2

Violence & Abuse in

Same-Sex Relationships:
A Review of Literature

A Report By:
Andrew Richards, Nathalie Noret & Ian Rivers
York St John College

Social Inclusion &

Diversity Paper No 5
Research into Practice

July, 2003
Artist: Christopher Lucas Furminger 2002
 3

Contents

Page

Introduction 3

Violence and Abuse in Same-Sex Relationships 4

- Definitions of violence and abuse in relationships 4

- A cycle of violence 7

- Rates of abuse and violence in same-sex relationships 9

- Dynamics of abusive relationships and characteristics 10

of victims and perpetrators

- Effects of violence and abuse in relationships 12

- Getting help 12

- Methodological issues 13

- Conclusion 14

References 15

Appendices

- Appendix I: Summary of key research findings 21

- Appendix II: Questionnaire 23

About the Authors 33

 4

Introduction
This report is a summary of research findings related to same-sex domestic abuse. The
report was commissioned by Yorkshire MESMAC and written by the Social Inclusion
and Diversity Research Group (SID) at York St John College. The purpose of this paper
is to review the current available literature on violence in relationships and abuse within
same-sex relationships. Recent preferences for reviewing academic literature include the
systematic approach, which carries greater scientific reliability. However the authors felt
that the methodologies employed by the various studies cited in this report were so
varied, that s systematic review was not feasible. Therefore a classical review of literature
was conducted. Although there is a considerable wealth of research on violence and
abuse within same-sex relationships, much of replicates previous researcher’s findings.
For that reason, findings that have been omitted from this report are those that are from
replicated studies.

Andrew Richards
[email protected]

Nathalie Noret
[email protected]

Ian Rivers
[email protected]

School of Sports Science & Psychology

York St John College
Lord Mayor’s Walk
YORK YO31 7EX
 5

Violence and Abuse in Same-Sex Relationships

The body of research into violence in relationships has grown substantially over the past
twenty years, however, until relatively recently, the majority of research focused primarily
on the violence perpetrated within heterosexual relationships, with men viewed largely as
perpetrators and women as victims. Research into violence and abuse within same-sex
couples is therefore relatively new and, in terms of depth, relatively understudied.
As Island & Letellier (1991) argue, since lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB)
communities are only now beginning to acknowledge the problem of violence and abuse
within same-sex relationships; ignorance continues to be widespread and outreach for
LGB victims is scarce at best and non-existent in many areas. Consequently, an increase
in research and education about violence and abuse in same-sex relationships is urgently
needed as this continued lack of information can only perpetuate the myth that it does
not exist.

Definition of violence and abuse in relationships

Merrill and Wolfe (2000) defined violence in relationships as:

A pattern of abusive behaviours occurring within the context of an intimate relationship

whereby one party intimidates, coerces, restricts, and controls the other. In this context,
‘abusive behaviour’ refers to any of a variety of non-consensual behaviours which
intentionally or recklessly inflict harm or potential harm or restricts freedom.

Comparing research on violence/abuse in relationships is a difficult task due to the

differing definitions of violence and abuse. The Metropolitan Police define ‘domestic
abuse’ as:

Any incident of threatening behaviour, violence or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual,

financial or emotional) between adults who are or who have been intimate partners or
family members regardless of gender.

When defining domestic abuse it is important to acknowledge and identify the different
forms it takes. Pitt (2000) has argued that violence in relationships is a pattern of
behaviours used with the intention of gaining power and control over a partner which, in
turn, causes the victim to feel fearful of that partner. Researchers have acknowledged that
abuse can manifest itself in many forms.
As we noted above, traditionally literature on domestic abuse has focused on
heterosexual relationships (i.e. abuse perpetrated by men against women). Such literature
has sub-divided abusive behaviours into physical - commonly involving punching,
kicking, slapping and pushing, and resulting in cuts, abrasions, bruises and burns –
(Dobash and Dobash, 1984); emotional - behaviours inflicting psychological harm
commonly including social isolation, verbal harassment and threats, extreme jealousy and
possessiveness - (Follingstad, et al 1990); financial - economic dependency, withholding
financial resources, preventing independent income - (Walker, 1979); and sexual -
sexually intrusive behaviours occurring without consent - (Russell, 1990).
 6

FIGURE 1: The Power and Control Wheel (Minnesota Program Development, 2003)
 7

The above diagram (Figure 1) and definitions (below) represent elements of power and
control within lesbian and gay relationships (adapted from the Domestic Abuse
intervention Project, 2003; and Farley, 1997).

