Sorting out the reasons couples turn violent

By Scott Sleek
Monitor staff

For years, Irene Frieze, PhD, wanted to keep rather quiet about her unexpected findings on dating violence. She was worried about how the mainstream media might spin her results, and how they might be interpreted by the feminist groups that had long lauded her work.

Why the hesitancy? Frieze, a psychology professor at the University of Pittsburgh, and her colleagues had found in surveys of 300 college students that women appeared more likely than men to start physical altercations with a dating partner, usually in the form of slapping, shoving or pushing.

When a Pitt public relations officer learned of the data last October and decided to issue a press release on it, Frieze?s reservations proved accurate. The National Organization for Women denounced the research as fraudulent, while a radio station exaggerated her results as showing that women 'cause most domestic violence.'

Frieze certainly wasn?t the first person to make such a discovery about women?s role in relationship violence. In fact, many psychologists, including noted feminist researchers, have collected similar results with far larger sample sizes.

But it?s not an easy topic to discuss. Some feminists deride the validity of such results, while men?s groups point to them as evidence that males are the unsung victims of domestic abuse.

But findings about women?s use of violence need to be discussed in context, psychologists say. True, a variety of studies dating to the late 1970s have shown that females are slightly more likely than males to acknowledge resorting to slapping, kicking or shoving romantic partners. Yet many researchers say romantic conflict is too complex and variable to say conclusively that one gender initiates it more often than the other.

And many psychologists say that a close examination of studies on dating and marital conflict indicates that women, not men, still are the major victims of relational violence: Men still inflict the most physical harm on their mates than vice versa.

Women who report using violence in their relationships say they do so in self-defense, in retaliation for abuse from their partners or as a way to ward of unwanted sexual advances.

In addition, psychologists find that women in such relationships are far more distressed and fearful than their husbands or boyfriends.

They?ve shown that women tend to resort to physical aggression to express anger or pain, while men use it to scare or control a woman. 'We have to look at the whole issue of fear and intimidation,' says Jacquelyn White, PhD, a University of North Carolina?Greensboro psychologist who studies dating violence. 'Women have far more to be worried about, mainly because of the size difference between themselves and their male partners.'

In fact, women who resort to aggression against a mate may face a greater risk of being severely battered than those who are more passive, Frieze speculates. 'When I?ve talked about the results, I?ve heard women say, ?Yeah, I hit my boyfriend?it makes me feel powerful,?' Frieze says. 'And the boys hold back. But what scares me is they?re not going to do that forever.'

Denver psychologist Lenore Walker, PhD, who for the last two decades has studied, treated and advocated for battered women, also worries about men?s potential for brutal retaliation. Walker says she?s noticed that women today are more apt to fight back when a mate abuses them. But she?s also seen a rise in the severity of injuries among the battered women she treats, and wonders if the two trends are connected.

Dina Vivian, PhD, who is a psychologist at the State University of New York at Stony Brook and has studied marital violence extensively, says she?s noticed first-hand that bi-directional violence has a more devastating impact on women than it does men.

'In the past 15 years, I?ve examined 600 couples and I?ve had only one man ever tell me he was scared of his wife?scared of her anger,' she says.

Yet some clinicians and researchers believe women aren?t being held accountable for their physical aggression against their husbands and boyfriends. They suggest that studies may underreport women?s aggression because men may be too embarrassed to admit being hit or injured by a woman. Younger males may be an exception: Studies have shown that they are more likely to report being victims of moderate physical abuse than are their female peers. But the girls don?t seem to be disagreeing with them. They acknowledge being the aggressors more often than the boys, studies show.

Cultural norms make it more acceptable for women to hit men than vice versa, and women seem to be taking advantage of it, says Judith Sherven, PhD, a Los Angeles psychologist and outspoken advocate for victimized men. And statistics show that women are more likely than men to use a weapon in a domestic battle, perhaps to make up for their lesser strength, she adds.

Women are becoming more aggressive because they?re increasingly intolerant of men?s foibles, Sherven contends.

The women?s movement, while succeeding in helping women gain equality in the workplace and other arenas, has not helped them shed the archaic idea that 'a man should be Prince Charming,' she says.

'I see young women in my practice who are much angrier at men than my generation was,' she says. 'They want the men to be perfect.'

But Sherven, White and other psychologists agree that, ultimately, the focus on domestic violence should steer away from gender culpability per se and more toward prevention.

'We must start trying to ameliorate aggressive behavior in general, and try to understand how gendered aspects of power, and the related issues of fear, intimidation and control affect both women and men,' says White.