The purpose of this review is “to investigate the effectiveness of interventions for preventing boys’ and young men’s use of sexual violence, including: increasing gender-equitable attitudes, bystander intentions, and other attitudes and behaviours”. It considers a total of 65 studies to assess the effectiveness of such interventions. The interventions came from 11 countries, although a high proportion was based in the USA. The majority of interventions took place in school settings.
“Men who go to Church don’t commit domestic violence!” A recent Christianity Magazine survey revealed over ½ respondents – mostly women & regular church goers - had suffered domestic abuse. Up to 10% evangelical Christians in UK experienced physical abuse in 2012. Read more
The Australian Centre for the Study of Sexual Assault has published its paper "Engaging men in sexual assault prevention".
• The next step in sexual assault prevention is to engage men - both as facilitators and as participants in prevention.
• If men are to be engaged in the prevention of sexual assault there must be a shared understanding of the fact that men have a positive role to play.
• A consideration of how to engage men in prevention efforts must take into account the ways in which some men may resist prevention messages - whether that resistance stems from discomfort, rejection of ideas, or from other sources.
• There is a tension when masculine gender stereotypes are used as a tool for engaging men in prevention while evidence suggests that these same stereotypes can contribute as underlying factors in the perpetration of sexual assault and violence against women.
This report outlines seven ‘entry points’ for engaging men and boys in domestic violence prevention: 1. Engaging fathers in domestic violence prevention; 2. Men’s health and domestic violence prevention; 3. The role of sports and recreation in domestic violence prevention; 4. The role of the workplace in domestic violence prevention; 5. The role of peer relationships in domestic violence prevention; 6. Men as allies in preventing domestic violence; and 7. Aboriginal healing and domestic violence prevention.
I have been something of a ‘cheerleader’ for men’s violence prevention. I’ve identified the principles which guide men’s involvement in violence prevention. I’ve written at length about the strategies which are most effective, the standards for best practice. But in this keynote address, I want to do something different. I highlight some hard truths, some of the challenges of this field. I will focus on three key points: (1) Men’s violence against women is fundamentally linked to gender inequalities. (2) Men’s involvements in violence prevention are shaped by these same gender inequalities. (3) Gender inequality is the problem, and gender equality is the solution. I then complicate these, noting that gender is not the only story and gender inequality is not the only problem, and that in some ways gender itself is the problem.
In this presentation, I first briefly outline the rationale for involving men in efforts to prevent and reduce men’s violence against women. I offer an intersectional analysis of gender, difference and violence. I first offer an intersectional account of men and masculinities, and I then also offer an intersectional analysis of violence against women. I then spend the remainder of the paper exploring effective ways in which to engage men from diverse backgrounds in violence prevention.
Until now, we’ve been far too comfortable with men occupying a lethargic role in the sexual and reproductive rights movement: that of passive allies. And while it’s imperative that communities and individuals most marginalized by reproductive oppression lead the way in building a new future, it’s also critical that we situate an analysis of masculinity in the reproductive justice framework, and equally important that men are enlisted to participate in that analysis.
This review assesses the effectiveness of programme interventions seeking to engage men and boys in achieving gender equality and equity in health. Research with men and boys has shown how inequitable gender norms - social expectations of what men and boys should and should not do - influence how men interact with their partners, families and children on a wide range of issues. These include preventing the transmission of HIV and sexually transmitted infections, contraceptive use, physical violence, household tasks, parenting and their health-seeking behaviour.
The debate over men’s versus women’s domestic violence is increasingly prominent, both in academic scholarship and in popular culture. We have always known that both men and women are capable of using violence, and that both men and women are the victims of violence. At the same time, domestic violence has long been understood to be a problem largely of violence by men, against women and children. However, a very different understanding of domestic violence is now increasingly visible. Here, domestic or family violence is seen to be gender-equal or gender-neutral. In this paper, I assess this claim. I will demonstrate that there is no ‘gender symmetry’ in domestic violence, and there are important differences between men’s and women’s typical patterns of victimisation and perpetration.
(Trigger warning: for abusive, woman-hating language and threats of violence)
When I write about feminism and men’s violence against women, I often receive supportive comments. While some of the praise is earned, much of it gives me a lot of credit for doing very little.