1

Samuel R. Miller
December 11, 2013
Prof. Georgia Duerst - Lahti
Politics 306: Feminist Political Thought and Action
Symmetrical Violence among Men and Women in Heterosexual Intimate Partnerships
The study of domestic violence in partnerships, called Intimate Partner Violence (IPV),
has historically been focused on male perpetrated violence against female victims. However,
recent studies have shown that IPV among teenagers, high school students, and college age
students have been committed at relatively symmetrical rates in heterosexual relationships
among both males and females. Male victims in particular have fewer resources at their disposal
due to stereotypes that blame or shame victims who come forward. Gender, therefore, is not a
risk factor or highly correlated with committing IPV.
The Definition of Intimate Partner Violence
An issue that has come up is the definition of what constitutes violence in an intimate
partnership. Certain studies have focused exclusively on physical and sexual violence; however
other studies have included physical, psychological, economic, sexual, verbal, emotional or
spiritual violence to come under a single definition abuse.
1
The differences in definitions, both
broad and narrow, have led to rates of IPV to be drastically different in their statistical findings.
Physical violence is not the only way to harm a partner, nor is it necessarily the most damaging.
Without being able to recognize abusive behaviors, IPV can be overlooked and the damage it
causes underestimated. Therefore, good research should distinguish each type of violence to

1
Joseph Michalski, Explaining Intimate Partner Violence: The Sociological Limitations of Victimization Studies,
Family Relations 20, no. 4 (Dec. 2005), www.jstor.org/stable/585658 (accessed 11 Oct. 2013).
2

show the spectrum of violence and examine the consequences and impact each type can have on
a partner.
IPV falls under four broad categories. Emotional abuse, sometimes referred to as
psychological abuse, is where a partner systematically controls the other by undermining a
partners confidence, worthiness, trust, or stability through, but not limited to, verbal aggression
(name-calling, accusing, ordering) or maintaining control (not allowing a partner to contact a
family member); physical abuse is where a partner purposefully harms the other by causing
bodily harm or pain through, but not limited to, choking, kicking, punching, slapping, or using a
weapon; sexual abuse is where a partner forces the other to have non consensual sexual activity
through, but not limited to, coercion, physical force, or threats; and economic abuse, though
uncommon among adolescents and college students, is where a partner maintains control over
the other through, but not limited to, exploitation of their partners income, preventing a
partners education or employment, or theft.
2

3
Victims of IPV are at a greater risk of depression,
physical injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, suicide, and many other negative physical and
psychological issues.
4

5
IPV cost victims about $5.8 billion in 1995, equal to about $8.63 billion
in 2012, in medical care costs and work productivity losses.
6
The 1995 estimate is limited in that

2
Love is Respect, Types of Abuse, Types of Abuse, www.loveisrespect.org/is-this-abuse/types-of-abuse (accessed
October 14, 2013).
3
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Intimate Partner Violence: Definitions, Injury Prevention and
Control, www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/definitions.html (accessed October 14, 2013).
4
Jacquelyn Campbell, Health Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence, The Lancet 359 (2002):
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08336-8 (accessed December 11, 2013).
5
Joelle Karen, et al, "Intimate Partner Violence and Incident Depressive Symptoms and Suicide Attempts: A
Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies," PLoS Medicine 10 (2013),
plosmedicine.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.1001439&representatio
n=PDF (accessed December 11, 2013).
6
DJ Whitaker et al., Differences in Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships with
Reciprocal and Non-Reciprocal Intimate Partner Violence, American Journal of Public Health,
aphapublications.org, ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020 (accessed October 11, 2013).
3

not all cases of IPV are reported as cause of injury and only accounted for female victims.
7
It
was the feminist movement in the 19
th
century that initially brought domestic violence into the
public conscious and it remains a solemn health and social issue today.
Historical Background in the United States
The first instance of domestic violence receiving recognition in the United States was in
the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1641.
8
The Body of Liberties, the first political charter
established by European colonists in Northeast America, stated that Every married woman shall
be free from bodily correction or stripes by her husband, unless it be in his own defense upon her
assault, which was established in the section Liberties of Women.
9
The Body of Liberties is an
apparent anomaly in regards to other societies during the 17
th
century. Other European states
tolerated certain forms of wife beating or gave husbands legal rights to do so. Therefore, wives,
and by extension all women, were treated as underdeveloped persons. Husbands, being granted a
legal right, had inherently greater power in households as to allow them to control and correct
perceived misbehavior of their wives.
Wife beating was especially prevalent in England where husbands were given legal rights
in British Common Law to beat their spouses.
10
Referred to as moderate correction, a husband
could use limited forms of physical violence against his wife in a way that was similar to how a

7
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services, Cost of Intimate Partner
Violence in the United States, Atlanta, Georgia: CDC, 2003.
8
Cathy Young, Domestic Violence: An In Depth Analysis, Independent Womens Forum, 30 September 2005,
www.iwf.org/files/50c58dda09f16c86b2c652aa047944f6.pdf (accessed 12 Oct. 2013).
9
Nathaniel Ward, Massachusetts Body of Liberties (1641), excerpted, Monica Banas,
history.hanover.edu/texts/masslib.html (accessed 11 Nov. 2013) p. 271
10
Ethan Shagan, The Rule of Moderation: Violence, Religion, and the Politics of Restraint in Early Modern England
(Cambridge University Press, 2011), 64.
4

parent punishes a misbehaved child.
11
William Blackstone, an English judge in the 18
th
century,
noted in his treatise Commentaries on the Laws of England that because a wife was legally
bound to her husband, it was considered reasonable that a husband be given the right to treat his
wife as such.
12
Even the Catholic Church during the 17
th
century endorsed a form of mild wife
beating though it treated excessive and illogical beating as sinful.
13

