This article deals with discourses of intimate partner violence and is based on interviews with professionals who meet violent men. The professionals emphasized the importance of men taking unreserved responsibility for their violent behavior. Intimate partner violence was viewed not only as “power and control” but as the result of complex situations and interplays. The discourses presented an ambivalent explanation of violent men as both ordinary and deviant. They were understood as having a strained background, but to be rather ordinary, often functioning well at work and in society. Yet, they have nonstandard views of women, act deviant in their communication and interplay with others, and cannot cope with certain situations in intimate relationships. Based on the interviews, men inclined to partner violence may be generalized as those who: attack immediately, explode unexpectedly, or ultimately become aggressive. The discussion challenges unreflected discourses as means for change when counteracting violence.
Augoustinos, M., & Walker, I. (1995). Social cognition, an integrated introduction. London: Sage.
2.
Babcock, J.C., Green, C.E., & Robie, C. (2004). Does batterers' treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 23(8), 1023-1053.
3.
Burr, V. (2003). Social constructionism. London : Routledge.
4.
Cascardi, M., Langhinrichsen, J., & Vivian, D. (1992). Marital aggression. Impact, injury, and health correlates for husbands and wives. Archives of Internal Medicine , 152(6), 1178-1184.
5.
Cavanaugh, M.M., & Gelles, R.J. (2005). The utility of male domestic violence offender typologies: New directions for research, policy, and practice. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20(2), 155-166.
6.
Connell, R.W. (1995). Masculinities. Los Angeles : University of California Press.
7.
Dahlgren, L., Emmelin, M., & Winkvist, A. (2004). Qualitative methodology for international public health. Umeå, Sweden: Print and Media.
8.
Dankwort, J. (1994). Counsellors' accounts of wife abuse and their clinical practice: Exploring a controversy. Doctoral dissertation, available through Proquest digital dissertations, University of Montreal , Montreal, Canada.
9.
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (2001). Positioning: The discursive production of self . In M. Wheterell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice, a reader (pp. 261-271). London: Sage.
10.
Edin, K.E., Dahlgren, L., Högberg, U., & Lalos, A. (in press). “The pregnancy put the screws on.” Discourses of professionals working with men inclined to violence. Men and Masculinities.
11.
Edley, N. (2001). Analysing masculinity: Interpretative repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse as data, a guide for analysis (pp. 189-228). London: Sage.
12.
Firestone, M., Harris, R.J., & Vega, W.A. (2003). The impact of gender ideology, male expectancies, and acculturation of wife abuse. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26(5), 549-564.
13.
Fox, K.J. (1999). Changing violent minds: Discursive correction and resistance in the cognitive treatment of violent offenders in prison. Social Problems, 46(1), 88-103.
14.
Gelles, R.J. (2000). Public policy for violence against women: 30 years of successes and remaining challenges. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19(4), 298-301.
15.
Hall, S. (2001). Foucault: Power knowledge and discourse. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice, a reader (pp. 72-81). London : Sage.
16.
Hearn, J. (1998). The violences of men. London: Sage .
17.
Hearn, J. (2000). The hegemony of men: On the construction of counter-hegemony in critical studies on men. In P. Folkesson , M. Nordberg, & G. Smirthwaite (Eds.), Hegemoni och mansforskning, Rapport från nordiska workshopen i Karlstad 19-21 mars 1999 [Hegemony and men's studies. Report from the Nordic Workshop March 19-21 1999] (pp. 17-36). Karlstad: Universitetstryckeriet .
18.
Heise, L.L. (1998). Violence against women: An integrated, ecological framework. Violence Against Women, 4(3), 262-290.
19.
Heise, L., & Garcia-Moreno, C. (2002). Violence by intimate partners. In E. G. Krug, L. L. Dahlberg, J. A. Mercy, A. B. Zwi, & R. Lozano (Eds.), World report on violence and health (pp. 87-122).
20.
Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Meehan, J.C. (2004). Typologies of men who are maritally violent: Scientific and clinical implications. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 19(12), 1369-1389.
21.
Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Stuart, G.L. (1994). Typologies of male batterers: Three subtypes and the differences among them. Psychological Bulletin,116(3), 476-497.
22.
Kimmel, M.S. (1987). Rethinking “masculinity”: New directions in research. In S. Kimmel (Ed.), Changing men: New directions in research on men and masculinity (pp. 9-24). London : Sage.
23.
Kimmel, M.S. (1996). Manhood in America: A cultural history. New York: Free Press.
24.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews, an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Lawson, D.M. (2003). Incidence, explanations, and treatment of partner violence. Journal of Counseling & Development, 81(1), 19-32.
26.
Råkil, M. (Ed.). (2002). Menns vold mot kvinner [Men's violence against women]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
27.
Rothman, E.F., Butchart, A., & Cerdá, M. (2003). Intervening with perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A global perspective. Geneva: World Health Organization.
28.
Starrin, B., Dahlgren, L., Larsson, G., & Styrborn, S. (1997). Along the path of discovery. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
29.
Straus, M.A. (1999). The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis. In X. B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships (pp. 17-44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
Taylor, S. (2001). Locating and conducting discourse analytic research . In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse as data, a guide for analysis (pp. 5-48). London : Sage.
31.
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Extent, nature, and consequences of intimate partner violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
32.
Wheterell, M., Taylor, S. , & Yates, S. J. (Eds.). (2001a). Discourse as data, a guide for analysis. London: Sage.
33.
Wheterell, M., Taylor, S. , & Yates, S. J. (Eds.). (2001b). Discourse theory and practice, a reader. London: Sage.
34.
Zlotnick, C., Kohn, R., Peterson, J., & Pearlstein, T. (1998). Partner physical victimization in a national sample of American families: Relationship to psychological functioning, psychosocial factors, and gender. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 156-166.
