Part 1

The World Health Organisation has recognised intimate partner violence (IPV) as one of the most prevalent types of violence against females, and it commonly encompasses sexual, physical and emotional mistreatment and controlling attitude by an intimate partner (WHO, 2012). IPV is common in different settings, regardless of the religious, cultural, or socioeconomic conditions. Though females can be violent in their association with males, particularly in self-defence, ex-partners or spouses have been identified as the most common perpetrators. IPV refers to any kind of behaviour in a close relationship that results in significant psychological, physical, or sexual harm to the people involved, and comprises of acts of sexual coercion, physical aggression, and psychological exploitation (Smith et al., 2016). IPV is common in all nations and an estimated 13-61% women report being physically abused by their partner, with 6-59% being subjected to sexual violence (WHO, 2012).

IPV rates are highest in Saskatchewan with as much as 682 sufferers per 100,000 individuals, followed by Manitoba (599). The proportion of police-reported IPV have also found to be greater in rural regions, compared to urban areas in the year 2017. Moreover, of the 933 IPV related homicide that occurred in Canada from 2007-2017, 79% involved female sufferers (Burczycka, 2018). Taking into consideration the high prevalence of IPV all across the globe, particularly in Canada, it is essential to explore the gender stereotypes that promote this kind of abuse. Gaining an insight into the impact of the gender stereotypes will help in implementation of appropriate strategies while counselling women. The research question is given below:

What are the existing gender stereotypes about intimate partner violence?

Part 2- Article Summaries

Article 1

The researchers stated that despite the insight into lesbian IPV perceptions, not much work had been done to determine how existing gender roles and stereotypes created an impact on the views and opinions of the jury about IPV. Hence, the research was conducted with the aim of examining the legal awareness of lesbian intimate partner violence (IPV) in an investigational setting. While conducting the trial summary amid 217 undergraduate men and women from the Southeastern United States, the perpetrator was charged with physically assailing her same-sex companion. An analysis of the judgments and verdicts offered by the research participants stated that the feminine or masculine appearance of the defendant and the victim created a significant influence on the judgments.

The female research participants observed masculine victim as more trustworthy, in comparison to a feminine sufferer, under circumstances when the perpetrator was masculine. Moreover, male participants were found to be angrier and disgusted towards masculine offender accused of attacking a feminine sufferer.  Hence, the researchers concluded that stereotypes regarding violence and gender roles created an impact on the manner by which jury members assessed IPV in lesbian couples, which in turn governed their verdict. Moreover, jurors might be in possession of typecasts that bias their decisions towards the sufferers and culprits, thereby resulting in unequal justice within the criminal code system. The article is relevant to the research question since it suggested that presence of stereotypic attitude based on gender role restrict the capability of the lesbian IPV victims to search for safety within the courts.

Article 2

The research was based on the recent cases that fascinated the nation and shed light on the female and male perpetrators of assault and violence like the case of Tiger Woods, Jodi Arias and Lorena Bobbitt. The primary aim of the researchers was to explore the influence of gender stereotype on the awareness and outlook of female offenders, particularly the stereotypes that were associated to emotionality, power, acceptability, and physicality of violence. Upon qualitatively analysing the open-ended replies of participants who had been enrolled from undergraduate communication courses, the researchers found that male wrongdoers were frequently believed to have become belligerent due to physical actions like, using drugs, cheating, or alcoholism. While women were identified as upset, scared or defending themselves, they were also considered over-emotional. Reason for engagement of male offenders in emotional violence was believed to be anger and eventual loss of temper. Male offenders were believed to have more physical ability and strength, in comparison to female perpetrators who were considered weak and timid.

Moreover, it was found that most participants believed that if the female committer was most accountable, she would not be blameworthy, when acting in self-defence. Hence, the researchers concluded that the discernments of male and female wrongdoers are multifaceted, predominantly when discovering the gender stereotypes that exist in the society. Relevance of the research article can be attributed to the fact that it provided a clear overview of the impact that gender stereotype creates on the notion about a female being provoked for IPV.