With the foundation of the feminist movement in Seneca Falls in 1848, womens rights
advocates in the United States sought to reform marriage laws such that the legal system
protected powerless wives from violent husbands.
14
Though it was a sluggish process, by 1900
legislation was passed in three state legislatures that would punish husbands who beat their
wives.
15
It was nearly a century later in 1993 that the first federal legislation was passed, the
Violence against Women Act (VAWA), that made wife beating a crime, and more broadly sex
discrimination, but also recognized the scope of the domestic abuse. Violence against women
remains a significant health and social issue in the United States. Women who stay with abusive
men tend to still see positive traits in their partner despite their violence.
16

Because there is significant historical context where a wife was battered by her husband,
enacted legislation has assumed a male aggressor and a female victim scenario.
17
To the
detriment of male victims of female violence and female victims in same sex partnerships,
female aggressors have been portrayed as stereotypically engaging in self defense or are not

11
Idib.
12
Reva Smigel, The Rule of Love: Wife Beating as Prerogative and Privacy, The Yale Law Journal 105, no. 8, (June
2006), http://www.jstor.org/stable/797286 (accessed 11 November 2013).
13
Cosmin Dariescu, How to Beat Your Wife: Regulations on Domestic Violence in the 17
th
Century Moldovia and
Walachia, Law Department at University of Iasi, Romania, (10 April 2013),
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2247858 (accessed 11 November 2013).
14
Reva Smigel, The Rule of Love: Wife Beating as Prerogative and Privacy.
15
Cathy Young, Domestic Violence: An In Depth Analysis.
16
Rick Nauert, Why Women stay in Abusive Relationships, Live Science, (accessed December 10, 2013).
17
Idib.
5

thought to be capable of causing severe injury.
18
Male victims tend to underestimate the severity
of abuse, ignore the abuse, or minimize its impact especially as it is common for men to have
been taught as young boys to never hit a girl.
19

20
Consequently, violence committed by women
today can be seen as harmless because of societal notions of violence. Modern empirical
evidence, on the other hand, has found that women are just as likely, if not more so, to initiate
IPV as men.
Modern Methods and Research
A reason that it was recently found that IPV was committed across equal levels has been
hypothesized as a result of the methodologies that studies undertook to survey participants. Past
studies primary focuses were about victimization rather than victimization and perpetration.
21

The partner who initiates violence against their partner is deemed the perpetrator in regards to
IPV.
Consequently, because of historical assumptions, some methodologies regarding research
on IPV have been framed in such a way where men are presumed to be perpetrators. One
method, the Duluth Model, developed in 1981 by social activist Ellen Pence, asserts that abuse is

18
Michelle Carney, Fred Buttell, Don Dutton, Women Who Perpetrate Intimate Partner Violence: A Review of the
Literature with Recommendations for Treatment, Aggression and Violent Behavior 12 (2007): 108 115,
lab.drdondutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Carney-M.M.-Buttell-F.-Dutton-D.G.-2007-Women-who-
perpetrate-intimate-violence.pdf (accessed September 5, 2013).
19
DJ Whitaker et al., Differences in Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships with
Reciprocal and Non-Reciprocal Intimate Partner Violence.
20 Angel Gover, Risky Lifestyles and dating Violence: A Theoretical Test of Violent Victimization, Journal of
Criminal Justice 32 (2004): 171-180 (accessed November 16, 2013).
21
U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Full Report of the Prevalence, Incidence, and
Consequences of Violence Against Women, Patricia Tjaden, Nancy Thoennes, NCJ 183781, (November 2000),
www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf (accessed 10 October 2013)
6

patriarchal in which violence is only committed by men against women.
22
The Duluth Model
website states:
Mens use of violence against women is learned and reinforced through many social,
cultural and institutional avenues, while womens use of violence does not have the same
kind of societal support. Many women who do use violence against their male partners
are being battered. Their violence is primarily used to respond to and resist the
controlling violence being used against them. On the societal level, womens violence
against men has a trivial effect compared to the devastating effect of mens violence
against women.
23

These are unsubstantiated claims that presume several things: men cannot be harmed by women,
women are justified in their use of violence, and male violence is widespread due to acceptance
of patriarchal values. Therefore, the Duluth Models premise is hypocritical in that it seeks to
treat men who subscribe to patriarchal values while applying patriarchal values to women. The
Duluth Model is ineffective because it ignores that both women and men are affected by IPV and
it engenders IPV. Fig. 1 shows a power and control wheel; an example of how only male
perpetrators of IPV are recognized by the Duluth Model. To fully understand the breadth of IPV,
research regarding IPV has to be framed in gender neutral terms because when researchers frame
questions in this way, mens and womens responses produce similar rates of violence.
24




22
Mills, Linda, et at, Enhancing Safety and Rehabilitation in Intimate Violence Treatments, Association of Schools
of Public Health 121 (2006): (accessed December 9, 2013).
23
Wheel Gallery," The Duluth Model, http://www.theduluthmodel.org/training/wheels.html (accessed December
9, 2013).
24
Carney, Buttell, and Dutton, Women Who Perpetrate Intimate Partner Violence: A Review of the Literature with
Recommendations for Treatment, 109.
7


For example, in a 2011 2012 study done by the California Alliance for Families &
Children found that 41% of females and 37% of males between the ages of 14 and 20 reported
being the victim in a violent relationship.
25
This study looked at emotional, physical, and sexual
violence specifically. However, 35% of females as opposed to 29% of males reported as being
the perpetrator in such abusive relationships. 29% of women and 24% of men reported both
victimization and perpetration. Female respondents were significantly more likely to be victims
of sexual abuse, male respondents were significantly more likely to be victims of physical abuse,
while the proportion of male and female victims of emotional abuse were about equal.
26

Perpetration of emotional violence tends to be the most frequently reported variation of
IPV, especially among the college aged population. In the 2010 National Intimate Partner and

25 Michelle Ybara and Dorothy Espelsage, "National Rates of Adolescent Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Teen-
Dating Violence," www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/08/sexual-teen.pdf (accessed October 10, 2013).
26
Idib.
Fig. 1: The Duluth Power
and Control Wheel shows
the spectrum of violence to
which male batterers can
identify violence they
committed against female
victims.
8

Sexual Violence Survey by the Center for Disease Control and Protection, it was estimated that
in a 12 month period approximately 13.9% of women and 18.1% of men in a relationship were
subject to a form emotional abuse seen in fig. 2 and 3.
27
The most common form of emotional
abuse reported by female victims was being called names (64.3%), witnessing a partner act angry
in a way that seemed dangerous (57.9%), being humiliated (58%), and demands to know their
location to keep track of her 61.7%).
28
Male victims reported that the most common forms of
abuse were demands to know their location to keep track of him (63.1%), being called names
(51.6%), being told he was a loser or not good enough (42.4%), witnessing a partner a partner act
angry in a way that seemed dangerous (40.4%), and being humiliated (39.4%).
29
This begs the
question: do men and women perpetrate emotional abuse for similar purposes?



