Advertisement

Journal of Family Violence

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 15–22 | Cite as

Coercive Control in Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence

  • Andrew FranklandEmail author
  • Jac Brown
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Abstract

Contemporary approaches to intimate partner violence (IPV) have been heavily shaped by the primacy given to coercive control over physical violence and the use of typologies. Few studies have attempted to apply these approaches to same-sex relationships. This study aimed to explore patterns of violence and control and examine the utility of typologies within same-sex domestic violence (SSDV). Data from 184 gay men and lesbians on their experiences with aggressive and controlling behaviors within same-sex relationships was used to identify categories consistent with Johnson's typology. Over half of the sample were non-violent and noncontrolling, while 13.0 % of respondents and 14.7 % of their partners had engaging in situational couple violence (SCV). Smaller proportions (4.4 % of respondents and 6.5 % of partners) engaged in coercive controlling violence (CCV). Rates of mutually violent control (MVC) were high (12.5 %). This typology was expanded to identify cases of non-violent control (NVC), which included 7.1 % of respondents and 5.4 % of partners. To date, no other studies have reported on the use of controlling behaviors within same-sex relationships. These data demonstrated the presence of patterns of control and violence consistent with categories originally identified in heterosexual couples. Data also supported the growing acceptance of the central role of coercive control in IPV.

Keywords

Control Domestic violence Gay Lesbian 

References

  1. Anderson, K. L. (2008). Is partner violence worse in the context of control? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 70, 1157–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, K. L. (2009). Gendering coercive control. Violence Against Women, 15(12), 1444–1457.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(5), 651–680.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartholomew, K., Regan, K. V., White, M. A., & Oram, D. (2008). Patterns of abuse in male same-sex relationships. Violence and Victims, 23(5), 617–636.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, J. (2004). Shame and domestic violence: treatment perspectives from self psychology and affect theory. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 19(1), 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. P. (1979). Violence against wives: A case against the patriarchy. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dutton, M. A., & Goodman, L. A. (2005). Coercion in intimate partner violence: toward a new conceptualisation. Sex Roles, 52(11), 743–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Graham-Kevan, N., & Archer, J. (2003). Intimate terrorism and common couple violence: a test of Johnson's predictions in four British samples. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(11), 1247–1270.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hart, B. (1986). Lesbian battering: An examination. In K. Lobel (Ed.), Naming the violence: Speaking out about lesbian battering (pp. 173–189). Seattle: Seal Press.Google Scholar
  10. Houston, E., & McKirnan, D. J. (2007). Intimate partner abuse among gay and bisexual men: risk correlates and health outcomes. Journal of Urban Health, 84(5), 681–690.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Johnson, M. P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnson, M. P. (2006). Conflict and control: gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12(11), 1003–1018.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnson, M. P. (2008). A typology of domestic violence: Intimate terrorism, violence resistance, and situational couple violence. Lebanon: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Kramer, C. Y. (1956). Extension of multiple range tests to group means with unequal numbers of replications. Biometrics, 12(3), 307–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Letellier, P. (1994). Gay and bisexual male domestic violence victimization: challenges to feminist theory and responses to violence. Violence & Victims, 9(2), 95–106.Google Scholar
  16. Lockhart, L. L., White, B. W., Causby, V., & Isaac, A. (1994). Letting out the secret: violence in lesbian relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9(4), 469–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McKenry, P. C., Serovich, J. M., Mason, T. L., & Mosack, K. (2006). Perpetration of gay and lesbian partner violence: a disempowerment perspective. Journal of Family Violence, 21, 233–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Krueger, R. F., Magdol, L., Margolin, G., Silva, P. A., et al. (1997). Do partners agree about abuse in their relationship? A psychometric evaluation of interpartner agreement? Psychological Assessment, 9(1), 47–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Murray, C. E., & Mobley, A. K. (2009). Empirical research about same-sex intimate partner violence: A methodological review. Journal of homosexuality, 56(3), 361–386.Google Scholar
  20. Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1986). Power and control: Tactics of men who batter. Duluth: Minnesota Program Development, Inc.Google Scholar
  21. Pitts, M., Smith, A., Mitchell, A., & Patel, S. (2006). Private lives: A report on the health and wellbeing of GLBTI Australians. Melbourne: The Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society.Google Scholar
  22. Stanley, J. L., Bartholomew, K., Taylor, T., & Oram, D. (2006). Intimate violence in male same-sex relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 21(1), 31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Straus, M. A. (1999). The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical and sociology of science analysis. In X. B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships (pp. 17–44). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The revised conflict tactics scale (CTS2): development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), 283–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tanha, M., Beck, C. J., Jose Figueredo, A., & Raghavan, C. (2010). Sex differences in intimate partner violence and the use of coercive control as a motivational factor for intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(10), 1836–1854.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Turrell, S. C. (2000). A descriptive analysis of same-sex relationship violence for a diverse sample. Journal of Family Violence, 15(3), 281–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Umberson, D., Anderson, K. L., Glick, J., & Shapiro, A. (1998). Domestic violence, personal control, and gender. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 442–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Waldner-Haugrud, L. K., Vaden Gratch, L., & Magruder, B. (1997). Victimization and perpetration rates of violence in gay and lesbian relationships: gender issues explored. Violence and Victims, 12(2), 173–184.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Zahnd, E., Grant, D., Aydin, M., Chia, J., & Padilla-Frausto, I. (2010). Nearly four million California adults are victims of intimate partner violence. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMacquarie UniversityNorth RydeAustralia

Personalised recommendations