Difference between revisions of "Intimate partner violence"

From Wiki 4 Men
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
[[Intimate partner violence]] is violence between people that are in an intimate relationship. This is distinct from [[domestic violence]] which can include violence between any two people that live together or are related.
  +
 
It's best to use the term IPV (intimate partner violence) as DV is actually very broad - it can include any people who are related or any people living together even if they are not related. If you want to talk about all DV then men are a clear majority of victims as they are for all violence.
 
It's best to use the term IPV (intimate partner violence) as DV is actually very broad - it can include any people who are related or any people living together even if they are not related. If you want to talk about all DV then men are a clear majority of victims as they are for all violence.
   

Revision as of 12:04, 1 August 2022

Intimate partner violence is violence between people that are in an intimate relationship. This is distinct from domestic violence which can include violence between any two people that live together or are related.

It's best to use the term IPV (intimate partner violence) as DV is actually very broad - it can include any people who are related or any people living together even if they are not related. If you want to talk about all DV then men are a clear majority of victims as they are for all violence.

Women are more likely to have serious injuries as a result of IPV but some recent research suggests that men are more likely to be injured overall.

About half of all IPV is reciprocal with both partners perpetrators and victims. Of non-reciprocal IPV women are perpetrators in about 70% of cases. Injury rates are higher in reciprocal IPV and the difference is greater for women than men.

One of the most significant indicators that a woman will be a victim of IPV is that she is a perpetrator of IPV.

This leads to the inescapable conclusion that any intervention strategy that ignores reciprocal IPV[1] fails women as well as men. [1] This being *all* mainstream (feminist inspired) intervention strategies

FBI data from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s found that for every 100 husbands who killed their wives in the United States, about 75 women killed their husbands.[1]

Research in Houston, Texas found that women were more likely than men to kill their partners or spouses for certain demographics:

Throughout the fifteen-year period of this study, women were over 40 percent of the offenders in lethal domestic assaults. Both victims and offenders in these intimate partner incidents were disproportionately Black. When comparing the sex ratios of killing by racial/ethnic subgroups, Black women were equally (or more) likely than Black men to be the perpetrators of intimate domestic homicide. Among non-Hispanic Whites (including Asians, others), there were 63 female intimate partner homicide offenders for every 100 male offenders. Within the small number of cases involving Hispanic couples, women were much more likely to be the aggressors in intimate partner homicide in the latter time period of this investigation. For both Blacks and Whites women were more likely to be the perpetrators in non-marital dyads.[2]

See Also

External Links

Quote

Defence lawyer, Kristie Bell, told a court the woman had clearly been provoked by discovering her husband of nine years and “his mistress’’ were having an affair.The two alleged victims, who had been standing facing each other when they were allegedly struck by the car in a Wavell Heights street on Friday afternoon, were both taken to hospital, a court heard.Police will allege CCTV captured footage of the wife driving directly at her husband and the other woman, who were left lying on… [3]

But I thought there was no excuse for DV/IPV?

References