27
Black, M.C., Basile, K.C., Breiding, M.J., et al, The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010
Summary Report, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011):
www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf (accessed September 18, 2013).
28
Idib.
29
Idib.
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
9

Feminist theory, for example, believes that if a man embraces patriarchal values and
traditional gender roles there is greater probability that he will approve of domestic violence
against women in order to establish dominance.
30
Indeed, there is correlation between an
acceptance of hostile and violent attitudes towards women and irrational actions and behaviors.
31

A 2013 study by the Society for Prevention Research found that 53% of college men perpetrate
emotional abuse and positive attitudes of male dominance and sexism was a significant predictor
of such abuse.
32
However, there is also correlation between male perpetration of emotional
abuse with substance abuse, childhood victimization, depression, and stress.
33
This means that
men who perpetrate emotional abuse do not act in this way for a singular reason; there are a
variety of factors that motivate such abuse, although they all may in some way be related to
positive beliefs about male dominance.
In regards to female perpetrators of emotional abuse, there are, like men, a variety of
factors that motivate perpetration. According to a 2012 study by Jenny Leisring, a professor at
Quinnipiac University, which researched motivations for perpetration of emotional abuse among
college women, there are fifteen reasons that motivate perpetration.
34
Additionally, there are
three subscales in the same study with which emotional abuse can be examined: denigration,

30
G.K. Kantor, Refining the Brushstrokes in Portraits of Alcohol and Wife Assaults, Alcohol and interpersonal
violence: Fostering multidisciplinary perspectives 24 (1993): (accessed November 17, 2013).
31
Christine Murray and Kerrie Kardatzke, Dating Violence Among College Students: Issues for College
Counselors, Journal of College Counselors 10 (2007): libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/C_Murray_Dating_2007.pdf
(accessed October 15, 2013).
32
Pippin Whitaker, "Centrality of Control-Seeking in Mens Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration," Society for
Prevention Research 14 (2013): 513 523, download.springer.com/static/pdf/525/art%253A10.1007%252Fs11121-
012-0332-z.pdf?auth66=1385198245_b7a67b44695fbbf2f72f196de318403b&ext=.pdf (accessed November 20,
2013).
33
Emma Fulu et al, Prevalence of and Factors Associated with Male Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence:
Findings from the UN Multi-Country Cross-sectional Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific, The Lancet
Global Health 1 (2013): 187 207, hwww.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(13)70074-3/fulltext
(accessed November 17, 2013).
34
Penny Leisring, Physical and Emotional Abuse in Romantic Relationships: Motivation for Perpetration among
College Women, Journal of Interpersonal Violence 20 (2012): (accessed November 19, 2013).
10

dominance, and restrictive engulfment. Denigration is where an abuser attacks the reputation of
their partner, dominance is where an abuser seeks to control or rule their partner, and restrictive
engulfment is where an abuser seeks to psychologically manipulate their partner to prevent them
from participating in social activities.
In total, 95% of women perpetrated at least one act of emotional abuse, 93% of women
perpetrated at least one act of restrictive engulfment with the most common motives being
jealousy, stress, in retaliation for emotional hurt, to get a partners attention, and anger; 59%
perpetrated at least one act of denigration with the most common motives being stress, retaliation
for emotional hurt, anger, and jealousy; and 35% perpetrated at least one act of domination with
the most common motives being anger, in retaliation for emotional hurt, stress, and to win an
argument.
35
There was no indication how often perpetrators engaged in emotional abuse so the
severity and relative frequency of abuse was not known.
A 2006 study, which is also the broadest study on IPV to date, asked 13,601 college
students from sixty eight universities across thirty two nations to investigate whether gender
is a statistical indicator for IPV and if mutual abuse, where both partners engage in abuse, occurs
at the greatest frequency.
36
The study, run by Murray Straus, a professor at the University of
New Hampshire, found that abuse, specifically physical abuse, occurs in about 31.2% of all
relationships. Straus differentiates between minor abuse (pushed or shoved, grabbed, threw an
object, or twisted arm or hair) and severe abuse (punched or hit a partner, kicked, choked,
slammed against a wall, beat up, burned, or used a weapon). For the 31.2% of relationships

35
Idib.
36 Murray Straus, Dominance and Symmetry in Partner Violence by Male and Female University Students in 32
Nations, Children and Youth Services Review 30 (2006): 252 275, pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID41E2.pdf
(accessed September 10, 2013).
11

where physical abuse, which includes both minor and severe and is seen in fig. 2, occurs, the rate
of male only violence was 9.9%, the rate of female only violence was 21.4%, and the rate of
mutual violence was 68.6%.
37
The rate of severe physical abuse for male only violence was
15.7%, the rate of female only violence was 29.4%, and rate of mutual violence was 54.8%.
These findings challenge the notion that IPV is committed primarily by men and that women are
not as likely as men to engage in physical violence. In another study done by the U.S National
Library of Medicine in 2007, where participants were between the ages of 18 and 28, found
similar results. The study found that while women report greater rates of victimization, they self
- report higher rates of perpetration with 19.3% of females reporting to be victims, but 24.8%
also perpetrating the violence.
38



