In emerging adulthood, the developmental period between ages 18 and 25, romantic relationships last longer and become more intimate and serious. This developmental period also marks the peak of intimate partner violence (IPV) rates across the lifespan. Individuals in this age group also rely on technology more heavily than other age groups, and use this technology as another means by which to perpetrate IPV. The current thesis investigated the impacts of victimization by such technological IPV (tIPV), as well as the importance of technology-related factors in the perpetration of tIPV. Two hundred and seventy-eight (204 female, 74 male) participants in an intimate relationship of at least three months completed an online survey. Participants reported on their perpetration of and victimization by in-person and tIPV as well as on a range of victim impacts and technology-related perpetration factors. Experiencing tIPV victimization was related to increased alcohol use for both men and women, and increased fear of partner for women. For depression, perceived stress, relationship satisfaction, quality of life, social support, and post-traumatic stress, tIPV victimization did not predict impacts above in-person victimization. The amount of technology usage as well as the amount of technological disinhibition both uniquely predicted tIPV perpetration, counter to the hypothesis that technological disinhibition would moderate the relationship between technology usage and tIPV perpetration. In-person IPV perpetration also significantly predicted tIPV perpetration, and when these variables were included, technology usage was no longer significant. Upon further investigation, social media use, but not texting, significantly predicted tIPV perpetration. While these results suggest some unique impacts and contributing factors to tIPV, overall these results highlight that tIPV often occurs within a broader pattern of abuse that includes in-person IPV. These results suggest that tIPV, while a new medium of aggression, is not necessarily distinct from in-person IPV. This means that efforts should be made to integrate tIPV into IPV theory and practice, rather than to create a new field of research and practice based solely around tIPV. / Graduate

Magister Psychologiae - MPsych / The year 1994 has important historical meaning for South African citizens. The 1994 election marked the beginning of a new nation and a time of freedom and democracy. As part of the change to a democratic society, the rights to gender equality and women's rights were incorporated in the development of the new constitution. However, although our constitution provides a clause on women's fundamental rights, women abuse is still a pervasive problem of enormous magnitude in South Africa. South Africa has a strongly entrenched patriarchal system, which makes men in terms of gender dominant and women subordinate.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / South Africans live in one of the most religious yet most violent societies the world over, with gender-based violence (GBV) against women in intimate relationships flagged as a national priority. Traditionally, and rightfully so, intervention programmes focused on women victim-survivors of intimate partner abuse (IPA). While intervention programmes for men who perpetrate IPA emerged more recently and signify an important paradigm shift in conceptualizing solutions to IPA, the literature reveals a gap in research about the role and influence of religiously pervasive contexts in communities where some of these programmes operate. South Africa claims to be a secular state; however, around 90% of its population are religious and close to 74% are affiliated with the Christian faith. Literature indicates that men who perpetrate IPA often use easily misinterpreted scriptures and religious teachings to justify their abusive behaviour.

While the old adage of “it takes a village…” is often stated in reference to raising children, this statement is also extremely applicable in combating social problems such as intimate partner abuse (IPA). All too often society members turn a “blind eye” to abuse occurring within our homes between intimate partners. Although recent research has shown improvement in attitudes condemning IPA, other research has identified that many individuals continue to perceive IPA as largely a private problem (Bethke & DeJoy, 1993; Straus, Kaufman Kantor, & Moore, 1997). This commonplace belief stands in stark contrast to the vast amount of research that shows IPA is anything but a private problem. In order to halt these occurrences, various intervention programs have been implemented (i.e. batterer intervention programs, mandatory arrest policies, etc.). However, less effort has gone into creating programs to prevent abuse in the first place (Harvey, Garcia-Moreno, & Butchart, 2007). In order to fulfill this need, Harbor House of Central Florida (Orlando, FL) created one notable primary prevention initiative referred to as Project Courage. Launched in 2010, Project Courage staff flooded an Orlando neighborhood (Pine Castle, FL) with IPA services. The following evaluation details Project Courage’s successes, challenges, and provides recommendations for the future. The data used in this evaluation were made available by Harbor House of Central Florida, and have been used with permission from the agency and from the University of Central Florida’s Institutional Review Board. Data from Project Courage were originally collected by the agency’s Prevention Department. First-year funding for the project was provided by the 100 Women Strong giving circle located in Orlando, Florida. The collector(s) of the original data, the funder(s), and their agents or employees bear no responsibility for the analyses or interpretations presented here

The purpose of this study was to examine factors influencing the decision of lesbian victims of domestic violence to call or not to call the police.

Although prevalence rates of gay intimate partner violence (IPV) appear to equal heterosexual IPV rates, gay male IPV does not feature strongly in public anti-­‐violence messaging. This relative silence appears to hold even within the LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex) community. This study addresses this silence. In-­‐depth qualitative interviews were conducted and a critical discourse analysis informed by Ian Parker’s (1992) perspectives, was used to analyse the results. A review of mainstream and critical discourses of violence show that IPV is usually constructed as an exclusively heterosexual phenomenon and these influenced participants’ constructions. Findings indicated that a range of discourses intersect to produce constructions of gay IPV as ‘not violence’, normative, un-­‐ harmful, unintimidating, ‘anti-­‐gay’, erotic, cathartic and intimate. All of these formations can result in gay IPV being silenced and it was shown that gay mens’ constructions of IPV were inextricably bound in gendered, power asymmetry. The study demonstrates how particular configurations of discourse are necessary for violence to become intelligible at all. The implications of these findings are discussed and possibilities for important community intervention suggested.

