Nick Smithers works for a Scottish charity that wants male victims to be included in the public perception of domestic violence.
—
I recently started a new job as the National Development Officer for Abused Men in Scotland (AMIS), a charity that’s been working to improve services of male victims of domestic violence since 2010. Part of my role is to raise awareness of male victims which often means taking our message to events where the focus has traditionally been on women. Which is why, earlier this year I ending up co-presenting a workshop with a representative of a prominent organisation which provides essential supports to women who are fleeing abusive partners.
“The challenge we face is creating a public story that accounts for both male and female victims.”
|
Conversations about male and female victims of domestic violence can often get reduced to arguments about gender politics. AMIS works hard to avoid this type of dialogue. As a frontline service we bring real expertise of working with male victims and we back this up with rigorous and original research such as our recent report on Men’s Experience of Domestic Abuse in Scotland.
One of the key themes that has emerged from our research is the extent to which the “public story” of domestic abuse is extremely pervasive—that being the notion that domestic abuse is perpetrated almost exclusively by men against women. It’s one thing knowing this, the challenge we face is finding ways to create a new public story that accounts for both male and female victims.
♦◊♦
As I sat in the hall awaiting the call to step up to stage and begin my presentation I was approached by the chairperson and informed that we would be joined by the Queen’s daughter the Princess Royal and asked whether I knew royal protocol. Well for those of you who live in more evolved democracies such things as royal protocol are likely to be something of a mystery – well, they are also a mystery to me, Scots born and bred. My innate urge to conform overcame any rebelliousness and I stood when expected, sat when instructed and generally behaved myself – I wanted to make friends and influence people of course.
“The ingrained, gendered conceptualisation renders male victimhood counter-intuitive and can lead to repeat victimisation of men.”
|
While I sat on stage and listened to the informative and moving presentation by my co-presenter, my anxiety grew, as the heightened atmosphere in the hall became apparent. As my co-presenter sat down there was much muttering and whispering and I could see that there was some disagreement between Her Royal Highness and her consort. Horror, against her will the Princess was being ushered from the room before having the opportunity to hear about the experience of men in Scotland who are victim to domestic abuse, she turned and offered an apology to me as she was led away and I took to the lectern.
Well I hope I can say confidently that she missed something, as the talk attracted a good deal of interest and the majority of questions afterwards were related to my presentation. Many of the professionals from around Europe recognised the iniquity that I related affecting men. I had described the ingrained, gendered conceptualisation which renders male victimhood counter-intuitive. This can create a service vacuum where repeat victimisation of men can become a common occurrence from an uncomprehending system.
I was asked my view on the introduction of the term “gender based violence” (GBV) to replace ‘domestic abuse’ in many official publications and discourse. I suggested that this could be another barrier to men getting help as the implication was that GBV was male on female—the standard assumption. My co-presenter intervened to make what, to me, was a telling clarification. It was asserted that GBV was not about ‘who does what to whom’ but about why some people were victimised due to their gender.
♦◊♦
My co-presenter then stated that social construction theory explains this phenomenon as it illuminates the fact that men are brought up to control women and that this is the context for domestic abuse. Well I was somewhat taken aback by this statement which I could neither relate to on a personal level as a man nor on a professional level having worked with men in a deprived area of Edinburgh for six years.
This exchange has been reverberating in my mind since then. It seems to encapsulate an ideology which is the hidden, guiding hand of domestic abuse policy here in Scotland and beyond. While it was surprising for me to hear such a political definition of sex roles it was highly instructive as to why abused men in Scotland often suffer in silence.
“If we keep speaking out for male victims then the public story about domestic violence will change.”
|
Men experiencing domestic abuse can feel stigmatised and ashamed. In many cases men will not recognise their experience as domestic abuse such is the prevalence of the public story- they will believe it is something which only happens to women. It is imperative that the narrative around domestic abuse shifts to allow gender inclusive language to become the norm.
The first step is the recognition that significant numbers of men are experiencing domestic abuse but often feel that they have nowhere to turn for help.
I believe that if we keep speaking out for male victims then the public story about domestic violence will change and everyone — including the Princess Royal—will recognize that both male and female victims of domestic violence need our help and support.
♦◊♦
Photo Credit: Flickr/The New Institute
The problem isn’t how it was named,but how it is perceived.Domestic violence is gender neutral.Without confronting those who encourage the status quo it is almost impossible to change perception.The media must be compelled to tell the whole story.And the groups that control how the media reports it must be compelled to tell the whole story.Workshops and symposiums are are not effective tools for creating social change.
I also conducted and published a research report on men’s experience of child protection services in Scotland which can be downloaded here–> http://www.circlescotland.org/publications.aspx
Nick
Thanks everyone for your thoughtful responses and citations
Katherine The aggressive denial of abuses by feminists women is no accident and is why I am not a feminist.This is nothing new.It was over 40 years ago that I first confronted this beast in the person of my feminist mother.The more I digest Nick’s approach coupled with a thread posted by David Perry,I realize how consistent their approaches are with current feminist narrative’s.Which is to downplay the existence of and affects on society of abuse by women.Which, as Tom points out, is shared by the executive branch-the modern day bully pulpit of feminism.None of this IS accidental,but represents well-crafted,… Read more »
Nick, I applaud you! But here in the USA it’s “Five steps forward, ten steps back”… If ya can’t get recognition from the top, what can we do.