37 Kimberly Ann Larson, College Students Perception of Adolescent Dating Violence (Masters diss., University of
Texas at Arlington, 2007), https://dspace.uta.edu/bitstream/handle/10106/275/umi-uta-1713.pdf?sequence=1.
38
DJ Whitaker et al., Differences in Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships with
Reciprocal and Non-Reciprocal Intimate Partner Violence, (accessed October 11, 2013).
Fig. 4: Part of the results from
Strauss survey. Shown here
is the assault rate. Rows
separate each country
showing the overall assault
rate for that country. Columns
separate if there was one
perpetrator or both persons
were violent.
12


The same 2007 study, the results of which are seen in Fig. 5, found in estimating the
injury rate in cases of physical abuse in IPV that, perpetrators who were men were more likely
to inflict injury on a partner than were those who were women, regardless of reciprocity.
39

Injury occurrence measures the proportion to which injuries are sustained for all violent
occurrences. This means that regardless of whether IPV is mutual (reciprocal), committed by a
single person (non-reciprocal), or if a woman perpetrated violence against her partner, women
sustain injuries at a greater rate than men. The study found in cases where men commit non-
reciprocal violence, the injury rate for women was 20%; in cases where there was mutual
violence, the injury rate for women was 31.4%, the highest injury rate of all variables; however,
women were also the perpetrators in about 57.35% for all violent occurrences.
40
The injury rate
in cases where women commit non-reciprocal violence against men was 8.1%, whereas in cases
where there was mutual violence, the injury rate for men was 25.3%.
41
Women are still at a
greater risk for suffering severe physical injuries, such as broken bones, committed against them

39
Whitaker et al., Differences in Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships with
Reciprocal and Non-Reciprocal Intimate Partner Violence.
40
Idib.
41
Idib.
Fig. 5: Taken from the National
Library of Medicine survey.
- Low Frequency: There were
one or two instances of
physical violence.
- Medium Frequency: There
were three to five instances of
physical violence.
- High Frequency: There were
six or more instances of
physical violence.
13

by their partner.
42

43
The consequences that result from this are that when males perpetrate
physical abuse against their partner the resulting injuries, particularly to females, are far more
severe in nature.
44
The NLM study found that if women retaliate against male perpetrated
physical abuse, meaning mutual violence, women are at the greatest risk of sustaining an injury.
Limitations to Studies
Issues with surveys which cause results of roughly equal rates of IPV may be a result in
how the survey questions are framed. For example, a survey conducted by the U.S Department
of Justice asked if respondents had ever been a victim or perpetrator in an act of physical or
sexual abuse in their lifetime as opposed to how many times in the past 12 months an act of
violence had been committed. The latter is considered leading.
45

Strauss studies have not been met without criticism. Lisa Carolossi, a professor at
Fordham University, said that the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS), the methodology developed by
Straus, despite its common usage in measuring IPV, does not measure severity of violence or the
context of violence.
46
The CTS also only reports incidences that have occurred in the past 12
months as opposed to looking at a persons lifetime.
47
This is troubling because experiences of

42
Deborah Capaldi and Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Informing Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Efforts:
Dyadic, Developmental, and Contextual Considerations, National Institute of Health, ncbi.nlm.nih.gov,
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3405175/?report=reader#__ffn_sectitle (accessed 11 October 2013).
43
Michele Cascardi, Marital Aggression: Impact, Injury, and Health Correlates for Husbands and Wives, Arch
Intern Med. 1992;152(6):1178-1184, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1599345 (accessed 11 October 2013).
44
Murray Straus, Womens Violence Towards Men is a Serious Social Problem, Current Controversies on Family
Violence, pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/VB33R%20Women's%20Violence%20Toward%20Men.pdf (accessed October
9, 2013).
45
U.S. Department of Justice, Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women.
46
Lisa Colorassi, A Response to Danis and Lockhart: What Guides Social Work Knowledge About Violence Against
Women?, Journal of Social Work Education 41 (2005): 147 159, website.cswe.org/publications/members-
only/journal/JSWEWinter05final.pdf#page=147 (accessed November 14, 2013).
47
Micahel Kimmel, Male Victims of domestic Violence: A Substantive Methodological Review, The Equality
Committee of the Department of Education and Science,
new.vawnet.org/Assoc_Files_VAWnet/GenderSymmetry.pdf (accessed November 20, 2013).
14

people who used to be in an abusive relationship, but more than 12 months ago would not be
able to include their experiences in the data even if they were still traumatized by it.
Angela Gover, a professor at the University of Colorado, Denver, speculates that in cases
of IPV where there is mutual physical abuse, it is common for women to employ self defense
against a partner, though some studies have found that only small percentages of women engage
in self defense against a partner.
48

49
Thus, the CTS may overlook negative effects experienced
by female victims of severe IPV as women have a greater probability of suffering injuries than
men in cases of IPV.
50

Differences between how males and females perceive what constitutes IPV influence
how men and women report abuse. Boys tend to describe behaviors as abusive if the intent was
negative, whereas girls tend to describe behaviors as abusive if the impact was negative.
51
This
is partially the reason why men report women as perpetrators in violence at higher frequencies
than men; the statistical probability of a man being injured by a female partner is significantly
less likely than the reverse, which means abusive women do not view their actions as negative.
Similarly, if a man tells a joke and his partner is emotionally hurt by it even if there was no
intention by the man to cause hurt, the woman likely will view the joke as abusive while the man
will not. Gendered definitions of IPV suggest that there are situations where abuse can be

48
Gover, Risky Lifestyles and dating violence: A theoretical test of violent victimization.
49
Straus, Dominance and Symmetry in Partner Violence by Male and Female University Students in 32 Nations.
50
Larson, College Students Perception of Adolescent Dating Violence.
51
Heather Sears, ""If It Hurts You, Then It Is Not A Joke": Adolescents' Ideas About Girls' And Boys' Use And
Experience Of Abusive Behavior In Dating Relationships," Journal of Interpersonal Violence 21, no. 9 (2006):
dx.doi.org/10.1177/0886260506290423 (accessed November 18, 2013).
15

viewed as acceptable or justified in specific circumstances depending on the gender of
perpetrator and victim.
52

