Gendered archetypes : social worker’s constructions of victims and perpetrators of intimate partner

(1)

Gendered Archetypes:

Social worker’s constructions of victims and perpetrators of intimate partner

abuse

Master’s thesis in Sociology, track Gender, Sexuality, and Society Supervisor: Marci Cottingham, Ph.D.

Second supervisor: Dr. Marie-Louise Janssen June 30 2016, University of Amsterdam Wordcount: 16.954

(2)

(3)

Acknowledgements

I want to thank both Marci Cottingham and Marie-Louise Janssen for their pleasant and helpful feedback, guidance, and suggestions, which made this thesis possible.

Also a big thank you to all my participants and all the people who have helped me to get into contact with participants. I highly appreciate that you have taken the time and made the effort to help me with this study.

(4)

(5)

1. Introduction

The April issue of one of The Netherlands biggest women’s lifestyle magazines, Linda. (2016), was all focused on the theme of domestic violence. This April issue and some of its reactions to it, give insight in the complexity surrounding domestic violence and intimate partner abuse (IPA)1. Shantie Singh (2016) wrote an opinion piece in national newspaper De Volkskrant in response to this April issue, in which she goes into a certain aspect that is put forward in the Linda. She writes about the generally surprised reaction of people when they are confronted with ‘strong women’ that also fell victim2 to an abusive partner (Singh, 2016). This surprise goes to show that people do not expect people who are considered strong in their public life, as possible victims. Being strong is considered to be in contrast of being a victim. However, being ‘strong’ is usually also described as a typically masculine trait (Durfee, 2011), which could make the possibility of men as victims of IPA more difficult to fathom. Although the April issue of the Linda. is mainly focused on women (its target audience is also women), it does go into men who fell victim to their women partners as well. In an item called:”Whacking with the Swiffer3” (Linda., 2016), six men talk about their experiences with abusive opposite-sex partners. Men as victims are also briefly mentioned in other articles in the magazine but they appear to be an afterthought, merely mentioned in between brackets.

Women are seen as the primary victims of IPA. Notions of masculinity and femininity heavily influence these views of men and women and their role in IPA. Men who are victims of IPA are often overlooked and are less likely to seek help (Dutton & Nicholls, 2005; Tsui, Cheung & Leung, 2010, Zverina, Stam & Babis-Wagner, 2011). For men victims to be treated as an afterthought in a lifestyle magazine can both be a reflection of- and shape public attitudes towards IPA. But if men victims of IPA are also treated as an afterthought by the people who should be providing the counseling and services often needed by people affected by IPA, this surely is a more serious problem.

During my 10-month internship for my social work degree in 2011, I worked

1

Although Linda. uses the term ‘domestic violence’, this issue is mainly focused on IPA which is a form of domestic violence, while domestic violence is an overarching term that, aside from IPA, can also include: child abuse, elderly abuse or honor related violence, among other forms of violence.

2_{I acknowledge that some people prefere to use the word ‘survivor’ because it implies more agency}

than the word ‘victim’. However I use the term ‘victim’ throughout instead, because in the Dutch language it is uncommon to refer to people who have been in abusive relationships as ‘survivors’.

(8)

as an ambulatory counselor for people with intellectual disabilities. One of my clients was referred to our organization because of IPA between her and her (opposite-sex) partner. An argument had gotten out of hand and she had cut her partner. What is interesting about this situation is that several people, all professionals, presented with the same information, had varying views on who the perpetrator and/or victim were in this scenario. But even though the man in the relationship was the one who was injured, nobody, including myself, seemed to consider the possibility that he was solely a victim. For me at the time, his possible ‘pure’ victimhood did not cross my mind, it was not even an afterthought. Most people, including myself, seemed to think that he must have provoked the cut in some way or another. The couple themselves also expressed that the violence in this incident had been mutual. Nevertheless I cannot help but wonder what the situation would have been like if the roles had been reversed. If the woman in this scenario had been cut, would I assume that she probably provoked it in some way? And if she had insisted that the violence had been mutual, would I have believed her or would I have thought that she had only been saying that in order to protect her partner?

In cases like this, the professionals involved can come from different disciplines or organizations. People may have been educated differently on domestic violence, and IPA in particular, than others. They may also have different experiences regarding IPA, either professionally or personally. People’s own gender and their perceptions of men and women, and masculinity and femininity may influence their judgment. These are questions that can be raised about any interaction between social workers and clients who have been affected by IPA. These considerations form the basis for my main research question: How do social

workers use notions of gender to construct an archetype of victims and perpetrators of intimate partner abuse?

I base my definition of IPA on the definition of the Dutch government of IPA because this definition informs all legislation and policy, which is the context in which social workers interact with clients. The definition is as follows: ”Partner abuse is every form of repeated violence (physical, sexual, mental, or economical) between adult partners who form a household or between ex-partners4” (Huiselijkgeweld.nl, 2016). I include emotional abuse in the category of mental abuse. I will also include non-cohabiting romantic partners in my definition of IPA.

4_{Partnergeweld is iedere vorm van herhaaldelijk geweld (fysiek, seksueel, psychisch of economisch)}

(9)

The definition of gender I will use is based on West and Zimmerman’s (1987) definition of gender: “Gender [..] is the activity of managing situated conduct in light of normative conceptions of attitudes and activities appropriate for one’s sex category” (West & Zimmerman, 1987, p. 127). One’s sex category is defined by whether people are perceived to be a man or a woman (Ibid, p. 127). So in this research gender is the enactment of masculinities and femininities.

Although other human service professionals are also likely to come across clients/patients affected by IPA, I focus on social workers specifically. This is because of all human service professions social workers provide the most social services across a life span (Brekke, 2012, p. 455). I define social work based on the global definition of social work, as formulated by the International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW); “Social work is a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that promotes social change and development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people” (IFSW.org, 2016). I will only focus on the practice-based professionals, because these are the people who actively work and interact with people affected by IPA. Social work focuses on “problem solving in human relationships and promoting interpersonal and social harmony” (Anastas, 2014, p. 571) this makes it an appropriate service for people affected by IPA.

The following sub-questions guide the research and help answer the main research question:

1. How are social workers informed/educated about IPA and gender?

2. How could the views of social workers on masculinity and femininity influence their judgment on who is the victim and who is the perpetrator in a situation of IPA?

3. How could the views of social workers on masculinity and femininity influence their counseling?

4. How does heteronormativity play into all this?

The aim of this research is to gain insight into how ideas of masculinity and femininity influence social worker’s constructions of victims and perpetrators of IPA. Extensive research on this specific topic is lacking. Research focused on IPA in relation to gender, often suggests than men use violence towards their (often opposite-sex) partner as way to reassure their masculinity (Anderson & Umberson, 2001, p. 374; DeKeseredy & Schwartz, 2005, p. 357; Sabo, 2005, p. 335). It is also known that the archetypical victim is a woman (Åkerström, Burcar & Wästerfors, 2011) and that women are seen as incapable of using violence (Hassouneh & Glass, 2008, p. 311). In the light of these assumptions, is becomes more difficult to acknowledge dynamics other than the woman-victim man-perpetrator dynamic.