Physical Abuse:
Twisting arms; tripping; pushing; biting; beating, using a weapon against a partner; throwing partner
down; punching; grabbing; kicking; pulling hair; burning; hitting; shoving; choking; slapping;
abandoning partner in dangerous places; holding a partner down; preventing a partner from leaving;
locking a partner in or out.

Coercion & Threats:

Threatening to physically harm partner or loved ones; stalk partner; destroy possessions; "out" partner at
work, to family, associates, or government agencies; mutilate self or attempt suicide.

Intimidation:
Scaring partner with looks, yelling, gestures, body language; smashing or throwing things; destroying
property; hurting pets; showing up uninvited/unannounced; writing threatening notes or letters; driving
recklessly.

Emotional Abuse:
Verbally assaulting with insults, criticisms, blaming, name calling; punishing partner for making
mistakes; having affairs; professing that partner is unattractive, unlovable, sexually inadequate; ignoring
partner's feelings, thoughts, concerns, use of intimate knowledge to create vulnerability.

Isolation:
Controlling what partner does, who she/he sees and talks to, where she/he goes; making a partner choose
between them and their loved ones; stalking exploiting the Us against Them relationship that being in
"the closet" creates, causing an exaggerated sense of dependency in partner; emphasizing that the violence
in relationships laws do not apply to ‘us’ and that no one will be available for help.

Sexual Abuse:
Rape, sex on demand, withholding, physically attacking the sexual parts of partner's body; forced
monogamy or non-monogamy, involuntary prostitution, denying reproductive freedom; making partner feel
bad about sexual history; refusing to practice safe sex; demeaning remarks about a partners body.

Using Children:
Emotionally and/or physically abusing shared or partner's children; using children as go betweens during
conflicts or separations; using visitation as an opportunity to harass partner; "outing" partner to children
against partner's will.

Economic Abuse:
Keeping partner from obtaining or holding a job; arranging to support partner and treating him/her as a
servant; forcing partner to work; demanding partner's money; using partner's identity to get money or
spend partner's money; controlling finances; jeopardising work; damaging property/equipment needed for
work.

Entitlement:
Treating partner as inferior; using differences against partner: education, wealth, politics, class privilege or
lack-of, physical ability, race, ethnicity, HIV status, or history of trauma; demanding that your needs
always come first; interfering with partner's job, personal needs, family obligations, or sleep.
 8

Intellectual Abuse:
Lying to confuse, convincing partner he/she is crazy; telling false stories; telling partner they don’t know
what they are talking about; manipulating partner with words/ideas.

Spiritual Abuse:
Denial of spiritual expression, withholding love/unity, expressions of prejudice.

A cycle of violence
A number of researchers have argued that abuse in same-sex relationships follows a
similar pattern to abuse in opposite-sex relationships (McClennen et al., 2002). Many
researchers refer to the ‘cycle of violence’, which represents the way in which violence
and abuse can develop and be maintained within a relationship. Research has suggested
that within the cycle of violence, abuse increases in frequency and severity over time
(McClennan et al., 2002), with abusive episodes interspersed with calm, loving and
attentive periods. However the pattern can often become predictable for victims, so
much so that it is often a source of tension even when an episode of abuse is not taking
place (Chesley et al., 1998; see Figure 2)

FIGURE 2: Cycle of Violence Based on Walker (1979)

Phase 1: Tension Building

Tension begins to increase within the
relationship, perpetrator increases his/her
threats, and takes more control. Victim
makes increasing efforts to please the
abuser, and calm him/her down, victim
denies the impending violence,
withdraws and experiences a loss
of control

Phase 3: Kindness and

loving behaviour ‘honeymoon’.
Perpetrator is extremely Phase 2: Act of Violence
apologetic, attentive and loving, The perpetrator becomes
often expressing guilt and shame, unpredictable,
abuser is manipulative and and looses control, lashing out on
promises to change, sometimes their partner, abuser becomes
the abuser will blame their partner extremely abusive, victim is left
for the violence, leaving the victim feeling trapped and victimised.
with mixed feelings, feeling guilty
and responsible for the abuse

In this model, after each incidence of abuse, both partners often believe that it will never
happen again, although it often does. Some researchers have adapted the cycle of
violence to show how the domestic abuse manifests itself over time (see Figure 3).
 9