Conclusion
IPV is a serious health and social issue that is especially common among adolescents and
college students. Women have historically suffered from domestic abuse to significantly greater
degrees than men which came as a result of deeply patriarchal cultures and masculinitys
condoning of physical violence. However, modern empirical evidence shows that IPV is
symmetrical in perpetration; men and women commit abuse at relatively equal rates, although
men commit sexual abuse at greater frequencies than women, women commit physical violence
at greater frequencies than men, and emotional abuse, which is the most prevalent and is the least
understood mode of abuse, is committed at equal frequencies by each gender. This suggests that
there needs to be greater advocacy for both male and female victims. Nonetheless, the
consequences and health research of male victims of IPV are limited compared to female
victims. More research is required in order to help treat male victims as theoretical risks of IPV
victimization screening include a risk of shame and embarrassment, misidentification as a
perpetrator, and patient and provider dismay over the lack of services available to male IPV
victims.
53
The focal point of IPV research and prevention can no longer focus exclusively on
violence by men against women. Aid for female victims of IPV should not decrease, rather male
victims need to receive greater advocacy in the public sphere. Public funding that raises
awareness for victimized men, such as the ad seen in Fig. 6, is a significant first step in helping

52
Idib.
53
Leigh Kimberg, Addressing Intimate Partner Violence with Male Patients: A Review and Introduction of Pilot
Guidelines, Journal of General Internal Medicine 23 (2008): (accessed November 21, 2013).
16

men who would otherwise be discouraged from trying to get help. Because male victims are
overwhelmingly neglected, they need the most help.

Likewise, female abusers have fewer treatment programs than men and there are limited
resources for how to treat such abusers. There has to be greater intervention efforts to help
female abusers heal their abusive tendencies including having a treatment program designed
specifically for women as currently female abusers are typically placed in programs designed for
male abusers.
54
This acknowledges the fact that while there are similarities between men and
women each have cultural advantages and disadvantages allowing for double standards in which
certain acts may be tolerated depending on gender.




54
Carney et al, Women Who Perpetrate Intimate Partner Violence: A Review of Literature with Recommendations
for Treatment
Fig. 6: This
advertisement on
domestic violence
was made by the
Sussex Police
Department in
Britain.
17

Beloit College Survey on Intimate Partner Violence
Purpose of Survey: Conduct research on the continuum of Intimate Partner Violence (including,
but not limited to, emotional, physical, psychological, sexual, and verbal abuse) experienced by
Beloit students to establish a baseline for IPV, enable Student Affairs to develop targeted
programming, and serve as a catalyst for a campus wide discussion. The research will be
conducted in conjunction with Student Affairs professionals and is aimed at understanding IPV
in the current cohort of Beloit students.
Statement of Anonymity: All of your responses will be completely confidential and
anonymous. We will NOT ask you for your name, and the answers to these questions will never
be associated with you in any way. PLEASE DO NOT PUT YOUR NAME OR THE NAME
OF ANYONE ELSE ANYWHERE. This is to ensure the most accurate and honest answers
possible. Participation in this study is strictly voluntary, and you are not obligated to complete or
answer all of the questions of the questionnaire. You may omit any questions or discontinue at
any time, but you will help us the most by answering every question that you can.
If for any reason you experience depression, flashbacks, suicidal thoughts, trauma, or feel
uncomfortable for any reason as a result of a part(s) of the survey, we encourage you to make an
appointment with a mental health counselor at the Health Center immediately to talk about your
experiences. Appointments can be made either in person or by phone.
Health Center Contact Information:
Location: Porter Hall, 1
st
Floor
Phone: (608)363-2331
Hours = Monday Friday 8:30 AM 12PM, 1:00PM 4:30PM
Comments Section
At the end of the 2
nd
part of the survey, you can write comments on the questionnaire. In fact, we encourage you to
write lots of comments on the questionnaire! Opinions, both positive and negative, on the questionnaire will only
improve its future usage.
18

Part 1: Preliminary Information
1. What is your gender?
a. Male
b. Female
c. Other (Specify)
2. What is your sexual orientation?
a. Heterosexual
b. Homosexual
c. Bisexual
d. Other (Specify)
3. Year at Beloit College?
a. First Year (Freshman)
b. Sophomore
c. Junior
d. Senior
e. Honors Term
4. What is your age?
a. 18
b. 19
c. 20
d. 21
e. 22 or older
5. What is your current relationship status?
a. Currently in a relationship
i. Less than one month
ii. One Four months
iii. Five Eight months
iv. Nine Twelve months
v. One year or more (Greater than twelve months)
b. Friends with Benefits
c. Currently not in a relationship, but have been in one in the past 12 months
d. Currently not in a relationship, have been in one, but not in the past 12 months
e. Single (Have never been in a relationship)
6. What is your current residence? (Do not indicate which house you are living in, only
circle one of the letters)
a. Traditional Residence Halls (Maurer, Chapin, Brannon, Aldrich, 609, 840)
b. 64 Halls (Porter, Whitney, Blaisdell, Bushnell, Peet)
c. Upper Class Residence Halls (815, Wood, Haven, Moore Townhouses, Clary Street
Apartments)
d. Greek Houses (Phi Kappa Psi, Sigma Chi, Tau Kappa Epsilon, Theta Pi Gamma, Alpha Sigma
Tau, Kappa Delta)
e. Special Interest Housing (Women's Center, French House, Spanish House, Russian House,
Outdoor Environment House, Alliance House, Music House, Anthropology House, Voces Latinas
House, Art House, Interfaith House, Substance Free House, Geology House, German House,
Black Students United, Peace and Justice, BSFFA, Japan House)
f. Off-Campus
19