(10)

Other dynamics can be opposite-sex relationships in which the woman is abusive towards the man and abusive same-sex relationships involving two women or two men. Typical notions of masculinity and femininity may push these other dynamics to the background. Researching how social workers use these notions of masculinity and femininity in the construction of archetypes of victims and perpetrators of IPA will add to theories on gender and IPA and help to give insight into the taken-for-grantedness of certain dynamics in IPA. Also it will add to the knowledge about how ideas of gender and IPA are constructed, as well as maintained. This will impact the services that are provided for people affected by IPA because it can help shed light on limited views that are informed by gender.

First I will go into gender in existing theory on IPA and some background information in the Dutch context. Then I will explore the theory of hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity, and heteronormativity, which will be used to analyze the results. In chapter 4 I will go into the ways in which social workers are educated about gender and IPA. Chapter 5 goes into how ideas about gender influence their judgment of victims and perpetrators of IPA and how these ideas influence their counseling in general. In chapter 6 I will go into heteronormativity in social work, followed by the concluding section with recommendations.

(11)

2. Empirical and theoretical background

2.1. Intimate partner abuse

2.1.1. Gender (a)symmetry

A lot of previous research has been done on the topic of domestic violence, including on IPA. The previous research can be divided into two major perspectives; the feminist perspective and the family violence perspective, both with their own research methods and outcomes. One of the main differences in outcomes between studies conducted in these perspectives, are their results on gender (a)symmetry in IPA (Kimmel, 2002). If there is an even distribution of men and women for both perpetrators and victims of IPA, this is called gender symmetry. In the case of gender asymmetry one gender, most often men, are overrepresented in the category of perpetrators and the other gender, women, overrepresented in the category of victims. Obviously these studies and their different outcomes on gender (a)symmetry are only focused on opposite-sex relationships and do not take same-sex relationships into account.

Researchers in the feminist perspective argue that men who abuse their women partners are far more common than the other way around, if women use violence towards men at all (Dobash, Dobash, Wilson & Daly, 1992; Stark & Flitcraft, 1996). In this way they claim gender asymmetry in IPA, with men as the main perpetrator. The main argument that is used by feminist researchers of IPA to explain why the majority of perpetrators are men, is that ‘wife battering’ is used by men as a way to maintain control over their wives. According to this logic all abuse is rooted in patriarchy. In any instances where women use violence against their partner, it is argued that this violence is self-defense to protect themselves from their violent partner (Anderson, 1997; Johnson, 1995; Kelly & Johnson, 2008). However studies on the motivations of people to perpetrate violence against their partner, show that all reasons to commit violence are similar for both men and women. Women use self-defense no more or less than men do (Elmquest et al., 2016, p. 189; Strauss, 2009, p. 247). The studies that show men as the main perpetrators and women as the main victims of IPA often draw their data from hospital and police records and find their respondents or participants in women’s shelters or service programs for (men) perpetrators (Anderson, 1997; Johnson, 1995, 2006). The validity of research based on this kind of data can be questioned (Dutton & Nicholls, 2005). These studies seem to measure the differences in help-seeking behaviors between men and women, instead of occurrence of domestic violence and the gender (a)symmetry of perpetrators and victims of IPA. Especially when taking into account that men are known to

(12)

underreport relationship problems (Anderson, 1997, p. 657) and the fact that men seek less help than women (Tsui et al., 2010), this kind of research does not seem to be representative. It must be noted that men often cause greater injury to their partner than women do, which could explain some of the difference in outreach to (medical) services (Strauss, 2009, p. 246). The findings of feminist researchers contradict the findings of researchers in the family violence perspective. Family violence researchers conclude that in opposite-sex relationships men and women partake or initiate violence towards their partner roughly as often (Dutton & Nicholls, 2005; Stets & Straus, 1990; Straus & Gelles, 1986; Tsui, 2014). Through this claim, they suggest gender symmetry in IPA. They argue that men victims of IPA are often overlooked because of men’s own reluctance to identify their partner’s aggression as a form of abuse (Steinmetz, 1977, p. 504). Women victims also get more attention and recognition because women generally seem to suffer greater physical consequences of abuse (Steinmetz, 1977, p. 504; Stets & Straus, 1990, p. 152; Strauss, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000, p. 154; Van der Veen & Bogaerts, 2010, p. 60). Studies that show that men and women perpetrate IPA roughly as often as each other, explain this by sociodemographic factors and power differences (Anderson, 1997; Merrill, 1996) or psychopathology (Dutton & Nicholls, 2005). Family violence research often draws their population from the general public through random selection (Anderson, 1997; Johnson, 1995, 2006). Strauss and Gelles (1986) also focused on the committing of partner violence, instead of only victimhood (p. 467). Their study showed that women use violence towards their partner as often as men used violence (Ibid, pp. 470-471).

The different outcomes of these studies can be traced back to the research methods that have been used and the population that was chosen to draw their respondents or participants from. This goes to show that the researchers choices in methods can color or bias the results to a certain political belief. These different claims regarding gender (a)symmetry between feminist researchers and family violence researchers, has implications for acknowledging people other than women in opposite-sex relationships as possible victims of IPA. The findings of these different studies have not been without consequences. Earlier studies on IPA, which mostly claimed gender asymmetry, have “guided policy, law, education, and interventions to date” (Kelly & Johnson, 2008, p. 476). Because the feminist studies have been used as the basis for so many services that are being provided for victims of IPA, the majority of services is focused on women who fall victim to IPA in an opposite-sex relationship. This pushes women who become victims in same-sex relationships and all men, both in same-sex and opposite-sex relationships to the background (Calton, Cataneo &

(13)

Gebhard, 2015, p.4; Parry & O’Neal, 2015, p. 52; Simpson & Helfrich, 2007, p. 40). 2.1.2. Different types of violence

