Differences in gender and race in Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) are examined, and it is hypothesized that there are differences in the perception of IPV based on the gender and race of the perpetrator. Men and women perpetrate IPV at similar or higher rates when self-defense is a non-significant motive (Archer, 2000; Costa et al. 2015; Kar & O'Leary, 2010; Richardson, 2005; Robertson & Murachver, 2007; Steinmetz, 1977-1978; Straus & Gozjolko, 2014; Vicario-Molina et al. 2015; Weston, Temple, & Marshall, 2005). Though studies on actual perpetration of IPV show that women perpetrate IPV at similar to higher rates than males, studies on perception of IPV show that men are perceived to perpetrate IPV at higher rates than women and female perpetrated IPV is viewed as less serious than male perpetrated IPV (Carlson & Worden, 2005; Felson, Messner & Hoskins, 1999; Fender & Field, 2009; Fender & Padre, 2005; Hamby & Jackson, 2010; Robertson & Murachver, 2009; Sylaska & Walters, 2014; Terrance, Plumm, & Thomas, 2011). While there is lack of research on perception of IPV based on gender and race of the perpetrator, statistics reveal that Blacks perpetrate IPV at higher rates than Whites; however, more Black men are incarcerated for IPV than White men and more White men are in treatment programs for IPV than Black men. Research also shows that treatment programs for women are designed to treat White women who seek shelter following an IPV incident. We seek to lay a foundation for much needed future research on the perception of IPV, especially when race is included in an effort to promote more effective treatment programs and outcomes for perpetrators of IPV.

This book draws together both: theory and practice on minority/migrant women and gendered violence. The interplay of gender, ethnicity, religion, class, generation and sexuality in shaping the lives, experiences and choices of minority/migrant women affected by violence has not always been adequately theorised within much of the existing writing on violence against women. Feminist theory, especially the insights provided by the concept of intersectionality, are central to the editors’ conceptual frameworks.

What do the Catholic Church, college sports, Hollywood, prisons, the military, fraternities and politics have in common? All have extraordinarily high rates of sexual and intimate partner violence, and child sexual abuse. Sexual and intimate partner violence is part of the landscape that women and children live with. Women and children are subjected to high levels of sexual and intimate partner violence and in the era of #metoo, Gender, Power and Violence provides a nuanced analysis of the ways in which the organizational structure of an institution, like a college campus or Hollywood, can create an environment ripe for sexual and intimate partner violence and even child sexual abuse. Gender, Power, and Violence looks at the problem of sexual and intimate partner violence through cases, observing the role that institutions play in perpetuating gender based violence, and provide a better understanding about the ways in which institutional structures shape, or have mishandled, gender based violence. Angela J. Hattery and Earl Smith touch on current events that have highlighted the pervasiveness of gender based violence across the institutions they interrogate throughout the book, but also in the entertainment industry, the government, and television journalism. Gender, Power, and Violence gives the reader a better understanding of what factors shape who will be perpetrators, who will be victims, and how organizations respond (or not) when it is reported. It also offers recommendations for transforming these institutions so that they are safe for women and children of all genders.

The history of the challenges faced by women of all races in the Crescent City

Draws from interviews with forty women to examine how African-American women contend with intimate partner abuse, and looks at the extent of domestic violence against African-American women.

This anthology explores a wide range of violence that commonly occurs in families and between intimates. Many articles offer a feminist perspective that addresses the gendered nature of violence and the consequences of power inequality in our society. A variety of violence topics are included: child abuse, incest, violence in heterosexual dating relationships, violence in gay and lesbian relationships, acquaintance rape, wife abuse and wife rape, and elder abuse.

This dissertation addressed the following research questions: Given that intimate partner violence is an expression of masculine power and control, how is this expression mitigated and/or aggravated by race and class differences? Are the cultural contexts used to justify the abuse different? Specifically, do the structural factors identified by the abusive men as contributing to intimate partner violence differ by race and class? Recent scholarship has challenged the primacy of gender as the pre-eminent explanatory factor in explaining intimate partner violence. This dissertation addresses this omission by examining how the construction of gender is impacted by race and class as demonstrated through men's accounts of intimate partner violence. The findings of this study are based on semi-structured interviews with fifty men currently receiving treatment for intimate partner violence. In order to qualify for the study, the men had to be enrolled in treatment for less than a month at the time of the interview. Of the fifty men who were interviewed for this research project, twenty-seven of the men were Black, twenty-two of the men were White and one man was Hispanic. I purposefully attempted to have comparable numbers of White and Black men in my sample due to the lack of Black men's participation in previous intimate partner violence research. Analysis of these interviews employed an Ecological Nested Model as the guiding theoretical framework. Currently there is a call for culturally sensitive treatment programs to increase the successful completion of treatment by men of color. Those suggestions rarely move beyond suggesting having a minority program director. The challenges to develop culturally sensitive treatments are real and much more complex than simply placing a different program director at the helm. Further, these differences in how and why men engage in intimate partner violence are not just reflective of race, but also of class and age. This research has suggested a number of policy recommendations that would allow program directors to tailor their treatment plans to account for such diversity, and to use the Ecological Nested Model as a way to better recognize those differences. While acknowledging race and class differences, these recommendations move beyond calling for a change in program director by race and allow for treatment that is culturally sensitive and thus hopefully more effective in understanding intimate partner violence and preventing future occurrences.