7. What is your living situation?
a. Single
b. Double or more
8. What is your partners gender? (If applicable)
a. Male
b. Female
c. Other (Specify)
9. Is/Was sex a part of your current or most recent relationship?
a. Yes
b. No
10. Opinions on General Statements (1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = unsure, 4 =
agree, 5 = strongly agree)
a. I often feel resentful of the opposite sex.
b. A person who has been raped was partially responsible for it.
c. Women at Beloit College are crazy.
d. There are situations where a girlfriend has a right to hit her partner.
e. I masturbate to porn at least once a week.
f. It is a partners duty to have sex if their partner wants to.
g. Gay / Bisexual persons have an easy time getting laid at Beloit College.
h. I am a religious / spiritual individual.
i. Women are treated poorly by men at Beloit College.
j. Men at Beloit College only interested in having sex.
k. If one person hits another, then it is within the other persons right to hit back.
l. Women are not as emotionally strong as men.
m. Men at Beloit College are creeps.
n. I am smarter than most members of the opposite sex.
o. There are situations where a boyfriend has a right to hit his partner.
Part 2: Relationship Questions (Questions should be answered only if the participants partner is
attending Beloit College or previously attended Beloit College). Answer using the scale below.
0 This has never happened
1 This has happened once in the past 12 months
2 This has happened two three times in the past 12 months
3 This has happened four six times in the past 12 months
4 This has happened seven or more times in the past 12 months
1.
a. Whenever my partner went somewhere (off-campus, to a bar, visit friends on/off
campus, etc.), I demanded to know where my partner was at all times (frequent
phone calls or text updates) or else I became suspicious and/or jealous of my
partners actions. ANSWER:
b. Whenever I went somewhere, my partner demanded to know where I was at all
times or else my partner became suspicious and/or jealous of my actions.
ANSWER:
20

2.
a. I insulted my partners bodily appearance, clothing choices, weight (too fat, too
skinny, etc.), or physical attractiveness. ANSWER:
b. My partner insulted my bodily appearance, clothing choices, weight, or physical
attractiveness. ANSWER:
3.
a. I forced my partner to have sex (oral, anal, vaginal, made to penetrate, etc.)
through physical violence (punching, kicking, holding down, use of a weapon).
ANSWER:
b. My partner forced me to have sex through physical violence. ANSWER:
4.
a. I deliberately withheld sex as a way to punish or assert dominance over my
partner. ANSWER:
b. My partner deliberately withheld sex as a way to punish or assert dominance over
me. ANSWER:
5.
a. I screamed, shouted, swore, or yelled at my partner to silence them.
ANSWER:
b. My partner screamed, shouted, or yelled at me to silence me.
ANSWER:
6.
a. I prevented or tried to limit my partner from contacting, seeing, or otherwise
talking to friends or family. (Ex. Forcing a partner to unfriend someone on
Facebook or limiting the amount of time a partner can have on the phone with
someone). ANSWER:
b. My partner prevented or tried to limit me from contacting, seeing, or otherwise
talking to friends or family. ANSWER:
7.
a. I deliberately destroyed, attempted to destroy, or broke property (Ex. video game,
book, homework assignment) that belonged to my partner. ANSWER:
b. My partner deliberately destroyed, or attempted to destroy, or broke property that
belonged to me. ANSWER
8.
a. During an argument, I neglected my partners opinion by minimizing their
concerns, refusing to compromise, mocking my partner, or claiming entitlement
(Ex. You cant do that, you are a man/woman!). ANSWER:
b. During an argument, my partner neglected my opinion by minimizing my
concerns, refusing to compromise, mocking me, or claiming entitlement.
ANSWER:
9.
a. In order to get my partner to do something, I manipulated my partner by lying to
my partner, intimidating my partner, threatening to commit self-harm, giving my
partner an ultimatum (Ex. If you do not do this, I will break up with you!), or
accusing my partner of cheating on me. ANSWER:
21

b. In order to get me to do something, my partner manipulated me by lying to me,
intimidating me, threatening to commit self harm, giving me an ultimatum, or
accusing me of cheating. ANSWER:
10.
a. I lied to and/or coerced my partner through, but not limited to, threats, peer
pressure, name calling, or humiliation to have sex with me without a condom,
birth control, or other form of contraception. ANSWER:
b. My partner lied to and/or coerced me through, but not limited to, threats, peer
pressure, name calling, or humiliation to have sex without a condom, birth control
or other form of contraception. ANSWER:
11.
a. I forced my partner, through coercion, threats, intimidation, or peer pressure, but
not physical violence, to perform a sexual act or get in a sexual position which my
partner did not want to do, did not want to try, or was otherwise incapable of
doing. ANSWER:
b. My partner forced me, through coercion, threats, intimidation, or peer pressure,
but not physical violence, to perform a sexual act or get in a sexual position which
I did not want to do, did not want to try, or was otherwise incapable of doing.
ANSWER:
12.
a. I accused my partner of being an inadequate lover or ridiculed my partner when
they did not want to have sex. ANSWER:
b. My partner accused me of being an inadequate lover or ridiculed me when I did
not want to have sex. ANSWER:
13.
a. I did something to spite my partner or spread rumors (whether they are true or
false) about my partner. ANSWER:
b. My partner did something to spite me or spread rumors about me.
ANSWER:
14.
a. I choked, held down, hit, kicked, punched, scratched, shoved, slapped, used a
combat technique (Ex. Submission holds seen in MMA), or used a weapon (Ex.
Throwing an object or hitting with an object) to hurt my partner. (Intent is the
focus of this question, not necessarily whether an injury was sustained).
ANSWER:
b. My partner choked, held down, hit, kicked, punched, scratched, shoved, slapped,
used a combat technique, or used a weapon to hurt me. ANSWER:
15.
a. My partner came to me with concerns about our relationship, possible
misbehavior, or other issues which I denied, made light of, shifted responsibility
onto, or blamed on my partner. ANSWER:
b. I went to my partner with concerns about our relationship, possible misbehavior,
or other issues which my partner denied, made light of, shifted responsibility
onto, or blamed on me. ANSWER:
16. Note: This question does not use the scale
22

a. If you or your partner ever choked, held down, hit, kicked, punched, scratched,
shoved, slapped, used a combat technique, or used a weapon against the other,
who was the first one to initiate violence the last time this happened?
1.I initiated the violence
2.My partner initiated the violence
3.This never happened
17. End Comments:























