Tweet
While activists for heterosexual victims of domestic violence have ensured measures such as Clare's law, LGBT people have fallen through the cracks
By Ally Fogg
No one who is familiar with the dynamics of intimate partner violence will have been surprised by a study published last week, showing pervasive broader health implications for those affected.
The study revealed that victims of abuse were significantly more likely to be ill or depressed, to abuse drugs or alcohol, or to be engaged in unsafe sexual practices. The only surprise may be that the victims in this paper were men who have sex with men.
The review and meta-analysis conducted by researchers at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine did not separate cause and effect. We cannot be sure what proportion of the negative health-related findings are a consequence, an accompaniment, or a cause of the violence.
Domestic abuse commonly causes injuries and harm far beyond the physical, leaving victims traumatised, terrorised, and often racked with self-loathing and misplaced guilt. That can manifest itself in passive and active self-destructive behaviour. This study marks an important reminder to health professionals and agencies that relationship violence is a notable factor in public health.
Domestic violence should be treated as a warning sign of broader health and well-being issues in GBT men – and vice versa.
Ahead of last Saturday's International Women's Day, the charity Broken Rainbow repeated its regular plea to the media that the situations of lesbian, bisexual and trans women are not written out of the script when violence against women is discussed. Sadly it appears their cry went unheard. The big news story of the day was the roll-out of Clare's law, described by almost all media outlets as a system to allow women to check whether new men in their lives have a history of violence and abuse. Virtually none of them mentioned that the same facility can be used by anyone, of any gender or sexuality.
Other coverage of IWD reflected on the newly published estimates of violence against women across the EU. Prominent international news coverage highlighted a range of issues, from country-to-country comparisons, to the effectiveness of policing and sanction. As far as I could tell, not a single journalist picked up on the detail that women who were in same-sex relationships reported higher rates of partner violence than others. The numbers were drawn from small sample sizes and must be treated with caution, but they are in keeping with a long history of research that has found levels and patterns of violence in LGBT relationships to be broadly comparable to those of heterosexual couples.
The public script of domestic violence is a fiercely contested battleground. Feminist campaigners have traditionally fought hard to ensure the issue remains framed as a matter of male violence against women. In recent years, advocates for male victims have strived to ensure some public awareness of female violence as a real and harmful phenomenon. Sadly the debate has often descended into a bitter, partisan, gendered squabble about whose team has it worse. Activists for men and women have dug their trenches and LGBT people have fallen through the cracks.
While the specialist gay and lesbian media and organisations such as Stonewall have occasionally addressed these issues to their own audiences, by and large representatives of the LGBT communities have been in no hurry to shout about the matter. While campaigning to be treated with equal rights, respect and dignity, it is probably not the best PR to be shouting "… and we beat our partners just as much as you do." This is entirely understandable, but it has had unfortunate consequences for those in need.
Research into the experiences of victims of same-sex relationship violence reveals a grim litany of unacknowledged problems and unaddressed needs. Our culture has pushed the issue so far to the margins it is all but invisible, and consequently many victims fear they will not be believed or taken seriously if they report their abuse. Police, now trained and primed to look out for signs of domestic violence in heterosexual couples, may fail to recognise an abusive same-sex relationship before their eyes, and may not follow the correct procedures for, say, separating partners before interview.
Societal homophobia not only deters some victims from speaking out, speaking honestly or seeking help, it is also used by some abusers as a weapon of control and coercion. This will usually be missed by standard assessment tools.
LGBT men and women who do seek help often find that shelters, support groups and programmes for perpetrators are strictly heteronormative – attempting to squeeze everyone into the same uncomfortable box. A woman-only space does not necessarily provide protection to a lesbian victim. Trans people, meanwhile, are not only at uniquely high risk of abuse, they may also have specific support and care needs within a system that is rigidly delineated by gender.
Domestic abuse is always an issue requiring sensitivity, nuance and care. A one-size-fits-all model has always left many victims unsupported and at risk. Designing systems that cater to the needs of some of the most vulnerable people at risk has to be the ultimate objective, but the first step is simply remembering that they exist.