Johnson (1995, 2006) has a different explanation for the discrepancy between the feminist perspective and the family violence perspective. According to him family violence and feminist researchers are researching two different phenomena; patriarchal terrorism and

common couple violence (Johnson, 1995, pp. 284, 285). Patriarchal terrorism is systematic

violence and control that is rooted in patriarchy and it is perpetrated by men against their women partners (Ibid, p. 284). Common couple violence is an occasional outburst of violence, which can be perpetrated by men as well as by women (Ibid, p. 285). Using this division, feminist researchers are focused on patriarchal terrorism while family violence researchers are researching common couple violence. In later work these categories were refined by also including the behavior of the partner (Johnson, 2006, p. 1006). These four new categories are intimate terrorism, violent resistance, situational couple violence, and mutual

violent control (Ibid). The categories are based on the aspects of control and violence in a

relationship (Johnson, 2010, p. 6). Intimate terrorism takes place when one partner is violent and controlling towards a partner that is not (Ibid, p. 1003). Johnson left out the term ‘patriarchal’ because even though he states that most intimate terrorism is rooted in patriarchy, intimate terrorism does not need to be a result of patriarchy (Ibid, p. 1015). In violent resistance someone is violent but not controlling, in reaction to a partner that is both violent and controlling. In situational couple violence one partner is violent for the moment, but there is no structural or systematic violence. When both partners are violent and controlling, it is mutual violent control (Ibid, p. 1003). Johnson states that intimate terrorism and violent resistance, in opposite-sex relationships, are both gendered, with men being the perpetrators of intimate terrorism far more often than women and women reacting to that in violent resistance far more often than men. Situational couple violence and mutual violent control are both less gendered, with men and women in opposite-sex relationships perpetrating this type of violence at the same rate (Ibid, p. 1010). The category of separation-instigated violence can be added to these four categories. Separation-separation-instigated violence is violence that occurs after a relationship has ended while there was no violence in the relationship when they were still together. In an opposite-sex relationship this type of violence is perpetrated by men as often as by women (Kelly & Johnson, 2008, p. 487).

Johnson argues that the different outcomes in studies on the gender distribution of opposite-sex IPA are based on these categories. However it should be taken into account that

(14)

also the gender differences within these categories may be a result of the lack of acknowledgement of men victims who are abused by their women partners. This lack of acknowledgement can start by the men themselves who do not see their relationship as abusive (Dutton & Nicholls, 2005), but can also be a result of the lack of acknowledgement of professionals involved with IPA.

2.1.3. Dutch research

Dutch research on domestic violence, including but not limited to IPA, can be situated within the family violence perspective and the feminist perspective. The first overarching research on domestic violence focusing on the entire Dutch population was commissioned by the Dutch ministry of Justice and conducted by Van Dijk, Flight, Oppenhuis and Duessman in 1997. For this research interviews were conducted with participants from a random sample. This study shows that both men and women fall victim to domestic violence at equal rates, but that women suffer greater injuries as a result of this violence (Van Dijk et al., 1997, p. 50). At first glance this study seems fit in with the family violence perspective described above. However this study used a broad definition of domestic violence, which, aside from IPA, also included other forms of abuse such as child abuse and honor related violence. No real assumptions about the gender distribution of IPA in opposite-sex relationships can be made of the basis of this research.

In 2010 a new study commissioned by the ministry of Justice came out, again using the broad definition of domestic violence. It consisted of three sub-studies that were supervised by Van der Veen and Bogaerts (Van der Veen & Bogaerts, 2010, p. 9). One of the sub-studies used police reports as data (Ibid, p. 64) and showed that about 70% of perpetrators are men and 30% are women (Ibid, p. 66). The second sub-study used a random sample focused on victims (Ibid, pp. 73-74), this showed that about 40% of victims are men and 60% are women (Ibid, p. 66). While the third sub-study focused on perpetrators, who were reached through probation offices (Ibid, p. 101) and showed that 97% of perpetrators were men and 3% were women (Ibid, p. 105). This synthesized study acknowledges problems of over- and underreporting of certain groups and uses Johnsons terms intimate terrorism and situational couple violence in differentiating between types of violence (Ibid, p. 58, 62). This study also shows that men are overrepresented as perpetrators of IPA in the form of intimate terrorism and women perpetrate intimate terrorism significantly less than they perpetrate other forms of domestic violence (Ibid, p. 116). Same-sex relationships are not specifically mentioned in this study. The combination of these three sub-studies is the most recent larger empirical research

(15)

that has been done in the Netherlands on the topic of domestic violence.

Due to its synthesizing nature and the combination of different methods and respondent groups, it produces results that overlap both the family violence perspective as well as the feminist perspective. It is important to look into empirical research that has been done in the Netherlands, because this type of research is often used to base policy on, or to legitimate policy with (Peper, 1998, pp. 46, 52). The fact that these studies were commissioned by the Dutch ministry of Justice, also shows this clear link between policy and research. This is an important link because the types of victims and perpetrators of IPA (or domestic violence in general in these cases) that are being put forwards in these studies, also inform policy. Dutch policy on domestic violence is formulated in gender-neutral terms.

2.2. Sexuality and gender 2.2.1. Heteronormativity

All of these studies concerning gender (a)symmetry in IPA are heteronormative in that they do not go into violence within same-sex relationships and the additional problems people who are affected by IPA in same-sex relationships face. I define heteronormativity as: “[The] institutionalized, normative heterosexuality [that] regulates those kept within its boundaries as well as marginalizing and sanctioning those outside them.” (Jackson, 2006, p. 105). I define heteronormativity as something different than, although related to, the concept of homophobia. Where heteronormativity sees opposite-sex relationships as superior and normal, homophobia goes a step further and also includes a fear, hatred, discomfort, and dislike of gay people (Bergman & Zinberg, 1997, p. 320; Brownlee et al., 2005, p. 486). Heteronormativity reaffirms a strict man-woman gender binary by reaffirming the hegemony of heterosexual, thus clear opposite-sex relationships (Jackson, 2006; Nielsen, Walden & Kunkel, 2000; Schilt & Westbrook, 2009). The LGBT community has had to struggle to get recognition for IPA within same-sex relationships (Elliot, 1996, p. 6), partially because of the prevalence of the feminist perspective within research on IPA (Parry & O’Neal, 2015, p. 52). The existence of IPA within same-sex relationships undermines the idea that men can only be perpetrators and women can only be victims of IPA (Elliot, 1996, p. 6). This goes to show that IPA is not necessarily an issue rooted in gender, but more likely rooted in power dynamics (Elliot, 1996, p. 3; Merrill, 1996, p. 13). Heteronormativity reaffirms gender roles and how people are socialized within these gender roles. Who can be perceived as a victim

(16)

and who can be perceived as a perpetrator is influenced by these gender roles (Brown, 2008, p. 458). By acknowledging abuse in same-sex relationships, gender based explanations of IPA get challenged which would make the recognition of men as victims and women as perpetrators, in both same-sex and opposite-sex relationships easier.