23

Service Honors Term Application
A. Statement of Purpose:
a. Conduct research on the continuum of Intimate Partner Violence
experienced by Beloit students to establish a baseline for IPV, enable
Student Affairs to develop targeted programming, and serve as a catalyst
for a campus wide discussion. The research will be conducted in
conjunction with Student Affairs professionals and is aimed at
understanding IPV in the current cohort of Beloit students. I am currently
developing a survey adapted from research compiled in the International
Dating Violence Survey, 2001 2006 as part of my capstone project in
POLS: Feminist Political Thought and Practice. Greg Buchanan and Ron
Nikora have been helpful in identifying problems with the survey and I
will continue to follow their guidance. I hope also to collaborate with the
Office of Institutional Research (OIR). The honors term will allow me to
administer and analyze the survey.
b. In order to ensure the best possible results, I am working to develop
methods that safeguard the complete anonymity of the respondents
whether submitted online or via hardcopies surveys mailed to me, the
OIR, or another designated. Ideally, Resident Assistants would distribute
the surveys early spring semester 2014. In order to get Greek students
involved, I will also speak to each chapters president and distribute the
survey through them.
24

c. The survey results will allow a data driven discussion about IPV on
campus including how it is viewed, how men / women / homo / hetero /
trans individuals define it, how it is reinforced or ignored, what steps can
be taken to prevent it, and why it happens. With my findings, I would
write a report and present it in a symposium or any other venue the
College deems useful.
B. The Value of the Project:
a. Create baseline data on IPV experienced by our students;
b. Gain insights into IPV on campus that can shape data driven campus
initiatives;
c. Undertake substantial original research.
C. The Value of the Selected Courses
a. POLS 295: POLS Quantitative methods taught by Ron Nikora; learn more
about methodology and analysis from a professor who understands
violence to be a public health concern;
b. Other Classes: Other classes that are related to law, gender, and sexuality
will be taken pending course schedule availability.
D. Proposed Projects Contributions
a. While there are discussions on campus that usually deal with sexual
violence, IPV encompasses all forms of violence including: emotional,
verbal, physical, and sexual. To my knowledge, there has never been any
student led research on this area at Beloit College. It is my perception
that people on campus seriously underestimate how widespread IPV is and
25

the frequency with which it is experienced by Beloit College students,
both on campus and in their lives elsewhere. Creating a baseline with this
survey will enable the College to periodically track trends in IPV among
its students in the future, as well as to develop targeted programming.
E. Qualifications:
a. A passionate interest with the aim of pursuing a law career in a related
area;
b. An active member of Phi Kappa Psi since Fall 2011 where I have held
officer positions and chaired or been a part of multiple committees;
c. A complete plan to undertake such research developed in my POLS 306
capstone course that includes a survey, HRB approval, and cooperative
understandings with Student Affairs and other campus offices as
recommended;
d. Four years of Beloit College liberal arts education, which gives me
curiosity, initiative, and the chance to tackle something meaningful, life-
changing, and useful for the College.
F. Faculty/Staff Sponsors:
a. Georgia Duerst - Lahti (Sabbatical Spring 2014)
b. Ron Nikora
c. John Winkelman
G. Letter/s of Support


26

Bibliography:
1. Black, M.C., Basile, K.C., Breiding, M.J., et al. The National Intimate
Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 Summary Report.
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (2011):
www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf (accessed
September 18, 2013).
2. Campbell, J. "Health Consequences Of Intimate Partner Violence." The
Lancet 359, no. 9314 (2002): 1331-1336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-
6736(02)08336-8 (accessed December 11, 2013).
3. Capaldi, D. M., & Crosby, L. (1997). Observed and reported psychological
and physical aggression in young, at-risk couples. Social Development, 6,
184206
4. Capaldi, Deborah, and Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling. "Informing Intimate
Partner Violence Prevention Efforts: Dyadic, Developmental, and Contextual
Considerations." National Institute of Health.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3405175/?report=reader (accessed
October 11, 2013).
5. Carney, M, F Buttell, and D. Dutton. "Women Who Perpetrate Intimate
Partner Violence: A Review of The Literature With Recommendations For
Treatment."Aggression and Violent Behavior 12, no. 1 (2007): 108-115.
lab.drdondutton.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Carney-M.M.-Buttell-F.-
Dutton-D.G.-2007-Women-who-perpetrate-intimate-violence.pdf (accessed
September 5, 2013).
6. Cascardi, M., Langhinrichsen, J., & Vivian, D. (1992). Marital aggression,
impact, injury, and health correlates for husbands and wives. Archives of
Internal Medicine. 152. 11781184.
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Department of Health and
Human Services. Cost of Intimate Partner Violence in the United States.
Atlanta, Georgia. CDC, 2003.
27