President Obama Signs the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization
March 07, 2013 | 25:11 | Public Domain
President Obama and Vice President Biden deliver remarks before the signing of the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization. March 7, 2013.
Men are bad … men don’t count. NOTHING about men being victims. Watch it if you can. It’s all about the women.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2013/03/07/lets-move-faith-and-communities-challenge-winners
Thanks Tom, we have similar things happening here and I sense that it is seen as politically expedient for male politicians to use this rhetoric. Possibly quite cynical but I don’t believe it helps gender equality at all.
Nick
I remember growing up I had an uncle who occasionally ‘Walked into a door’ (at least, that was the explanation for the black eyes). Looking back, it must have been truly humiliating for him since NO ONE bought that story. Back then, it was like you had to say something like that rather than the truth. They had 2 girls and a boy and my aunts behavior really scarred her daughters far more than their son. I know it took a long time for my one cousin especially to be able to trust herself in a relationship. She was scared… Read more »
interesting…
When everybody understood the term “domestic violence” to mean “wife-beating”, “domestic violence” was he preferred term. Now the terminology is shifting to “violence against women”, and now “gender-based violence”, which suggests to me that the public are coming to understand that domestic violence is not a one-way thing, and the gynocentrists are trying to redefine the problem to keep the focus on female victimhood and male villainy rather than on offering help to whoever needs it. So keep pushing – it’s having an effect.
Try saying dv is not gender based to any of the feminist researchers, my husband did recently on a centre for social justice panel and was literally laughed at, she rolled in the aisles with her chums at the notion. Subsequently she has singled him out for attack repeatedly, calling him dangerous, questioning his working practice and latterly attempting to say that the Centre for Separated Families has dangerous practice around the family, all this witnessed by leading policy makers. When he stood up to this and asked her to desist from her unwarranted personal and professionak attacks on him,… Read more »
I think we have to understand why there is so much resistance to the inclusion of men as victims of domestic violence. 1. there are people (men and women) who are perfectly okay with women being under control of men. I doubt many would advocate violence as a method of control, but denying women access to birth control, controlling their sexuality through shame and punishment, and diminishing their economic freedoms are pretty powerful tools in their own right. 2. It has taken decades for domestic violence AT ALL to make it to the public consciousness. Back in our grandmother’s day,… Read more »
1. there are people (men and women) who are perfectly okay with women being under control of men. I doubt many would advocate violence as a method of control, but denying women access to birth control, controlling their sexuality through shame and punishment, and diminishing their economic freedoms are pretty powerful tools in their own right. If this is a reason why there is resistance to including male victims then it sounds like it boils down to “Since men did it to women why should we care when women do it to men?” So we (a generic we) exclude male… Read more »
Hello Karen, I hope I get a chance to speak to you about this as I am full of admiration for your work. I have been in dialogue with Nick Child recently and we hope to develop opportunities to move things along positively.
Nick’s ‘Equalism’ website provides some interesting ideas I think –> http://equalism.org.uk/
Nick
“My co-presenter then stated that social construction theory explains this phenomenon as it illuminates the fact that men are brought up to control women and that this is the context for domestic abuse. Well I was somewhat taken aback by this statement which I could neither relate to on a personal level as a man nor on a professional level having worked with men in a deprived area of Edinburgh for six years.” Has that person never heard of hen-pecked men? Or the women are always right meme where power n control is largely given to women in relationships and… Read more »
Nick I have experienced said violence and have had a friend raped by two women.While I can appreciate your calm,intelligent,non-confrontational approach to dealing with this problem,a greater sense of urgency is warranted.Literally,lives and futures are at stake Feminist’s, who are directly responsible for creating this beast of a problem,are not going to deconstruct their carefully constructed Frankenstein. Careers and institutions, academic and otherwise,were built on the immutable theory that women are incapable of violence.It is a truly odd and terribly immature,flimsy,thesis.Nonetheless,you are up against a monolithic institution built upon a flawed idea that most take as fact.At some point there… Read more »
How much of the confusion is due to the narrative is too simplistic for the often complex world of domestic relationships and violence, especially when the same terms are applied to vastly different social contexts (Scotland versus Afghanistan, for example)? For example, while we can agree there are cases of men trying to control women, through violence, financial blackmail, and emotional harm, research has shown that are also cases of women trying to control men in the exact same way. And the number of women in the latter category is much higher than one could guess from popular media. However,… Read more »
Last I saw of stats in the U.S about half of DV situations were reciprocally violent, both genders hitting each other. And that a woman who hits a man first increases her risk greatly of a severe physical attack since fights escalate and men’s physical strength helps, but men also do get injured greatly too.