Even though IPA is as much, if not more, a problem in same-sex relationships as it is in opposite-sex relationships (Elliot, 1996, p. 3: Merrill, 1996, p.10; Parry & O’Neal, 2015, p. 52), people affected by it in same-sex relationships do face additional circumstances that are specific to IPA in same-sex relationships (Balsam & Szymanski, 2005, p. 259). There are four major misconceptions about IPA in same-sex relationships, according to Merrill (1996). All four of these misconceptions are based on assumptions about gender. The first is that men are the aggressors and perpetrators of IPA and therefor it would be logical for gay men to be abusive, whereas IPA for lesbian women would not exist. A second misconception is that IPA in same-sex relationships is not as serious or severe as when a woman is abused in an opposite-sex relationship. There is also the misconception that all abuse in same-sex relationships must be mutual. Lastly it is assumed that abuse in same-sex relationships has the same dynamic as men abusing women in opposite-sex relationships, in which the femme is beaten by the butch (Merrill, 1996, p. 12). It is clear that these ideas are based on a stereotypical view of gender in IPA in which mainly men are perpetrators and women are victims.

People in abusive same-sex relationships are more reluctant to seek out help and also experience more barriers in reaching services than women in opposite-sex relationships do (Chan, 2005; Parry & O’Neal, 2015; Simpson & Helfrich, 2007). Due to homophobia, people in same-sex relationships may be less outspoken about their relationship. This increased isolation makes it less likely for their friends or family notice something is wrong and step in (Chan, 2005, p. 4). People that experience IPA in their same-sex relationship may also be reluctant to seek help from the police or other services, such as social work, because they may have experienced homophobia with similar organizations in the past (Ibid, p. 6) or because the services are targeted at heterosexual women only (Simpson & Helfrich, 2007, p. 41). In line with the misconception that same-sex IPA must be mutual (Merrill, 1996), people are reluctant to report the abuse, in fear of being accused of abuse themselves or not being believed (Chan, 2005, p. 5; Greenberg, 2011, p. 232; Simpson & Helfrich, 2007). Another consideration to not seek help for members of the LGBT community who are affected by IPA would be because they do not want to bring any negative attention to an already marginalized group, or out of fear of being ostracized by their local community (Chan, 2005, p. 5;

(17)

Crenshaw, 1997, p. 179; Elliot, 1996, p. 6). 2.2.2. Masculinities & Femininities

It is important to look into masculinities and femininities because these notions may inform policy on IPA, as well as shape the ideas of people who implement this policy (social workers) and people who are affected by IPA themselves. Men victims of IPA might experience being victimized as emasculating (Hines & Malley-Morrison, 2001; Steinmetz, 1977). The influence of notions of masculinity is also described by Tsui et al. (2010): “Men’s help seeking behaviors have been largely influenced by societal perceptions toward gender differences that overemphasize men’s physical capability to repel abuse, as well as societal expectations toward men’s financial and physical ability to resolve their own issues” (p. 769). This does not only count for men in opposite-sex relationships, but also for men in same-sex relationships (Oliffe et al., 2014).

These kind of societal perceptions and expectations of men named by Tsui et al. (2010), comply with the concept of hegemonic masculinity as described by Connell and Messerschmidt (2005). The theory of hegemonic masculinity was originally formulated as a reaction to the rather essentialist sex-role theory, which failed to explain why so many men did not live up to their ascribed sex-role (Carrigan, Connell & Lee, 1987). Connell (1987) used the notion of hegemonic masculinity to explain the differences between what actual men were like, and what men were expected to be like (p. 184). Hegemony is defined as ”a social ascendancy achieved in a play of social forces that extends beyond contests of brute power into the organization of private life and cultural processes” (Connell, 1987, p. 184). In the theory of hegemonic masculinity, there are different forms of masculinities, which are placed in a hierarchy. Hegemonic masculinity is what is seen as the “most honored way of being a man” (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 832). This hegemonic masculinity also legitimates men’s domination over women (Connell, 2005, p. 77; Pyke & Johnson, 2003, p. 35). Other forms of masculinity are subordinated, complicit, or marginalized masculinities (Connell, 2005, pp. 77-81). Subordinated masculinities are forms of masculinity that are being subordinated by other dominant masculinities; an example of this is the homosexual masculinity that is subordinated by the heterosexual masculinity (Ibid, p. 78). Men, who enact a complicit form of masculinity, do not actively partake in hegemonic masculinity themselves. However they do benefit from hegemonic masculinity and the subordination of women (Ibid, p. 79). Marginalized masculinities are forms of masculinities that are enacted by men in marginalized classes or ethnic groups (Ibid, p. 80). Forms of masculinity that are not

(18)

considered hegemonic are not as clearly defined as hegemonic masculinity. This is because the hegemony of this dominant type of masculinity pushes other forms of masculinity to the background or even unconsciousness. This stops these other types of masculinity from formulating cultural definitions and recognition (Connell, 1987, p. 186).

What is considered a hegemonic form of masculinity may vary in different contexts, is susceptible to change, and can be shaped on different levels (Connell, 1987, p. 183; Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, pp. 840, 835). The local level of hegemonic masculinity takes form in face-to-face interaction and in immediate communities. The regional level takes place on a bigger scale and is at the level of nation-states and politics. The third level of hegemonic masculinity is the global level; this goes beyond the borders of nation-states and is transnational (Ibid, p. 849). These enactments of masculinity (or femininity) can be influenced by other axis of domination such as class and race (Connell, 1987, p. 183; Pyke & Johnson, 2003; Schippers, 2007). Considering this, social workers and clients of social workers may have varying backgrounds and varying conceptions of hegemonic masculinity on a local level. However on a regional level the conceptions of hegemonic masculinity are more likely to be similar. It is important to point out that most men do not fully embody hegemonic masculinity, but it is a form of masculinity they strive for or at least position themselves to (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 832). Durfee (2011) describes the following traits that are often linked with hegemonic masculinity: ”Power, physical strength, aggression, rationality, control, and self-determination” (pp. 317, 218).

Aside from looking at only masculinity is it also important to involve femininity, because the archetype of a victim is closely linked with femininity (Åkerström, Burcar & Wästerfors, 2011). And as Connell and Messerschmidt (2005) put it: “Gender is always relational, and patterns of masculinity are socially defined in contradistinction from some model (whether real or imaginary) of femininity” (p. 848). Another reason why it is important to look into femininity is because it may influence general notions of the possibility of women perpetrating violence against their partner. According to Hassouneh and Glass (2008) women are seen as “innately nonviolent, caretaking and nurturing” (p. 311). These traits go directly against the image of a controlling, and aggressive perpetrator of violence. Motz (2014) names several myths about women and violence, which are all rooted in notions of femininity. One major myth is that women cannot be perpetrators of violence unless they are being coerced by a man. Other myths are that women are “fundamentally passive and gentle” and that only “’mad’ women are violent” (p. 268).