FIGURE 3: The Cycle of Violence in Linear Form

 10

Although the ‘cycle of abuse’ is often mentioned in the research literature, such a pattern
is not always evident in abusive relationships. Often abusive incidents occur without
warning signs or an evident build-up. There may also be instances where the perpetrator
shows no remorse or there may be instances where calm follows such an occurrence,
however neither model (Figures 2 and 3) take into account differences in the
development of abusive relationships.
Lehman (1997) suggested that the cycle of violence develops slowly in the
beginning of a relationship and periods of abuse are often followed by lengthy periods of
tenderness, love and affection. Yet, as the relationship develops, these ‘honeymoon’
periods of love and affection grow shorter and less frequent as the intensity of the
violence and abuse increases.
Marrujo & Kreger (1996) have suggested that lesbian and gay victims of domestic
abuse are more likely than heterosexual victims to use physical violence as a defence
against the abuse they are experiencing. In reviewing the literature, we found that the
term ‘mutual battering’ is often mentioned. Currently, a debate exists between researchers
as to whether this phenomenon truly exists. This concept – mutual battering - which was
originally applied to abusive behaviours among heterosexual couples, substantiates the
theory that both men and women use physical and emotional aggression to resolve
conflict within their relationships. However, such aggression does not always occur
simultaneously with an episode of ‘domestic’ violence or abuse and, as a result, the roles
and status of the victim and perpetrator can become blurred or less well delineated
(Marrujo & Kreger 1996). It is important when discussing ‘mutual battering’ (sometimes
referred to as ‘mutual combat’) to clearly define the term. Mutual battery or combat has
been described in terms of an individual who, following an episode of violence or abuse,
uses physical aggression to prevent further injury (Marrujo & Kreger, 1996). Sometimes
abusers may claim that they too are victims in what can become a ‘mutually abusive’
relationship. However research suggests that there is rarely a ‘mutually abusive’
relationship, and there is almost always a ‘primary abuser’ and a ‘primary victim’
(Lehman, 1997). Renzetti (1992) has argued that not all violent acts are the same, nor do
they all constitute abuse. There is a difference between someone who uses violence in
self-defence in order to protect themselves from further violence or abuse, and violence
or abuse that is initiated without cause. However, it is important to acknowledge that
although mutual battery occurs infrequently, power balances in relationships can shift
and a perceived victim can in actual fact be or become a perpetrator.

Rates of abuse and violence in same-sex relationships

Identifying a valid prevalence rate for abuse or violence in same-sex relationships is a
difficult task due to the methodological differences in the various studies conducted to
date. Current literature suggests that reports of the prevalence of violence or abuse
within same-sex relationships fall anywhere between 15% and 87%. Full details of the
publications reviewed can be found in APPENDIX 1.
Although Frieze (1980) reported that sexual violence occurs in 31% of lesbian
relationships and Waterman et al. (1989) concluded that sexual violence occurs in 12% of
gay relationships, several researchers suggest that violence in same-sex relationships
occurs at approximately the same rate as abuse among heterosexual couples – between
25-50% (Pitt, 2000, Alexander 2002, Gunther & Jennings 1999, Wallace 1996). However,
this belief may have led to an inaccurate view of the true prevalence of violence within
same-sex relationships and particularly sexual violence. One reason for this is that
researchers studying heterosexual violence or abuse have used a continuum of severity to
measure degrees of sexual coercion relationships. Christopher (1988) used a two-
dimension continuum of severity measuring tactics and outcomes. Tactics were ranked
 11