Article 3

The foundation of the research was based on the fact that children who are subjected to IPV demonstrate an increased likelihood of aggression and anxiety related problems. The primary objective of the research was to explore the role of gender as a protective or risk factor for the externalising or internalising symptoms and their outcomes in IPV-exposed children. On conducting the study amid 176 children aged not less than four years, it was found that gender-typed sex roles were a hazard factor not for boys, but for girls, and that androgynous gender roles acted in the form of protective factors for both girls and boys. Previous exposure of the children to IPV demonstrated a positive correlation with externalising issues, and a negative correlation with income of the family. Moreover, it was found that girls were more likely to suffer from externalising problems, compared to boys.

In addition, children who had androgynous gender role were more susceptible to the externalising problems, when compared to children with gender-typed roles. It was concluded by the researchers that owing to societal outlooks for particular gender, the kind of gender role related with behavioural patterns varied for girls and boys. Moreover, the impact of gender role on the outcomes of children was also dependent on severity of IPV that the children had been exposed to. Relevance of the article can be accredited to the fact that it demonstrated the significance of examining the gender role of a child as a protective or risk factor for behavioural issues amid those exposed to IPV.

Article 4

The research was based on the fact that majority of investigations related to IPV place an emphasis on homosexual association and elucidate that male-to-female violence is professed more deleteriously than female-to-male violence. The primary aim of the research was to explore the influence of gender of each person of a couple, and the kind of aggression demonstrated on perceptions of IPV. On asking 251 participants to read scenarios that focused on physical or psychological aggression between two men, two women, and a man and a woman, physical aggression was perceived more destructively, in comparison to psychological aggression. Moreover, the research participants assessed the encounter, the wrongdoer and the sufferer in a manner that was unswerving with conventional gender roles, elucidating more apprehension for female, in comparison to male sufferers, and superior disparagement of male, when compared to the female committers. The researchers concluded that male aggressors are generally professed more destructively and as proficient of inflicting more damage than females when being involved in any violent behaviours.

Notwithstanding the gender of the sufferer, existence of a male offender was found to generate more negative opinions and outlooks of the encounter, and also resulted in more negative assessment of the offender. These findings also suggested that female perpetrators are perceived as less capable of inflicting injury, in comparison to their male counterparts, despite being engaged in similar behaviour. Relevance of the findings can be accredited to the fact that it disentangled the confusion between the gender of the offender and that of the sufferer, within the setting of third-party insights of physically and psychologically violent encounters.

References

Burczycka, M. (2018). Section 2: Police-reported intimate partner violence in Canada, 2017. Retrieved from https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm#a6

Hammock, G. S., Richardson, D. S., Lamm, K. B., Taylor, E., & Verlaque, L. (2017). The effect of gender of perpetrator and victim on perceptions of psychological and physical intimate partner aggression. Journal of family violence, 32(3), 357-365.

Scarduzio, J. A., Carlyle, K. E., Harris, K. L., & Savage, M. W. (2017). “Maybe She Was Provoked” Exploring Gender Stereotypes About Male and Female Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence. Violence Against Women, 23(1), 89-113.

Smagur, K. E., Bogat, G. A., & Levendosky, A. A. (2017). Gender role and gender as predictors of behavior problems in children exposed to intimate partner violence. Journal of family violence, 32(2), 157-168.

Smith, S., Chen, J., Basile, K., Gilbert, L., Merrick, M., Patel, N., … & Jain, A. (2016). National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010-2012 State Report.

Wasarhaley, N. E., Lynch, K. R., Golding, J. M., & Renzetti, C. M. (2017). The impact of gender stereotypes on legal perceptions of lesbian intimate partner violence. Journal of interpersonal violence, 32(5), 635-658.

World Health Organization. (2012). Understanding and addressing violence against women- Intimate partner violence. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/77432/WHO_RHR_12.36_eng.pdf;jsessionid=EF71B61F6AD8EC4CF29B142034F2D59D?sequence=1