(19)

For Connell and Messerschmidt (2005), the feminine equivalent of hegemonic masculinity is emphasized femininity. They choose not to use the term ‘hegemonic’ for femininity because in a patriarchal society even the most ‘hegemonic’ femininity would still be subordinate to hegemonic masculinity (p. 848). Emphasized femininity focuses on complying with the needs of men and this way contributing to legitimating patriarchy (Schippers, 2007, p. 87). Some do argue there is such a thing a hegemonic femininity (Pyke & Johnson, 2003; Schippers, 2007). Pyke and Johnson (2003) describe how Asian-American women value white-American femininity over Asian femininity. This way white-American femininity can be seen as a hegemonic form of femininity. However, they do describe a significant difference between hegemonic masculinity and their idea of hegemonic femininity; ”Whereas hegemonic masculinity is a superstructure of domination, hegemonic femininity is confined to power relations among women” (Pyke & Johnson, 2003, p. 51). The differences among white-American femininity and Asian-American femininity can be explained with the racial dimension in establishing hegemony. Both white-American women and Asian-American women may have less of an influence on establishing institutionalized power than men, but Asian-American women have even less influence than white-American women. These different forms of masculinities and femininities and the hierarchy among them, may influence the help-seeking behaviors of people affected by IPA and what kind of information they disclose to social workers because they may want to fit into certain categories of masculinity or femininity. It may also influence how social workers interpret information about the abuse, and what kind of service they may provide for their clients because their assessment of the situation may be informed by gendered archetypes.

(20)

3. Methods

To find answers to the questions posed earlier, about the use of gender in the construction of social workers of archetypes of victims and perpetrators of IPA, semi-structured interviews have been conducted with social workers who have experience with clients who are affected by IPA (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2004, p. 3). These interviews can give insight into their perceptions and understandings (Bryman, 2012, p. 470). In the interviews I focused on how these social workers view victims and perpetrators of domestic violence, what kind of characteristics they name and how gender plays into these views. Interview participants may have had a different definition of gender than I described earlier. In the interviews I listened to what genders they ascribed to people in the pronouns they used and the words ‘woman’ and ‘man’ to describe someone. To describe a masculine man and a feminine women was also part of the interview guide, to get insight into what the participants considered masculine and feminine. I also focused on what techniques they use to gain insight into such a private matter of clients. The final interview guide that I have used in included in appendixes I and II (English and Dutch). The questions in the guide functioned as a directive in the interview conversations.

I reached my participants through a purposive sampling in the form of a snowball sampling (Ibid, pp. 418-419). Through personal connections and by contacting social work organizations I have reached social workers that professionally come into contact with clients who are affected by IPA. Most of the participants have been reached through personal connections. In April 2016 a total of 17 interviews have been conducted, however one of the interviews could not be used in this study due to a lack of experience with clients who were affected by IPA of the participant. The group of participants consisted of 11 women and 5 men, in ages ranging from 23 years old to 64 years old. The years of experiences of working as a social worker ranged from one year to 32 years. These social workers worked for varying organizations. Six of these organizations were specifically to service people affected by domestic violence, the other ten organizations were open to a broader variety of questions and problems. Out of the sixteen participants one participant worked in an involuntary setting of social work. All interviews were transcribed and made anonymous; the names used throughout this study are pseudonyms.

The data has been analyzed based on the grounded theory method. Due to the short time frame in which all the interviews took place, there was little overlap between the interviewing, transcribing and coding stages of the analysis. However the concept of constant

(21)

comparison has been applied by going back into the data while making the analysis and writing the results (Ibid, p. 568). This way I could check whether my analysis was consistent with the data and if I had missed certain aspects. In the analysis two rounds of coding have been done. For the first round of coding, I used open-coding, by deriving codes from the data instead of using preconceived concepts or categories as codes and applying them to the data. (Ibid, p. 569). For the second round of coding I based my strategy on axial-coding. Axial-coding is when connections between categories are being made with Axial-coding, shedding light on patterns, context, causes, and consequences (Ibid). In the second round of coding I did not want to close of any categories yet. I used axial-coding as an explorative tool that helped me lift the analysis to a more abstract level. An overview of the code groups and codes used in the second round of coding and their definitions is included in appendix III. While writing the results, I did go back into the data to check and confirm ideas and patterns that came up. This way I was able to form coding categories that lead to concepts and themes (for example various ways of consulting with colleagues) and this way I found patterns in the data which a described in the results (Saldaña, 2003, p. 12). I ended the coding process when I had reached theoretical saturation and no new themes came up anymore (Bryman, 2012, p. 268).

To ensure the quality of my research, I have used Yardley’s (2000, as described in Bryman, 2012) criteria of sensitivity to context; commitment and rigour; transparency and coherence; and impact and importance (p. 393). I have kept these criteria in mind during any decision making of this study.

(22)

4. Getting informed about gender and intimate partner abuse

The perceptions social workers have about gender in the dynamics of IPA and its victims and perpetrators, are influenced by how they are informed about IPA in general. Social workers are informed in numerous ways: during their formal education; in education and training during their working life; through interaction with other professionals and colleagues, and by images that exist about IPA in society at large.

4.1. Formal education

When social workers were asked about their formal education and to what extent IPA was a part of this education, most social workers acknowledged that some attention had been given to domestic violence as a whole. It must be noted that for most participants their memories of their formal education had been blurred over time. Most of them remember there being some sort of course concerning domestic violence, but are unsure about what exactly had been taught in that class and to what extent their current knowledge of IPA had been based on that course, or was a result of other learning opportunities or their work experience. Those who do have clear memories of their formal education note several things about this.

“It is an enormously broad education, so everything gets some attention, like a true ‘generalist,’ you know a little about everything.5” - Laura, 33, 2 years of

experience

The first one being that for their degree, social workers are being trained to be ‘generalists’, as opposed to ‘specialists’ in specific fields in social work, for example domestic violence. Because the profession of social work can entail so many different things and people can work with such a broad variety of clients, the goal of the education is to inform social workers on as many of these aspects as possible. The inevitable result of this being that it leaves little room for specialization. This leads some social workers to believe that too little attention is being paid to IPA in the formal education. This could be because they felt domestic violence took up too small of a part in the entire curriculum, as explained by Mark.

5_{“het is natuurlijk een enorme brede opleiding, dus alles krijgt een beetje aandacht, als een echte}

(23)

“That is relatively little, for an education of four years, while in practice you come across it [IPA] quite a lot, but your antennas, so to speak, are not really being developed during the education6_{” – Mark, 32, 2 years of experience}

Mark shows that there is some disbalance in how much attention is being given to domestic violence and IPA in the formal curriculum and how often he comes across cases related to domestic violence or IPA in his work. The social workers that could recall their formal education, noted they had had either no courses on it at all or only one. Others noted that the course on domestic violence had mainly been focused on child abuse, with as a result of this IPA being pushed to the background. This is expressed by Michael while reflecting on the role of IPA in his formal education.