with verbal and psychological coercion regarded as less severe than physical force.
Outcomes can range from touching and kissing to full penetration. Individuals who have
been forced to have penetrative sex are considered to have been victimised to a greater
degree than those who have been verbally coerced into kissing (Waldner-Haugrud, 1995).
It is important to note that although prevalence rates of sexual coercion have been
reported, no such continuum of severity has been used in same-sex studies. Having said
that one thing that most researchers agree upon is that domestic abuse has been
identified as the third largest health risk to gay men after HIV/AIDS and substance
use/abuse (Singer & Deschamps, 1994).
Turell (2000) conducted a survey of 499 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
men and women (aged 16-74 years). The study identified behaviours characteristic of
emotional, physical and sexual abuse within both present and past same-sex relationships.
Emotional abuse was reported by 83% of the sample; 9% reported physical violence in
their current relationship, 32% in past relationships and 1% reported forced sex in their
current relationship. Fifty three percent of those who disclosed ‘domestic’ abuse or
violence reported being victims in two or more relationships. Fifty five percent of
abusive relationships lasted two or more years and 25% lasted five or more years.
Data from previous studies investigating the prevalence rates of lesbian domestic
abuse have varied greatly. For example, reported levels of physical and emotional abuse
have ranged from 18% to 60% and 81% to 95% respectively (Loulan, 1987; Bologna et
al, 1987; & Kelly & Warshafsky, 1987). Tuel and Russell (1998) sampled 23 lesbians and
17 female heterosexual survivors of violence in relationships using a self-report
questionnaire containing the Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965), the Beck
Depression Inventory (Beck, 1967) and the Index of Spouse Abuse Revised (Hudson &
McIntosh, 1981). Heterosexual participants reported higher levels of both physical and
non-physical (e.g. emotional) abuse, however no differences were found in reported
levels of depression and self esteem between groups. There are, however, a number of
possible explanations for the greater levels of abuse reported among the heterosexual
sample. For example, male heterosexual abusers may victimise their partners more than
lesbians. However Tuel and Russell noted that heterosexual participants reported that
their relationships lasted significantly longer than lesbian relationships suggesting an
escalation in abuse and violence with time (e.g. Renzetti, 1992). Notably, for both groups
the severity of depression was found to be related to the degree of physical violence
encountered. Similarly, self-esteem was related to levels of non-physical abuse. This is
consistent with the findings of Aguilar and Nightingale (1994) who found that low self-
esteem is associated with non-physical abuse. Clearly there are some similarities among
heterosexual and lesbian victims of abuse or violence within relationships - especially in
terms of the emotional response to different types of violence - however, the overall
impact of abuse may be more significant for lesbians as a loss of trust in women
challenges the popular belief that the lesbian or all women communities are safe havens
(Tuel & Russell, 1998).

Dynamics of abusive relationships and characteristics of victims and perpetrators

Studies focusing on abuse and violence within same-sex relationships have attempted to
identify and describe the types of relationships in which violence may develop and the
characteristics of typical perpetrators and victims. Niolon (2002) argued that a history of
abuse is often an indicator of becoming involved in an abusive relationship, either as a
perpetrator or as a victim, and he also suggested that a low level of self esteem be also be
a particularly important indicator.
 12

It has also been suggested that LGB victims of violence in relationships share
similar risk profiles to battered heterosexual women. For example, low income,
unemployment, a history of family violence, experiences of childhood sexual abuse,
depression and heavy substance use (Greenwood et al, 2002).
Farley (1996) conducted a study examining the demographic profiles of 288 gay
male and lesbian perpetrators of violence in relationships over a period of six years. His
data showed that gay and lesbian abusers come from a variety of social backgrounds,
cutting across economic class, education and occupation, and represent all ethnic groups.
Ninety-four per cent had received mental health treatment in the past, and 38% had been
hospitalised. Approximately one third of the men and women reported feeling suicidal
and approximately 20% reported feeling ‘homicidal’. Farley (1991) also found that a
history of abuse was also a common factor among this sample.
Renzetti (1994) argued that the greater the abusers dependency and the greater
the victims inclination for independence, the greater the frequency and variety of abusive
acts. Abusers, whether lesbian, gay, bisexual or heterosexual have been profiled as having
negative self-concepts and low self-esteem which, in turn, leads to high dependency
needs (Cruz & Firestone, 1998). Renzetti (1997) also argued that homophobia can be
internalised to produce negative self-esteem, and can be used as a tool of abuse when an
abuser threatens to ‘out’ or expose their partner’s sexual orientation.
Abuse dynamics within a same-sex relationship can also be affected where one
partner is HIV positive. Caring for a partner, living with the disease and fear of
contraction have been used as excuses to perpetrate both violence in relationships and
abuse. In turn, those with the disease have used emotional abuse in an attempt to
persuade a partner to remain in a relationship even though it has broken down (Island &
Letellier, 1991).
As noted by Miller et al. (2000), the physical strength differential is often reduced
between same-sex couples, and especially among gay couples. Male victims of violence or
abuse are not necessarily less masculine in appearance, mannerisms or physical strength
(Renzetti, 1992). In addition, masculinity in gay men is not related to abuse (Kelly &
Warshafsky, 1987). Furthermore, gay men who may be described as having feminine
traits are often individuals who display high levels of self-esteem, competitiveness and
dominance (Harry, 1984). Harry (1984) further asserts that most gay men are attracted to
those who display a similar degree of masculinity or femininity.
Berger (1990) found that 45% of the gay couples in his study regarded financial
or employment issues as the greatest source of conflict in their relationships. If one
partner earns more money than the other, it can become a significant source of tension
for the couple. Niolon (2002) argued that men in general are not accustomed or
socialized into being able to accept being in a less powerful position. Harry (1989) argued
that although it may not be common, the less powerful partner could conjure up
thoughts and images of being ‘kept’. Other external stressors can contribute to high
tensions within same-sex partnerships. The “glass ceiling” effect in some occupations
and not being entitled to pension, insurance and the other benefits associated with a
partner’s job has been found to contribute to the development of tension among lesbian
and gay couples (Miller et al., 2000). This is further compounded by the fact that same-
sex couples are not entitled to marry and are therefore not granted next of kin rights thus
leading to an inability to conform to the social models associated with heterosexuality.
Indeed, while the unequal division of tasks such as cleaning and shopping remains a
constant within societal conceptions of heterosexual relationships; surprisingly, the
equality that same-sex relationships can bring to the domestic situation may result in
further tension through the inability of the outside world to cope with lifestyles that do
not conform to some approximation of the perceived ‘norm’. Nevertheless, same sex
 13

