Violence Victimisation as a gender-specific process

Violence is recognized as a serious public healthproblem. Numerous studies have documentedassociations between physical and sexual violence and a number of short and long-termhealth problems – primarily among women. While it is well known that male violence towardsother men is widespread, less knowledge existson the health of male victims. Reliable data onthe magnitude and causes of violence among men and women are needed to establish patterns of violence and gender differences herein. Additionally, evidence on the health status of male and female victims will contribute to our knowledge about gender-specific health problems associated with violence. This information may be used to develop meaningful and gender specific prevention initiatives. Additionally, it is integral to violence prevention that the normalisation of physical violence among men be challenged. This requires an examination of the ways in which normative understandings of gender perpetuate the view that men’s use of violence is inevitable and non-damaging to men and thus sustain men’s violence overall. Male-on-male violence must thus be analysed as rooted in the very conceptions of gender that produce and perpetuate men’s violence against women.

The overall aim of the present PhD study is to analyse violence victimisation as a genderspecific process, with particular reference to interpersonal violence. The project looks at victimisation in two ways:
1. An empirical analysis of gender differences in exposure to physical and sexualised violence and in health problems associated with violence
2. A theoretical analysis of victimhood as a discursively and subjectively constructed identification, which is shaped by binary and hierarchical gender categories that may perpetuate men’s use of violence overall. 

The empirical analysis is based on data from two nationally representative health surveys conducted in Denmark in 2000 and 2002, respectively. The theoretical analysis draws on the present empirical findings and existing theory. 

The thesis is based on the following three papers:

Paper I Physical violence, self-rated health and morbidity: is gender significant for victimisation? 
In 2000, 4975 men and 5483 women aged between 16 and 67 years in Denmark answered questions on lifetime and last-year experiences of physical violence. The paper focused on physical victimisation within the past year. 6% of men reported at least one experience of physical violence compared with 4% of women. The prevalence of physical victimisation was highest among men aged 16-24 years and was significantly higher than for women in all age groups. Women reporting violence victimisation were significantly more likely to rate their own health as poor and report a number of illness symptoms than female non-victims. This difference was not found among men. Victimisation was found to be gender-specific, in terms of exposure as well as the violence-health relation.

Paper II Is sexual victimisation gender-specific? The prevalence of forced sexual activityamong men and women in Denmark, and selfreported well-being among survivors.
In 2000, 4857 men and 5296 women aged between 16 and 67 years in Denmark answered questions on lifetime and last-year experiences of sexual abuse and assault. The analysis focused on lifetime experiences among men and women aged between 16 and 39 years. Nearly14% women and 2% of men in this sub-group reported at least one lifetime incidence of forced sexual activity. Sexual abuse was associated with poor health, illness behaviour and risk behaviour for both men and women. The pattern of association was comparable for men and women on a number of indicators. 

Sexual victimisation was also analysed among anationally representative sample of 14-16 year olds. In 2002, 2910 boys and 2918 girls answered detailed questions about their sexual experiences before the age of 15. Close to 4% of girls and 1% of boys reported at least one sexually abusive experience. Associations between sexual victimisation and well-being were found for both genders and the pattern of association was almost identical for boys and girls. Sexual victimisation was thus found to be gender specific in terms of exposure, but fewer differences were found in associations between abuse and health.

Paper III Upholding the myth of masculinity: the gendered production of victims
The paper explored how victimisation might be viewed as a constructed identification. It was argued that the binary and hierarchical construction of gender shapes our understanding of violence, and thus of victims. Further, it was argued that normative expectations of gender impact upon men and women’s subjective experiences of victimisation, including one’s self-perceivedability to resist and prevent being victimised. The analysis suggested that the gendered construction of victims actually upholds a view of men’s violence towards other men as normal, and thus perpetuates men’s violence overall. 

Conclusion  

Violence victimisation can be thought of as gender-specific, at the level of material experiences of violence, as well as the way in which violence victims are viewed and are discursively/subjectively constituted.