This article examines the construction of gender within men's accounts of domestic violence. Analyses of in-depth interviews conducted with 33 domestically violent heterosexual men indicate that these batterers used diverse strategies to present themselves as nonviolent, capable, and rational men. Respondents performed gender by contrasting effectual male violence with ineffectual female violence, by claiming that female partners were responsible for the violence in their relationships and by constructing men as victims of a biased criminal justice system. This study suggests that violence against female partners is a means by which batterers reproduce a binary framework of gender.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bachman, R.
, and L. E. Saltzman. 1995. Violence against women: Estimates from the redesigned survey August 1995. NCJ-154348 special report. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
2.
Bowker, L. H.
1983. Beating wife-beating.Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
3.
Butler, J.
1990. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity.New York: Routledge.
4.
Butler, J.
1993. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex.New York: Routledge.
5.
Campbell, A.
1993. Men, women and aggression.New York: Basic Books.
6.
Collins, P. H.
1991. Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment.New York: Routledge.
7.
Connell, R. W.1992. A very straight gay: Masculinity, homosexual experience, and the dynamics of gender.American Sociological Review57:735-51.
8.
Dobash, R. E.
, and R. P. Dobash. 1979. Violence against wives: A case against the patriarchy.New York: Free Press.
9.
Dobash, R. E.
, and R. P. Dobash.1984. The nature and antecedents of violent events.British Journal of Criminology24:269-88.
10.
Dobash, R. E.
, and R. P. Dobash. 1998. Violent men and violent contexts. In Rethinking violence against women, edited by R. E. Dobash and R. P. Dobash.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
Dobash, R. P.
, R. E. Dobash, M. Wilson, and M. Daly.1992. The myth of sexual symmetry in marital violence.Social Problems39:71-91.
12.
Eaton, M.
1994. Abuse by any other name: Feminism, difference, and intralesbian violence. In The public nature of private violence: The discovery of domestic abuse, edited by M. A. Fineman and R. Mykitiuk.New York: Routledge.
13.
Edwards, R.1990. Connecting method and epistemology: A white woman interviewing Black women.Women's Studies International Forum13 (5): 477-90.
14.
Fagot, B.
, R. Hagan, M. B. Leinbach, and S. Kronsberg.1985. Differential reactions to assertive and communicative acts of toddler boys and girls.Child Development56:1499-1505.
15.
Fine, M.
, L. Weis, J. Addelston, and J. Marusza.1997. (In)secure times: Constructing white working-class masculinities in the late 20th century.Gender & Society11:52-68.
16.
Goffman, E.1977. The arrangement between the sexes.Theory and Society4 (3): 301-31.
17.
Gondolf, Edward W.
, and James Hannekin.1987. The gender warrior: Reformed batterers on abuse, treatment, and change.Journal of Family Violence2:177-91.
18.
Gray, N. B.
, G. J. Palileo, and G. D. Johnson.1993. Explaining rape victim blame: A test of attribution theory.Sociological Spectrum13:377-92.
19.
Hearn, J.
1998. The violences of men: How men talk about and how agencies respond to men's violence against women.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
Island, D.
, and P. Letellier. 1991. Men who beat the men who love them: Battered gay men and domestic violence.New York: Harrington Park.
21.
Jang, D.
, D. Lee, and R. Morello-Frosch. 1998. Domestic violence in the immigrant and refugee community: Responding to the needs of immigrant women. In Shifting the center: Understanding contemporary families, edited by S. J. Ferguson.Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
22.
Kirkwood, C.
1993. Leaving abusive partners: From the scars of survival to the wisdom for change.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
23.
Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J.
, P. Neidig, and G. Thorn.1995. Violent marriages: Gender differences in levels of current violence and past abuse.Journal of Family Violence10:159-76.
24.
Lundgren, E.
1998. The hand that strikes and comforts: Gender construction and the tension between body and symbol. In Rethinking violence against women, edited by R. E. Dobash and R. P. Dobash.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Martin, Del.
1976. Battered wives.New York: Pocket Books.
26.
McCaughey, M.1998. The fighting spirit: Women's self-defense training and the discourse of sexed embodiment.Gender & Society12:277-300.
27.
Messerschmidt, J.
1993. Masculinities and crime: A critique and reconceptualization of theory.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
28.
Messner, M. A.
1992. Power at play: Sports and the problem of masculinity.Boston: Beacon.
29.
Messner, M. A.1998. The limits of the “male sex role”: An analysis of the men's liberation and men's rights movements' discourse.Gender & Society12 (3): 255-76.
30.
Messner, M. A.2000. Barbie girls versus sea monsters: Children constructing gender.Gender & Society14 (6): 765-84.
31.
Pence, E.
, and M. Paymar. 1993. Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model.New York: Springer.
32.
Ptacek, J.
1990. Why do men batter their wives? In Feminist perspectives on wife abuse, edited by K. Yllo and M. Bograd.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
33.
Renzetti, C. M.
1992. Violent betrayal: Partner abuse in lesbian relationships.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
34.
Riessman, C. K.1987. When gender is not enough: Women interviewing women.Gender & Society1 (2): 172-207.
35.
Savran, D.
1998. Taking it like a man: White masculinity, masochism, and contemporary American culture.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36.
Scully, D.
1990. Understanding sexual violence: A study of convicted rapists.Boston: Unwin Hyman.
37.
Straton, J. C.1994. The myth of the “battered husband syndrome.”masculinities2:79-82.
38.
Straus, M. A.
1993. Physical assaults by wives: A major social problem. In Current controversies on family violence, edited by R. J. Gelles and D. R. Loseke.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39.
Walker, L.
1984. The battered woman syndrome.New York: Springer.
40.
West, C.
, and S. Fenstermaker.1995. Doing difference.Gender & Society9:8-37.
41.
Williams, C. L.
, and E. J. Heikes.1993. The importance of researcher's gender in the in-depth interview: Evidence from two case studies of male nurses.Gender & Society7:280-91.
42.
Yllo, K.
1993. Through a feminist lens: Gender, power, and violence. In Current controversies on family violence, edited by R. J. Gelles and D. R. Loseke.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