couples do sometimes adopt the model of ‘normality’, especially if one of the partners is
in a highly demanding occupation and the other is not (Miller et al., 2000).
In a study of same-sex relationships, Landolt and Dutton (1997) sampled 52 gay
male couples using a self-report style questionnaire. The questionnaire included the
Marital Power Scale (Coleman and Straus, 1986) measuring perceived power balances
between couples. Forty percent of the sample reported at least one member of the
couple instigating one or more violent acts in the past year. However, neither physical
nor psychological rates of abuse were higher among couples whose power dynamics
differed and this runs contrary to the findings of Coleman and Straus (1986) who, using
the same scale, found higher rates of violence and abuse among heterosexual couples
where one partner has greater power than the other.
Cruz and Peralta (2001) conducted in depth qualitative interviews using a
purposive sample of 25 gay men who had experience with violence in relationships
within a same-sex relationship. Ages ranged from 23 to 43 years (average age of 32 years)
and the abusive relationships lasted from 10 months to 10 years. Victims reported high
rates of alcohol consumption by their abusive partner, however alcohol, in itself, was not
found to be an autonomous predictor of domestic abuse. Other factors such as
childhood exposure to violence in relationships were reported alongside alcohol
dependency. Although there does seem to be an association between alcohol dependency
and the perpetration of violence and abuse, both would also seem to correlate with
negative life events (e.g. abusive parenting).
Lie et al. (1991) noted that 50% of their sample of lesbian victims of violence and
abuse in relationships had perpetrated violent acts against a partner in the past. While
there were no qualitative explanations to elaborate the findings in this study, there are a
number of potential reasons why these women also perpetrated acts of violence. For
example, it may be plausible to believe that 50% of victims are in two-way violent
relationships and therefore just as much to blame as their partner. They may also be
lashing out defensively or as a reactionary action. They may also be pushed to their
emotional limits in their relationships and decide to stand up for themselves. However,
until there is further research to elaborate on these statistics the exact meaning of Lie et
al.’s findings remains unclear.

Effects of violence and abuse in relationships

The most frequently reported effects of sexual assault and abuse include depression,
anxiety, low self-esteem, disassociation, sleep disorders, shame, guilt, self-mutilation,
suicidal ideation and attempts, drug and alcohol abuse, eating disorders, Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder (PTSD), fear, displaced anger and sexual dysfunction (Sloan & Edmond,
1996). Reported prevalence rates of sexual violence in lesbian and gay relationships vary
from study to study (see page 8).