“The focus was on child abuse, it [IPA] was really sidelined7”- Michael, 31, 4 years of experience

When there is relatively little attention being paid to IPA in the formal education and there is little room for specialization, education runs the risk of being superficial. IPA is a very complicated issue that concerns many different aspects, such as gender and sexuality, but also aspects such as mental health, and finances, among others (Anderson, 1997; Dutton & Nicholls, 2005; Merrill, 1996). These different aspects and their complexity ask for a nuanced approach. If there is no room for specialization, it is likely that the curriculum falls back on the most dominant visions on IPA. These most dominant visions are still based on the original studies done by researchers in the feminist perspective and focus on women as victims and men as perpetrators of IPA in opposite-sex relationships. There is barely any room for criticism on the assumptions regarding gender in these dominant theories, in the curriculum. This way social work students are likely to assume these same assumptions about masculinity and femininity and how they relate to IPA, and while using this assumption they will reaffirm them.

Of course the official curriculum and what courses are being thought, with which goals, and which books are being used in those four years of training can be made relatively objective. However, the person teaching a specific course can have a heavy influence on how

6_{“Dat is relatief weinig, terwijl ik denk dat in de praktijk je het [IPA]best wel vaak tegenkomt, alleen}

dat de voelsprieten om het maar zo te zeggen niet echt ontwikkeld zijn in de opleiding” – Mark, 32

7_{“De focus was op kindermishandeling, het [IPA] was echt een ondergeschoven kindje.” – Michael,} 31

(24)

the course is being taught and what students take away from this. This undermines the objectivity of the curriculum; the subjectivity of a teacher can sway either way.

“I think I have been very lucky with the teachers I have had, [..] who gave me a broader outlook8_{” – Mark, 32, 2 years of experience}

What Mark shows here, is that for him, the subjectivity of his teachers have helped him in gaining a broader perspective on IPA, because his teachers added something to the prescribed curriculum, such as an attention to women as perpetrators of IPA and violence within same-sex relationships. A teacher can add criticism on dominant gender notions in IPA and challenge their students to critically assess the taken-for-grantedness of women as the primary victims and men as the primary perpetrators of IPA. This of course works two ways. Depending on the teacher, social work student might not be encouraged to challenge dominant ideas about masculinity and femininity. This again could result in students taken over these assumptions and perpetuating them in their professional careers.

So how does the formal education shape social workers ideas on the role of gender in IPA? In the formal curriculum, it seems there is little attention being paid to it, so it may not influence their already existing ideas on gender in IPA that much. Social work student do not come into their education as a tabula rasa, but they have grown up and been socialized in a society in which a specific form of masculinity is considered hegemonic. Additionally their own family, school, neighborhood, and peer group among other settings also uphold certain forms of masculinity and femininity as favorable. Depending on the curriculum and the teacher these ideas get challenged. Some participants noted that it was mentioned that it could happen to men as well, in which any form of victimhood other than heterosexual women appears to be another afterthought and there appears to be no clear focus on gender symmetry. The subjectivity of teachers can play a huge part in the ideas social work students have developed on gender in IPA. Students need to have been confronted with the different types of dynamics, and possible perpetrators and victims of IPA in their study. So in their future work, they can recognize men as victims and women as perpetrators of IPA in both opposite-sex and same-opposite-sex relationships, because they know it is a possibility. It is unreasonable to expect of people to pick up on something they do not know exists. In their formal education, these antennas, as Mark called them, can be developed or neglected, depending on the

8_{“Ik denk wel dat ik gemazzeld heb met de docenten die ik heb gehad, die mij daardoor, nou, ik denk}

(25)

curriculum and teachers.

Aside from bringing on awareness about different types of dynamics, and victims and perpetrators of domestic violence, the formal education of social work students also plays a part in creating awareness about heteronormativity. This will be explained further in chapter 6.

4.2. Education and training during career

As is the case for many professions, a student can only learn so much in school. Therefore training and education during their further career is also important. Social workers can access further education, information, and training in several ways, depending on the organization and the social worker themself. Tessa emphasizes the importance of further development during a social worker’s career.

“Keep on developing, things also keep on developing. The fact that we have to deal with sexting in a relationship, you will have to anticipate on that, that is not something I learned in school.9” – Tessa, 23, 4 years of experience

Education during one’s career is important for two reasons, the first one is to keep up with an ever changing society, as is seen in the example provided by Tessa. The second one is that it can provide some specialization that was lacking in the formal education. This specialization can be focused on IPA.Some organizations provide mandatory courses on IPA, especially if these organizations themselves are specialized in IPA. Other organizations provide information on IPA (among other subjects) that employees can look up. Some provide very little extra information on subjects such as IPA. If additional training, education, and/or information is being provided by the organization, the effect that this has on the ideas of social workers about gender and IPA of course depends on the type of additional education the organization provides. This further specialization does offer the opportunity to go into the nuances of IPA, gender symmetry in IPA, and how notions of masculinities and femininities play into this.

What someone learns during their career is not only dependent on the training, education and information an organization provides. Many social workers also point out that

9_{“Blijven ontwikkelen, en het blijft ook ontwikkelen, het feit dat je nu weer met sexting te maken hebt}

binnen een relatie. Dat zul je ook weer mee moeten nemen, het is niet wat ik op school heb geleerd.”-

(26)

they search for additional information themselves, like Jacqueline.

“I am very curious myself, so I search for new methods.10_{” – Jacqueline, 63, 8} years of experience

As can be seen in this quote, it takes a certain type of person to go out of their way to search for additional information. Jacqueline is curious and therefore actively searches new information. When it comes to social workers seeking out extra information for themselves, or not, this depends on the individual. Some people will want to learn more about specific topics, such as IPA, while others may be content with the knowledge they currently possess. It also depends on the individual social worker, what type of information they search and what they eventually do with the new information they come across. They might also reject certain information if it does not fit with their ideas of masculinity and femininity.

Of course whatever information is being provided by organizations and how the topic of gender is handled in these courses or trainings, can have as much effect on the views of social workers as their formal education had.

4.3. Learning from colleagues

Another way, in which social workers are informed about IPA during their careers, is through their colleagues. All participants explain that they regularly consult with colleagues about clients and cases, especially when it concerns more difficult or intense cases. Consulting with colleagues can come with varying degrees of satisfaction, ranging from helpful and insightful, to not helping much at all.

