with LGBT youth, further complicating data collection.
What is the Diathesis-Stress Model?
It suggests that vulnerability to environmental stressors increases the risk of negative mental health outcomes, which can contribute to IPV.
What does the Cumulative Stress Theory propose?
The more risk factors present (e.g., witnessing violence, abuse, neglect), the more severe the outcome
Clusters of these factors are worse than individual exposures.
What is Biological Sensitivity Theory?
biological differences in how children respond to environments
Highly sensitive children react strongly to both positive and negative environments, needing supportive environments to thrive
Less sensitive children are more resilient and develop emotional buffers against stressors.
What is the Adaptive Calibration Model?
builds on the Biological Sensitivity Theory, focusing on the Stress Response System (SRS), which governs reactions to stress.
sensitive:
Positive environments reduce reactivity.
Dangerous environments increase reactivity, which can lead to protective responses that may later become maladaptive and trigger IPV perpetration if threats are perceived.
How does the Biological Sensitivity Framework help address adolescent IPV?
It allows IPV to be seen as a series of maladaptive behaviors that can be untaught, focusing on the child’s sensitivity to environmental stressors.
What should interventions focus on to prevent adolescent IPV?
general violent exposure, social environments, how they interact w/ abusive behaviour
educate youth who havent been in relationships
parents engaged in interventions
peer mentoring from past perps
peers in similar situations helps reduce feelings of stigma and shame