8. Colarossi, Lisa. "A Response To Danis & Lockhart: What Guides Social
Work Knowledge About Violence Against Women?." Journal of Social Work
Education 41, no. 1 (2005): 147-159.
dx.doi.org/10.5175/JSWE.2005.200400418 (accessed September 4, 2013).
9. Dariescu, Cosmin. How to Beat Your Wife: Regulations on Domestic
Violence in the 17th Century - Moldavia and Walachia (May 16, 2013).
ssrn.com/abstract=2247858
10. Devries, Karen, Joelle Mak, and Loraine Bacchus, et al. "Intimate Partner
Violence and Incident Depressive Symptoms and Suicide Attempts: A
Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies." PLoS Medicine 10 (2013).
plosmedicine.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2F
journal.pmed.1001439&representation=PDF (accessed December 11, 2013).
11. Follingstad, Diane R., Shannon Wright, Shirley Lloyd and Jeri A. Sebastian.
Sex Differences in Motivations and Effects in Dating Violence Explaining
Intimate Partner Violence: The Sociological Limitations of Victimization
Studies. Family Relations, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Jan., 1991), pp. 51-57
12. Fulu, Emma, Rachel Jewkes, and Tom Roseli. "Prevalence of and factors
Associated with Male Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence: findings
from the UN Multi-country Cross-sectional Study on Men and Violence in
Asia and the Pacific." The Lancet Global Health 1, no. 4 (2013): 187 - 207.
www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(13)70074-
3/fulltext (accessed November 17, 2013).
13. Gover, Angela. "Risky Lifestyles And Dating Violence: A Theoretical Test Of
Violent Victimization." Journal of Criminal Justice 32, no. 2 (2004): 171-180.
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2003.12.007 (accessed November 16, 2013).
14. "Intimate Partner Violence: Definitions." Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention., 20 Sept. 2010. Web. 19 Sept. 2013.
www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/definitions.html
15. Kantor, GK. "Refining the Brushstrokes in Portraits of Alcohol and Wife
Assaults." Alcohol and Interpersonal violence: Fostering Multidisciplinary
perspectives24 (1993): 284 - 290.
28

16. Kimberg, Leigh, "Addressing Intimate Partner Violence With Male Patients:
A Review And Introduction Of Pilot Guidelines." Journal of General Internal
Medicine 23, no. 12 (2008): 2071-2078.
17. Kimmel, Michael. "Male Victims of Domestic Violence: A Substantive and
Methodological Research Review." The Equality Committee of the
Department of Education and Science.
new.vawnet.org/Assoc_Files_VAWnet/GenderSymmetry.pdf (accessed
November 20, 2013).
18. Leisring, Penny. Physical and Emotional Abuse in Romantic Relationships:
Motivation for Perpetration among College Women. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence 20 (2012): 1 18.
19. Michalski, Joseph H. Explaining Intimate Partner Violence: The Sociological
Limitations of Victimization Studies. Sociological Forum 20, No. 4 (Dec.,
2005), pp. 613-640.
20. Mills, Linda, Peggy Grauwiler, and Nicole Pezold. "Enhancing Safety and
Rehabilitation in Intimate Violence Treatments: New Perspectives."
Association of Schools of Public Health 121 (2006).
jstor.org/stable/10.2307/20056977?Search=yes&searchText=duluth&searchT
ext=model&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dduluth
%2Bmodel%26amp%3Bprq%3Dmale%2Bconditioning%26amp%3Bhp%3D
25%26amp%3Bacc%3Don%26amp%3Bwc%3Don%26amp%3Bfc%3Doff%
26a (accessed December 9, 2013).
21. Nauert, Rick. "Why Women Stay in Abusive Relationships." LiveScience.
http://www.livescience.com/8202-women-stay-abusive-relationships.html
(accessed December 10, 2013).
22. Sears, Heather. ""If It Hurts You, Then It Is Not A Joke": Adolescents' Ideas
About Girls' And Boys' Use And Experience Of Abusive Behavior In Dating
Relationships." Journal of Interpersonal Violence 21, no. 9 (2006): 1191-
1207. dx.doi.org/10.1177/0886260506290423 (accessed November 18, 2013).
29

23. Shagan, Ethan H. "The Bridle of Moderation." In The Rule of Moderation:
Violence, Religion and the Politics of Restraint in Early Modern England.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 63 - 65.
24. Smigel, Reva. ""The Rule of Love": Wife Beating as Prerogative and
Privacy." The Yale Law Journal 105, no. 8 (1996): 2117 - 2207.
www.jstor.org/stable/797286 (accessed November 11, 2013).
25. Straus, Murray. "Dominance And Symmetry In Partner Violence By Male
And Female University Students In 32 Nations." Children and Youth Services
Review 30, no. 3 (2008): 252-275.
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.10.004 (accessed September 10, 2013).
26. Straus, Murray A. Women's Violence Toward Men is a Serious Social
Problem. Current Controversies on Family Violence. 2005. 55-77.
pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/VB33R%20Women's%20Violence%20Toward%20
Men.pdf (accessed October 9, 2013).
27. "Wheel Gallery." The Duluth Model.
theduluthmodel.org/training/wheels.html (accessed December 9, 2013).
28. "Types of Abuse." Www.loveisrespect.org. Web. 19 Sept. 2013.
www.loveisrespect.org/is-this-abuse/types-of-abuse.
29. U.S. Department of Justice. National Institute of Justice. Full Report of the
Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women. By
Patricia Tjaden and Nancy Thoennes. NCJ 183781, November 2000.
www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf (accessed 10 October 2013).
30. Ward, Nathaniel. The Massachusetts Body of Liberties. Hanover Historical
Texts Project. Hanover University. history.hanover.edu/texts/masslib.html.
31. Whitaker, D. J., T. Haileyesus, M. Swahn, and L. S. Saltzman. "Differences in
Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships With
Reciprocal and Nonreciprocal Intimate Partner Violence." American Journal
of Public Health (2007).
ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020 (accessed
October 11, 2013).
30

32. Whitaker, Pippin. "Centrality of Control-Seeking in Mens Intimate Partner
Violence Perpetration." Society for Prevention Research 14 (2013): 513 - 523.
download.springer.com/static/pdf/525/art%253A10.1007%252Fs11121-012-
0332z.pdf?auth66=1385198245_b7a67b44695fbbf2f72f196de318403b&ext=.
pdf (accessed November 20, 2013).
33. Ybarra, Michele, and Dorothy Espelage. "National Rates of Adolescent
Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Teen-Dating Violence." American
Psychological Association (2013).
www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/08/sexual-teen.pdf (accessed
September 15, 2013).
34. Young, Cathy. "Domestic Violence: An In-Depth Analysis." Independent
Womens Forum.
www.iwf.org/files/50c58dda09f16c86b2c652aa047944f6.pdf (accessed
October 12, 2013).