“You will learn that in that moment, and colleagues are always very approachable, [..] some colleagues have a lot of experience and you can always spar with them.11” – Anouk, 25, 3 years of experience

Anouk explains that she learns during her work by consulting with colleagues who have more experience with IPA. However, some of the participants felt like they could rely on their

10_{“Ik zelf heel nieuwsgierig ben en erg zoek naar methodieken.” – Jacqueline, 63}

11_{“Dat leer je dan op dat moment en wat dat betreft hier zijn collegas altijd heel toegankelijk [..] in}

dit geval ook wel een aantal collegas die daar wel heel erg veel ervaring in hebben dus daar kan je altijd wel even mee sparren.” –Anouk, 25

(27)

colleagues experience a lot less. This could be due to the new format in which a lot of social work is being provided since the 2015 transition of funds to local municipalities. Local municipalities already got a coordinating responsibility concerning domestic violence in 2007 through Wet Maatschappelijke Ondersteuning (WMO) (Tierolf, Lünnemann & Steketee, 2014, p. 16). The WMO is a law that should provide in citizen’s well being and is organized on a local level within all municipalities (Rijksoverheid.nl, 2016). The role of local municipalities got even bigger due to the 2015 transition, in which several funds which were originally organized on a regional level were transferred to be organized by local municipalities (Tierolf, Lünnemann & Steketee, 2014, p. 17). Due to this transition, in many municipalities new multi-disciplinary teams have been formed, which consist of social workers from different mother-organizations. The members of these teams bring with them their own experience and also training they have had in their organization prior to the formation of the multi-disciplinary teams. Elisa talks about the difference of experience and knowledge she experienced in one of these new teams.

“I did miss a lot [of knowledge] with colleagues, some of them came from elderly care and there is violence as well, but for some reason it is less of a topic of concern.12” – Elisa, 47, 20 years of experience

There are two sides to the difference in experience among members of these new teams, one of them being that social workers with more experience and knowledge can rely less on their colleagues than they did before and a lot of knowledge can get lost. But on the other hand, social workers with less experience and knowledge are provided with an opportunity to expand their knowledge by learning from their new colleagues.

Most participants talk about colleagues having different views on cases of IPA when they discuss these cases with them. However, they point out that these views are not necessarily clashing, but more complementary to each other and a way to account for blind spots of an individual social worker. Especially in cases where there is suspicion of IPA in a relationship, consulting with colleagues can be very helpful, as illustrated by Laura.

“When I get the feeling that I can’t get through, or I feel like it isn’t complete, then I make use of my colleagues. Then I ask my colleagues: Hey, what is it I’m not seeing? Or, I have this certain gut feeling, what can I do with that? They are

12_{“Ik miste wel heel veel bij collega’s, sommige kwamen dan uit de ouderen zorg en daar is ook}

(28)

the ones that give me suggestions and advice.13” – Laura, 33, 2 years of

experience

Laura also mentions gut feelings; oftentimes social workers may have unspecified gut feelings about a situation, or do not know what exactly to make of a situation. When asked to describe warning signs of IPA in contact with clients, many social workers say that it is just a feeling they get, or they just sense something is off. Anouk and Michael show how it can be difficult to pinpoint.

“Some sort of alarm bell goes off. Like, huh? That there is something you can’t quite put your finger on or that is not allowing insight. Like, what is it that is going on? What is taking place?14_{” – Anouk, 25, 3 years of experience}

“Why I felt that something wasn’t right all along, I don’t know.15” – Michael, 31,

4 years of experience

This is very much in line with the ‘antennas’ mentioned by Mark and described earlier. These social workers may not be able to put their finger on what it is exactly, but they are picking up on something. This goes to show how important it is to develop these antennas in such a way that they not only pick up on women as victims in opposite-sex relationships. These antennas need to be developed beyond dominant imagery of IPA, so that alarm bells also start ringing when a client who does not fit the woman-victim man-perpetrator dynamic, is giving off signals of IPA. The vocational profile formulated by the Dutch association for social workers (BPSW) states the following: ”The person of the social worker is his most important tool” (BPSW, 2006, p. 9). This shows how important it is for the individual social worker to expand their personal ideas about masculinity and femininity in a way that enables them to acknowledge all victims and all perpetrators of IPA.

In these scenarios it can be helpful to have a colleague at your side in a way of a second

13

“Als ik zelf het idee heb, ik kom hier niet door heen, of ik heb het idee dat het niet volledig is, dan zet ik mijn collega’s in. Dan vraag ik aan mijn collega’s van: joh, wat mis ik nou of, ik heb een bepaald onderbuik gevoel wat kan ik daar nou mee? En dat zijn eigenlijk dan de gene die mij tips en adviezen geven. “ – Laura, 33

14_{“Er gaat wel een soort belletje rinkelen. Van hè? [Dat] je niet helemaal de vinger op de zere plek}

kan leggen of niet helemaal inzichtelijk is. Van: Wat is er nou allemaal aan de hand? Wat speelt er nou?” – Anouk, 25

(29)

opinion. This can be done in two different ways, it can be a colleague who comes along to appointments and also sees the clients, with who someone can check if they have the same feelings. Or it can be someone completely outside of the situation who can help with a more objective view on the facts that are available, as explained by Melissa.

“Especially in those situations [with unspecified gut feelings] it helps when there is someone who thinks along with you, who isn’t in the case, who doesn’t know all their faces and doesn’t know everything. Because that person can ben concrete and say: ’Ok, so what did you exactly see in their behavior, what is actually there and what are you filling in yourself? And what information would you want to get a clear picture, instead of guessing?’16_{” – Melissa, 26, 1 year of experience}

Consulting with colleagues can be in relatively formal settings such as organized sessions in which colleagues discuss their caseload, or intervision. But it can also be done in a more informal, less organized setting, as described by Iris.

“I give them [colleagues] coffee, I put them in a chair and I say: ’You have to think along with me.’ I say: ’This is it, this is what I have done, did I forget something? Do you have any suggestions for next time? What shall I do? Say?17” – Iris, 26, 3 years of experience

The benefit of organized sessions is that social workers who might feel less inclined to ask for their colleagues advice, are also put in a situation where they are confronted with other people’s ideas. These uncertainties and gut feelings mentioned by social workers are very much a part of social work and are inextricably linked to a social worker’s personal frame of reference, which can be complemented by a colleagues (different) frame of reference. This collection of individual frames of reference helps form the view of possible perpetrators and victims of domestic violence. To what extent the perspectives of colleagues are complementary, depends on the diversity of frames of reference within the team. If every

16_{“Vaak juist in die situaties [met onderbuikgevoelens] helpt het ook wel als er even iemand mee}

denkt die niet in die zaak zit en niet alle gezichten voor zich heeft en niet alles weet. Want die kan dan even heel concreet zeggen:’ja ok, maar wat heb je nou gezien echt aan gedrag, wat is er concreet aanwezig en wat ben jij nu zelf aan het invullen? En welke informatie zou je dan nog willen hebben om wel een helder beeld te krijgen in plaats van dat je nu maar gaat lopen gissen?’” – Melissa, 26

17

“Ik geef ze [collega’s] dan koffie en dan zet ik ze op een stoel, zeg ik:’Je moet even meedenken.’ Dan zeg ik:’ Nou dit is het, ik heb dit gedaan, ben ik iets vergeten? Heb je nog tips of voor de volgende keer? Wat zal ik doen? Zeggen?” – Iris, 26

(30)

member of the team has more or less the same, traditional views of masculinity and femininity, there is nobody there to look at the situation from a different angle. This could result in a limited recognition of victims and perpetrators of IPA that do not fall into the woman-victim man-perpetrator dynamic.