Getting help
There are a number of possible explanations relating to why victims of violence and
abuse in same-sex relationships do not seek help and support. Pitt & Dolan-Soto (2001)
argued that victims together with many of the organisations supporting victims of violent
or abusive relationships might not be aware that violence and abuse occurs in same-sex
relationships at approximately the same rate as in heterosexual relationships. As a result,
victims may believe that it is only happening to them. Lesbian, gay and bisexual victims,
like heterosexual victims, are often unwilling to report abuse because they fear retaliation
from an abusive partner. However victims from same-sex relationships may also be
anxious or concerned about reactions from professionals (including the Police) if they
reported the abuse (Burke & Follingstad, 1999). In the United States, the National
 14

Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP, 2002) argue that victims of violence or

abuse in same-sex relationships are unlikely or unwilling to seek assistance from services
such as battered women’s shelters, law enforcement, or health centres and hospitals
because of the perceived anti-lesbian/gay/bisexual prejudice that they believe pervades
such services. Victims of violence in same-sex relationships may also have difficulty in
reporting their abuse due to genderized view Society has about the nature of violence and
aggression. The prevailing attitude in Society is that women are not as violent as men,
and Letellier (1994) suggested that gay men may find it difficult to view themselves as
victims as it is inconsistent with prescribed notions of masculinity. Niolon (2002) argued
that contemporary society has failed to acknowledge that men can be victims of violence
too, and women can be perpetrators.
If and when a victim of violence or abuse decides to seek help, s/he needs to
know where s/he can go to obtain it. In 2001 at the Broken Rainbow Conference (held
in the United Kingdom) delegates were told for the first time that lesbians regularly face
homophobia in battered women’s refuges, and that currently, again in the UK, there are
only 18 bed spaces available for gay men (Broken Rainbow, 2002). The Conference also
identified that there is currently no support provision for transgender or bisexual victims
of violence or abuse in relationships. As a result, some researchers have argued that the
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities must take some responsibility for the
current lack of support provision for victims of violence and abuse in the home.
Delegates were told that although the community has become more visible in terms of
addressing political and human rights issues, it barely acknowledges the existence of
violence or abuse in same-sex relationships, and does not raise the issue with the
heterosexual population. This is a view shared by Morrow & Hawxhurst (1989), who
argued that many lesbians and ‘lesbian-supporting’ therapists hold idealized and often
unrealistic pictures about the nature of lesbian relationships, which lead them to deny the
existence of abuse among lesbian couples. Niolen (2002) further expanded on this point
by suggesting that domestic abuse within a lesbian relationship goes against feminist
philosophy (i.e. that a woman is capable of hitting or abusing another woman).
Furthermore, gay and bisexual men appear to agree with a myth that a man can not be a
victim of abuse. It has been suggested that this reluctance to acknowledge the existence
of violence in relationships by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities may
represent an unwillingness to acknowledge that same-sex relationships are not always
perfect, and can go wrong (Niolon, 2002; Broken Rainbow, 2002). However this lack of
acknowledgement can have a detrimental effect upon victims of abuse as Lehman (2002)
points out:

This silent denial by the community is detrimental as it perpetuates the abuse, suffocates
potential funding and services and removes support, protection, validation and empowerment
from the victim.

Methodological Issues
As we noted earlier in this report, many researchers have acknowledged the difficulties
involved in studying violence and abuse in all relationships, both same-sex and opposite-
sex. A direct comparison of prevalence rates of violence in relationships is often difficult
to undertake due to the differing methodologies employed by each researcher or group
of researchers. Burke & Follingstad (1999) argued that in order to conduct a reliable
study on violence in relationships it is imperative that the term is clearly defined. There
has been some controversy over whether behaviours such as threatening to punch
someone constitute an act of physical violence or psychological abuse. Because different
 15

authors define and record such behaviours in different ways, it is almost impossible to
establish a valid prevalence.
In addition, Burke & Follingstad (1999) have argued that, in terms of gathering
research data, it is necessary identify the victim and the perpetrator of the violence or
abuse carefully in order to determine whether the data being collected is indicative of an
abusive relationship or mutual battery. This could be done simply by asking participants
to explain why they or their partner were violent or abusive. However, without this
attempt at differentiation, acts of self-defence can only exaggerate prevalence rates.
Finally, Turell (2000) argued that there may be some methodological difficulties
relating to the use of self reports as a means of measuring violence or abuse in same-sex
relationships. Those individuals who remain in abusive relationships, or have been
affected most severely by their experiences are perhaps less likely to participate or
disclose fully for fear of their partner finding out. Consequently, those who do participate
or have participated in many of the studies cited above may under-represent their
experiences. As a result, Turell (2000) has suggested that retrospective reports may be a
more useful method of gathering data (i.e. that there is a sufficient lapse in time between
a victim leaving a violent or abusive relationship and her/his participation in the research
project).

