Alesha Durfee

Situational Ambiguity and Gendered Patterns of Arrest for Intimate Partner Violence

Using data from the 2005 National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), this analysis focuses on the impacts that domestic violence mandatory arrest policies have on arrest outcomes in “situationally ambiguous” cases: cases where both the female and male partners have been identified by police as both a victim and an offender. Results indicate that although officers arrest male partners more frequently than female partners, after controlling for incident and individual factors, mandatory arrest policies disproportionately affect women. Furthermore, correlates of arrest differ for male-only arrests versus female-only arrests. These findings are discussed in the context of changing legal responses to domestic violence.

“I’m Not a Victim, She’s an Abuser” Masculinity, Victimization, and Protection Orders

Previous research analyzing masculinity and domestic violence has focused on men’s accounts of the violence they have committed; relatively little research has focused on men’s accounts of victimization. This article critically examines how men negotiate the competing discourses of victimization, hegemonic masculinity, and stereotypes about domestic violence when filing for a domestic violence protection order against a woman partner. Three themes related to gender and victimization emerged from the men’s narratives. First, the men’s descriptions of the violence they had experienced focused on their power and control over their intimate partner. Second, the men described their active resistance to the abuse but were careful to note that their actions were not “abusive” and that they were not the “abusers.” Finally, although most of the men described both verbal and physical abuse, most did not express a fear of their partner. I discuss the results of this analysis in the context of the recent increase in men claiming victimization in a number of realms.

Teaching Sensitive Issues: Feminist Pedagogy and the Practice of Advocacy- Based Counseling

In this paper, we discuss ways in which instructors can assist and empower students in crisis using the Advocacy-Based Counseling (ABC) perspective. This praxis, developed by battered womens advocates to inform their work with survivors of intimate partner violence, emphasizes the importance of listening to students, as well as identifying and addressing safety concerns. We also discuss the necessary limits of the instructors role in these situations, and how to communicate those limits to students.Our discussion begins with some of the reasons students are likely to have problems, covers some of the potential issues raised by teaching about social phenomena in the classroom, and expands to consider a range of sensitive issues. The pedagogy of violence is a useful starting point because of its unfortunate ubiquity. Just as violence respects few boundaries in the social world, instructors in different departments and disciplines are faced with the impacts of violence on their students. The prevalence of violence in society also means that in every class some of our students will be survivors (and perpetrators) of violence, for whom this material may elicit strong reactions. Furthermore, many of the teaching materials we and other instructors use in our courses are inherently emotive, and they often evoke a wide range of responses from students who may have limited personal experience with violence.What are the most productive and sensitive ways to handle this classroom reality? How can we as instructors cultivate a supportive learning environment in which students feel comfortable discussing their reactions to violence in a manner appropriate to the classroom setting? How should this knowledge affect our course design, pedagogical approach, and interactions with students, both in groups and individually? To what extent can or should we modify the traditional instructor/ student relationship to assist students in crisis—and what elements of that relationship should remain unchanged? We explore these questions through an examination of the Advocacy-Based Counseling (ABC) perspective, suggesting strategies that both instructors and administrators can use to better address these situations.

Victim Narratives, Legal Representation, and Domestic Violence Civil Protection Orders

The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between the use of legal representation and domestic violence civil protection order hearing outcomes. In most jurisdictions, the protection order process has been bureaucratized and carefully structured to facilitate access for victims without legal representation; however, results of an analysis of protection order cases indicates that even with “victim-friendly” procedures and forms, individuals without legal representation are significantly less likely to have their requests for protection orders granted. The implications of these findings are discussed in the context of institutional inequalities in the American legal system.

Characteristics Related to Protection Order Use Among Victims of Intimate Partner Violence

One increasingly important resource for victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) is domestic violence civil protection orders (POs). Using a transdisciplinary framework, this article critically examines the use of POs by IPV victims seeking shelter services. Previous contact with police and medical professionals are the strongest predictors of having obtained a PO; education level, income, age, race, and having children in the shelter are also significant predictors of having obtained a PO. These findings are discussed in the context of previous research on help-seeking behaviors and the growing body of transdisciplinary research on violence against women.