I realized I stated “research states” without offering citations. Here is a presentation about men as victims of domestic violence, with a section on what happens when men seek help – often times they are turned away because helplines, shelters, and the legal system explicitly or implicitly see domestic violence as a man against woman issue. http://www.clarku.edu/faculty/dhines/May%202011%20Canada%20roundtable%20presentation.pdf Here is a bibliography of studies looking at number of assaults by women on male partners. http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm The gender paradigm in domestic violence research and theory: the conflict of theory and data. Aggression and Violent Behavior, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359178905000042 “Feminist theory of intimate violence is… Read more »
Actually, there is very little difference in levels of violence between Afghanistan and western countries. Most transcultural studies show a maximum of 3% variance, and quite often violence against women is lower in countries ruled by conservative religions. DV is a human experience that is remarkably insulated against cultural influence. Most men and women simply do not commit violence against their partners, and of those who do over 90% of it is mutual couple violence.
But how can we trust it Adam? jus recently there was that Norwegian woman, who got raped, if im not mistaken, at Dubai. And guess who got arrested? the woman did. Now in light of this cultural hostile enviroment, it is not surprising that violence in general are kept inside closed doors.
How can we trust what? Don’t think I’m advocating for conservatism, i loathe it, but it has almost nothing to do with domestic violence. DV is a psychological issue that shows no regard for gender, race, class or creed.
Both the Norwegian woman and the Sudanese man were arrested and convicted of adultery in Dubai. Both have been pardoned. Not that it makes it much better, but your account made it seem like there was no consequences for the rapist in that case.
Hi Adam
I look forward to reading the facts about this!
Please give us a link to the good resent reaserch you are referring to here.
Same level of domestic violence in countries like Pakistan and Afganistan as in western countries ?
Hmmm,
Do you have citations to support that statistic? because I do a lot of work in gender in developing countries, and the legal system in places like Afghanistan is such that what we consider domestic violence in the US or Europe, is often *legally sanctioned* (as well as culturally sanctioned). The forms of violence include forced marriage (especially of under age girls- 87% of marriages in Afghanistan are considered non-consensual), marital rape (which is not legally defined in Afghanistan’s legal code), financial control (no access to cash), custody threats, and threats and actual physical punishment for defying the rules of… Read more »
Hi Danny,
I agree with you about the term GBV I certainly don’t support it’s introduction as I mentioned above. With regards to my co-presenter’s thoughts on the context of women abusing men, well this is the problem with the gendered definition of domestic abuse- it affords no satisfactory explanation for the abusive behaviour of women in same sex or mixed sex relationships.
Nick
….it affords no satisfactory explanation for the abusive behaviour of women in same sex or mixed sex relationships. A problem indeed. In my experience when talking about men who abuse their partners there are long drawn out theories and causes and explanations that are heavily gender specific but when talking about abusive women all of a sudden there is either silence, excuses (that would never be allowed to fly if said about abusive men) or the “violence is gender neutral” argument is pulled out. And even in male/male relationships there is no woman so why is the abusive man in… Read more »
“And to clarify I’m not trying to say that the angle of “he wants to control her” has no place in the conversation because that mentality certainly does exist. However it cannot continue to be the entire conversation on partner violence.”
Exactly!
Nick
Yes, and even the top/bottom dom/sub culture doesn’t always come into play in the typical man/woman lens. As such, one can’t even paint gendered violence in non-typical relationships as someone being the abused “woman” and the other being the abusive man. There is such a thing as dominant subs, bottoms, etc. What about those who exert their control based on what they know the public perceptions of so called “gendered violence” is? “Oh, who’ll believe you that I’m beating YOU up?” That definitely doesn’t fit the picture that GPV paints. Personally, in my work, I use the term “Intimate Partner… Read more »
You advocate for gender inclusive language regarding domestic violence. Do you anticipate much resistance to this idea? Could this become another gender politics battle if women’s advocates see it as diminishing the effort to eliminate violence against women? My questions are not a challenge, just curiosity.
HI Dave,
There is resistance to the idea but we feel very strongly that it is essential for progress in tackling domestic abuse in all it’s forms. That is not to say that a gendered analysis is not important. Gender inclusive language reduces barriers to men getting support without detracting from supports and services which exist for women.
Nick
There is a lot of resistance, based on the possibility that a focus on men will diminish donations and funding. There are no men’s shelters in Canada for a reason. For example, the Canadian Women’s federation says this (with no citation) about male victims: “Although some people claim that men are too embarrassed to admit a woman has abused them, the reverse is actually true: in self-reported research, men tend to over-estimate their partner’s violence while under-estimating their own. At the same time, women over-estimate their own violence, and under-estimate their partner’s. This explains why self-reported research often shows similar… Read more »
I was asked my view on the introduction of the term “gender based violence” (GBV) to replace ‘domestic abuse’ in many official publications and discourse. I suggested that this could be another barrier to men getting help as the implication was that GBV was male on female—the standard assumption. My co-presenter intervened to make what, to me, was a telling clarification. It was asserted that GBV was not about ‘who does what to whom’ but about why some people were victimised due to their gender. I’m not a fan of the term gender based violence. It sounds like an attempt… Read more »