<p>Våld i nära relationer existerar i de flesta samhällen och förekommer bland såväl heterosexuella som samkönade par. Mycket forskning har främst ägnats åt mäns våld mot kvinnor där offret ofta orsakas stort lidande. Men våld som konfliktlösningsmetod är inte förbehållet män utan används även av kvinnor. En kartläggning av mäns och kvinnors våld i nära relationer i en svensk allmänpopulation planeras och ett frågeformulär har sammansatts och översatts från engelska. Denna uppsats ingår i valideringsstudien av formuläret. Syftet har varit att undersöka frågeformulärets giltighet i en svensk allmänpopulation. Valideringen har skett genom fyra fokusgruppsdiskussioner med experter. Resultatet visar att formuläret ger en giltig bild av mäns våld mot kvinnor. Fokusgrupperna har i lägre grad kunnat validera formulärets giltighet för kvinnors våld mot män i heterosexuella relationer. Våld i samkönade relationer berördes i princip inte alls under diskussionerna. Fokusgruppernas sammansättning antas i hög grad ha påverkat resultatet.</p>

Våld i nära relationer existerar i de flesta samhällen och förekommer bland såväl heterosexuella som samkönade par. Mycket forskning har främst ägnats åt mäns våld mot kvinnor där offret ofta orsakas stort lidande. Men våld som konfliktlösningsmetod är inte förbehållet män utan används även av kvinnor. En kartläggning av mäns och kvinnors våld i nära relationer i en svensk allmänpopulation planeras och ett frågeformulär har sammansatts och översatts från engelska. Denna uppsats ingår i valideringsstudien av formuläret. Syftet har varit att undersöka frågeformulärets giltighet i en svensk allmänpopulation. Valideringen har skett genom fyra fokusgruppsdiskussioner med experter. Resultatet visar att formuläret ger en giltig bild av mäns våld mot kvinnor. Fokusgrupperna har i lägre grad kunnat validera formulärets giltighet för kvinnors våld mot män i heterosexuella relationer. Våld i samkönade relationer berördes i princip inte alls under diskussionerna. Fokusgruppernas sammansättning antas i hög grad ha påverkat resultatet.

Recent research has found high rates of abuse in gay male relationships; however, little is known about their lived experience. This study aims to explore (1) the social construction of abuse in gay male relationships, (2) its discursive effects on clinical practice and (3) the lived experience of gay men involved in abusive relationships. This study included three sets of data. Using a discourse analysis, articles published in popular queer media and academic literature were analyzed to understand the social construction of partner abuse. Three focus groups, with 16 service providers, were conducted to examine the discursive effects of partner abuse on clinical practice. In-depth interviews with 21 gay men involved in partner abuse were conducted to understand their lived experience. Transcripts of the focus groups and interviews were reviewed in detail to highlight themes and concepts. Analysis revealed that gay male partner abuse is not a self-evident or natural category but, rather, socially constructed. Current discourse created two opposite categories (the victim who is powerless and helpless; the perpetrator powerful and evil) that both informed and limited the way in which service providers saw and, thus, worked with gay men involved in partner abuse. Yet, as shown in the analysis, the lived experience of partner abuse does not always fit neatly into the rigid victim and perpetrator roles. Instead, the roles are frequently unclear and contradictory. We social workers need to be aware of the discursive effects of gay male partner abuse and critically examine how they impose certain assumptions on us. Instead of seeking a “true” experience of partner abuse, we need to help these men search for meaning within the events that are relevant to them, regardless of how they fit into the normative discourse of gay male partner abuse.

Recent research has found high rates of abuse in gay male relationships; however, little is known about their lived experience. This study aims to explore (1) the social construction of abuse in gay male relationships, (2) its discursive effects on clinical practice and (3) the lived experience of gay men involved in abusive relationships. This study included three sets of data. Using a discourse analysis, articles published in popular queer media and academic literature were analyzed to understand the social construction of partner abuse. Three focus groups, with 16 service providers, were conducted to examine the discursive effects of partner abuse on clinical practice. In-depth interviews with 21 gay men involved in partner abuse were conducted to understand their lived experience. Transcripts of the focus groups and interviews were reviewed in detail to highlight themes and concepts. Analysis revealed that gay male partner abuse is not a self-evident or natural category but, rather, socially constructed. Current discourse created two opposite categories (the victim who is powerless and helpless; the perpetrator powerful and evil) that both informed and limited the way in which service providers saw and, thus, worked with gay men involved in partner abuse. Yet, as shown in the analysis, the lived experience of partner abuse does not always fit neatly into the rigid victim and perpetrator roles. Instead, the roles are frequently unclear and contradictory. We social workers need to be aware of the discursive effects of gay male partner abuse and critically examine how they impose certain assumptions on us. Instead of seeking a “true” experience of partner abuse, we need to help these men search for meaning within the events that are relevant to them, regardless of how they fit into the normative discourse of gay male partner abuse.