Source: LGBT victims of domestic abuse are rarely catered for – or acknowledged
By Ally Fogg
No one who is familiar with the dynamics of intimate partner violence will have been surprised by a study published last week, showing pervasive broader health implications for those affected.
The study revealed that victims of abuse were significantly more likely to be ill or depressed, to abuse drugs or alcohol, or to be engaged in unsafe sexual practices. The only surprise may be that the victims in this paper were men who have sex with men.
The review and meta-analysis conducted by researchers at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine did not separate cause and effect. We cannot be sure what proportion of the negative health-related findings are a consequence, an accompaniment, or a cause of the violence.
Domestic abuse commonly causes injuries and harm far beyond the physical, leaving victims traumatised, terrorised, and often racked with self-loathing and misplaced guilt. That can manifest itself in passive and active self-destructive behaviour. This study marks an important reminder to health professionals and agencies that relationship violence is a notable factor in public health.
Domestic violence should be treated as a warning sign of broader health and well-being issues in GBT men – and vice versa.
Ahead of last Saturday's International Women's Day, the charity Broken Rainbow repeated its regular plea to the media that the situations of lesbian, bisexual and trans women are not written out of the script when violence against women is discussed. Sadly it appears their cry went unheard. The big news story of the day was the roll-out of Clare's law, described by almost all media outlets as a system to allow women to check whether new men in their lives have a history of violence and abuse. Virtually none of them mentioned that the same facility can be used by anyone, of any gender or sexuality.
Other coverage of IWD reflected on the newly published estimates of violence against women across the EU. Prominent international news coverage highlighted a range of issues, from country-to-country comparisons, to the effectiveness of policing and sanction. As far as I could tell, not a single journalist picked up on the detail that women who were in same-sex relationships reported higher rates of partner violence than others. The numbers were drawn from small sample sizes and must be treated with caution, but they are in keeping with a long history of research that has found levels and patterns of violence in LGBT relationships to be broadly comparable to those of heterosexual couples.
The public script of domestic violence is a fiercely contested battleground. Feminist campaigners have traditionally fought hard to ensure the issue remains framed as a matter of male violence against women. In recent years, advocates for male victims have strived to ensure some public awareness of female violence as a real and harmful phenomenon. Sadly the debate has often descended into a bitter, partisan, gendered squabble about whose team has it worse. Activists for men and women have dug their trenches and LGBT people have fallen through the cracks.
While the specialist gay and lesbian media and organisations such as Stonewall have occasionally addressed these issues to their own audiences, by and large representatives of the LGBT communities have been in no hurry to shout about the matter. While campaigning to be treated with equal rights, respect and dignity, it is probably not the best PR to be shouting "… and we beat our partners just as much as you do." This is entirely understandable, but it has had unfortunate consequences for those in need.
Research into the experiences of victims of same-sex relationship violence reveals a grim litany of unacknowledged problems and unaddressed needs. Our culture has pushed the issue so far to the margins it is all but invisible, and consequently many victims fear they will not be believed or taken seriously if they report their abuse. Police, now trained and primed to look out for signs of domestic violence in heterosexual couples, may fail to recognise an abusive same-sex relationship before their eyes, and may not follow the correct procedures for, say, separating partners before interview.
Societal homophobia not only deters some victims from speaking out, speaking honestly or seeking help, it is also used by some abusers as a weapon of control and coercion. This will usually be missed by standard assessment tools.
LGBT men and women who do seek help often find that shelters, support groups and programmes for perpetrators are strictly heteronormative – attempting to squeeze everyone into the same uncomfortable box. A woman-only space does not necessarily provide protection to a lesbian victim. Trans people, meanwhile, are not only at uniquely high risk of abuse, they may also have specific support and care needs within a system that is rigidly delineated by gender.
Domestic abuse is always an issue requiring sensitivity, nuance and care. A one-size-fits-all model has always left many victims unsupported and at risk. Designing systems that cater to the needs of some of the most vulnerable people at risk has to be the ultimate objective, but the first step is simply remembering that they exist.
Source: LGBT victims of domestic abuse are rarely catered for – or acknowledged