Prevalence and correlates of sexual risk among male and female sex workers in Tijuana, Mexico

Abstract We investigated prevalence and correlates of sexual risk behaviours among male and female sex workers in Tijuana, Mexico, the busiest border crossing area on the US – Mexico border, analysing survey data from a purposive, cross-sectional sample of male and female sex workers who worked in a range of indoor and outdoor settings. Logistic regression was used to determine factors that were associated with sexual risk-taking, defined as failing to use a condom with last client. In bivariate regression models, gender, work setting (e.g., indoor vs. outdoor), poverty, engaging in survival sex, marital status and perceived drug addiction were correlated with sexual risk. When controlling for work location, housing insecurity, poverty, survival sex, marital status and perceived drug addiction, male sex workers were still 10 times more likely than female sex workers (FSW) to engage in sex without a condom during their last encounter with a client. And, although FSW were significantly more likely than males to have used a condom with a client, they were significantly less likely than males to have used a condom with their regular partner. Future research should further examine how gender shapes sexual risk activities in both commercial and non-commercial relationships.

Predictors of Workplace Violence Among Female Sex Workers in Tijuana, Mexico

For sex workers, differences in rates of exposure to workplace violence are likely influenced by a variety of risk factors, including where one works and under what circumstances. Economic stressors, such as housing insecurity, may also increase the likelihood of exposure. Bivariate analyses demonstrate statistically significant associations between workplace violence and selected predictor variables, including age, drug use, exchanging sex for goods, soliciting clients outdoors, and experiencing housing insecurity. Multivariate regression analysis shows that after controlling for each of these variables in one model, only soliciting clients outdoors and housing insecurity emerge as statistically significant predictors for workplace violence.

Offense Type and the Arrest Decision in Cases of Intimate Partner Violence

Although previous research has examined arrests for intimate partner violence (IPV), most of these analyses focus exclusively on physical assault and intimidation. Research on arrests for sexual assault have examined arrests for cases of stranger and/or acquaintance sexual assault, but have not included sexual IPV. Using data from the 2010 National Incident-Based Reporting System, this analysis is the first to calculate and compare arrest rates for sexual IPV, physical IPV, and intimidation. Results indicate that after controlling for other factors, police are less likely to make an arrest in cases of sexual IPV than in cases of physical IPV or intimidation. These findings are discussed in the context of the consequences of sexual assault on IPV victims.

Protection Order Use Among Latina Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence

This mixed-methods study examines the impact of immigration status on the ability of Latina survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) to file for and obtain a domestic violence protection order. Undocumented Latinas living in shelters are less likely to know what a protection order is or how to obtain one. At the same time, undocumented Latinas are more likely to believe that their partner would follow an order and that police would arrest their partner for a violation. Latina survivors of IPV live at the nexus of multiple systems of oppression; therefore, understanding their experiences using an intersectional framework is critically important.

Book Review: A Typology of Domestic Violence: Intimate Terrorism, Violent Resistance, and Situational Couple Violence

Michael Johnson’s book addresses an important issue in the study of domestic violence: whether domestic violence is a “unitary phenomenon” or whether there are multiple forms of domestic violence. Using previous research on domestic violence and secondary data, Johnson argues that there are three types of domestic violence: “intimate terrorism,” “violent resistance,” and “situational couple violence.” The introduction and first chapter provide an overview of the three types and use statistics to illustrate the differences between them. The next three chapters explain, in detail, each of the three types of domestic violence. Johnson concludes with a discussion of the implications this typology has for intervention, prevention, and research on domestic violence. Although Johnson’s typology was first proposed in the 1990s, this book makes several valuable contributions to the literature on domestic violence. First, it provides a comprehensive understanding of each of the three forms of violence, adeptly delving into each form’s causes, correlates, and consequences as well as the efficacy of interventions designed to combat domestic violence. Second, Johnson’s typology can be used to better understand the problem of gender symmetry in domestic violence, which has been hotly debated for the past 30 years. Family violence researchers argue that domestic violence is gender symmetrical—men and women are equally likely to both use violence and to be victimized in their intimate relationships. Research by feminist researchers, however, argues that domestic violence is gender asymmetrical—men are far more likely than women to use violence and women are far more likely than men to be victimized by an intimate partner. Each group of researchers has an extensive body of research to support its position. Johnson theorizes that these differences have arisen because each group has studied a different form of domestic violence. He argues that family violence researchers have been studying “situational couple violence” and feminist researchers have been studying “intimate terrorism.”