Since 2013, in an attempt to make these gut feelings explicit and useful, social work organizations (among other professional service providers) need to have a reporting code (Meldcode) in place (VWS, 2013). This code is generally a five-step plan that a social worker needs to follow when they pick up on signals of domestic violence. The first step is to map out the signals, followed by consulting with colleagues and possibly professionals specialized in domestic violence. The third step is to discuss these concerns with the client, after which an assessment is made of the severity of the situation. The fifth and final step is to assess whether the organizations themselves keep on providing services or whether they report it to Veilig Thuis (Safe Home) (Ibid). Veilig Thuis is the organization where both laypeople and professionals can turn to for advice about, or for reporting child abuse and domestic violence (Vooreenveiligthuis.nl, 2016). Veilig Thuis can do a more pervasive investigation of situations and alert Dutch child protective services if deemed necessary (VWS, 2013). This reporting code makes it mandatory to discuss cases with other parties (usually colleagues), however it depends on these parties and their views of masculinity and femininity how definitive gender is in the assessment of the situation of IPA.

Another factor about these gut feelings and social workers’ frames of reference concerning gender in IPA that needs to be taken into account, is that the majority of social workers are women.

“I am in a work field with a lot of women, so yes, we have different views sometimes. What I notice is that my female colleagues, they are softer and they go along with both perpetrator and victim for much longer. And I notice that I myself restrict them more and don’t accept certain behavior.18” – Mark, 32, 2 years of

experience

Mark links the difference in views with some of his women colleagues to the difference in gender between them. The example offered by Mark goes into how they interact with clients.

18_{“Ik zit in een werkveld met veel vrouwen, dus ja, we hebben wel andere beeldvorming soms. Wat ik}

merk is dat mijn vrouwelijke collega’s, die zijn wat zachter en die gaan wat vaak wat langer mee met zowel dader als slachtoffer. En ik merk dat ik veel meer begrens en gedrag ook niet accepter.” –

(31)

Other men have also pointed out a difference between men and women social workers.

“I think not everybody sees it that way [how he himself sees it] and I don’t think there is an equal distribution of men and women to offer their perspective. Women are dominant in our world [social work]. So a lot of what is being said and written, is being said and written by women. And of course there are many nuances in this, but there is also a lot of social action involved [in social work]; ‘I’m going to make a case for-‘. As women, for women, well then it isn’t nuanced anymore.19” – Michael, 31, 4 years of experience

Michael discusses the consequences of the majority of social workers being women on a larger scale. He points out that women in general can benefit from the assumption that only men can perpetrate IPA and therefor have little interest in emancipating men who fall victim to IPA. This goes to show that a diverse team in which social workers consult with each other is necessary. It can help erase the influence of blind spots and biases that social workers may have concerning gender in IPA. It can, again, help develop or neglect a social worker’s antennas for possible victims or perpetrators of IPA.

4.4. Society

The different frames of reference that individual social workers have are influenced by their formal education and by what they are being exposed to in their working environment. However, these social workers are also individuals, who are like described earlier, socialized and currently living in and part of society. The views of the social worker on masculinity, femininity, and IPA, are also influenced by society at large. Possible gaps in the knowledge and experience of social workers can be filled with images they see on for instance television. Jolanda explains how she made up for the lack of attention that had been given to IPA in her formal education.

“That was not part of the education back then, how did I do it? By reading, by watching television, by listening to people.20” – Jolanda, 50, 24 years of

19

“Ik denk niet dat iedereen er zo [als hijzelf] naar kijkt en ik denk ook niet dat er een gelijkwaardige verdeling is tussen mannen en vrouwen die daar een visie op hebben. Vrouwen zijn dominant in onze wereld [maatschappelijk werk]. Dus heel veel van wat er wordt gezegd en geschreven wordt door vrouwen gezegd en geschreven. En natuurlijk zijn er een heleboel nuances over te maken, maar er is ook een hele hoop barricade werk bij [bij maatschappelijk werk]; ‘ik ga me sterk maken voor-’. Als vrouwen voor vrouwen, nou dan ben je niet meer genuanceerd.” - Michael, 31

(32)

experience

Jolanda’s response to how she had been educated about IPA shows the broad diversity of sources that social workers use to base their views on. How popular media can influence a social workers image can be seen in a comment made by Linda. She had no experience with men as victims of IPA, but when asked what she thought these men might be like she gave the following answer.

“It sounds really silly, but like what I have seen on television, on a show like Dr.Phil or something.21” – Linda, 29, 1,5 years of experience

Popular media do not provide nuanced imagery of gender. Men and women are often portrayed as vastly different types of people, complimentary to each other (Connell, 1987, p. 61). Men are portrayed as stereotypically aggressive or as breadwinners, while women are shown as homemakers or other facilitating roles for men (Collins, 2011; Connell, 1987, pp. 185, 246). The media do not only reflect what is considered as a hegemonic form of masculinity, but also shape what is considered hegemonic masculinity through fictional characters in for example action movies (Connell, 1987, pp. 184-185). However, these views of masculinity and femininity that are portrayed in the media, which fit with the woman-victim man-perpetrator dynamic of IPA, are not all defining in the view social workers have of gender and IPA.

“But it does surprise me how many women are part of the group of perpetrators. Maybe it was my own judgment, that somehow I expected: ’O domestic violence, it is the man who is battering’, but as it turns out, that is not always the case.22” –

Melissa, 26, 1 year of experience

Melissa explains how her initial ideas about the gender of perpetrators of IPA have been proven wrong when she was exposed to women who are perpetrators, in her professional life. Several social workers explain that they feel that domestic violence as a whole, is being given

naar mensen te luisteren.” – Jolanda, 50

21_{“Ja dat klinkt heel gek maar uh wat ik dan op televisie heb gezien bij een dr phil programma of}

zoiets.” – Linda, 29

22_{“Maar toch verbaast het mij wel ook hoeveel vrouwen erbij zitten als pleger. En dat is dan}

misschien wel mijn eigen oordeel dat ik er dan ergens vanuit ga van: o weet je, huiselijke geweld, nou dan is het de man die slaat, want dat blijkt dus echt in lang alle gevallen niet zo te zijn.” – Melissa, 26

Gendered archetypes : social worker’s constructions of victims and perpetrators of intimate partner