Conclusion
Although there is an increasing body of research into violence and abuse in same-sex
relationships, it remains incredibly difficult to determine an accurate prevalence rate due
to the variety of methodological issues outlined above. However, researchers do seem to
agree that, in nature and expression at least, violence and abuse in same-sex relationships
follows a similar pattern to that found in heterosexual relationships, and that there
remains a need for the development of appropriate services for victims of violence or
abuse in same-sex relationships.
Based upon the data collected as part of this literature review, the authors have
devised a questionnaire (see APPENDIX II) that attempts to address many of the
methodological issues we have highlighted, including whether or not isolated reports of
violence or abuse are a retaliatory or defence mechanism against sustained abuse by a
same-sex partner.
 16

References
Alexander, C.J. (2002) Violence in Gay and Lesbian Relationships. Journal of Gay &
Lesbian Social Services: Issues in Practice, Policy & Research, 14, 95-98.

Aguilar, R.J., & Nightingale, N.N. (1994) The Impact of Specific Battering Experiences
on the Self-Esteem of Abused Women. Journal of Family Violence, 9, 35-45.

Bailey, G.R. (1996) Treatment of Violence in relationships in Gay and Lesbian

Relationships. Journal of Psychological Practice, 2, 1-8.

Beck, A.T. (1967) Depression: Clinical, experimental and therapeutic aspects. New York, NY:
Harper & Row.

Benedict, H. (1994) Recovery: How to survive sexual assault for women, men, teenagers and their
friends. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Berger, R.M. (1990). Men Together: Understanding the Gay Couple. Journal of
Homosexuality, 19, 31-49

Bologna, M.J., Waterman, C.K., & Dawson, L.J. (1987) Violence in Gay Male and Lesbian
Relationships: Implications for practitioners and policy makers. Paper Presented at the Third
National Conference for Family Violence Researchers, Durham, NH.

Bradford, J., Ryan, C,. & Rothblum, E.D. (1994). National Lesbian Health care survey:
Implications for mental health care. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 228-242.

Brand, P.A., & Kidd, A.H. (1986) Frequency of Physical Aggression in Heterosexual and
Female Homosexual Dyads. Psychological Reports, 59, 1307-1313.

Bryant, A.S., & Demian, R. (1994). Relationship Characteristics of American Gay and
Lesbian Couples: Findings from a national survey. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services,
1, 101-117.

Broken Rainbow, Conference Report Retrieved from www.lgbt-dv.org on12th May 2002.

Burke, L.K., & Follingstad, D.R. (1999). Violence in Lesbian and Gay Relationships:
Theory, Prevalence, and Correlational Factors. Clinical Psychology Review, 19, 5, 487-512.

Chesley, L., MacAuley, D., Ristick, J. & Stewart, C. (1998). Abuse in Lesbian Relationships:
Information and Resources. Ontario: Health Canada.
URL www.hc-sc.gc.ca/nc-cn

Coleman, D.H., & Straus, M.A. (1986) Marital Power, Conflict, and Violence. Violence and
Victims, 1, 141-157.

Coleman, V.E. (1990). Violence between lesbian couples: A between groups comparison.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University Microfilms International, 9109022
 17

Cruz, J.M., & Firestone, J.M. (1998). Exploring Violence and Abuse in Gay Male
Relationships. Violence and Victims, 13, 2, 159-173.

Cruz, J.M., & Peralta, R.L., (2001) Family Violence and Substance Use: The perceived
effects of substance use within gay male relationships. Violence and Victims, 16,161-172.

Diamond, D.l., & Wilsnack, S.C. (1978). Alcohol abuse among lesbians: A descriptive
study. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 123-142.

Dobash, R.E., & Dobash, R.P. (1984) The Nature of Antecedents and Violent Events.
The British Journal of Criminology, 24, 269-288.

Elliott, P. (1996) Shattering Illusions: Same sex violence in relationships. In C.M.

Renzetti, & C.H. Miley (Eds.), Violence in Gay and Lesbian Partnerships. (pp 1-8), New York,
NY: Haworth.

Farley, N. (1996). A survey of factors contributing to gay and lesbian violence in

relationships. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 4, 35-42.

Follingstad, D.R., Rutledge, L.L., Berg, B.J., Hause, E.S and Polek, D.S. (1990) The Role
of Emotional Abuse in Physically Abusive Relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 5, 107-
119.

Fray-Witzer, E. (1999) Twice Abused: Same sex violence in relationships and the law. In
Leventhal, B. & Lundy, S. (Eds) Same Sex Violence in relationships: Strategies for change.
London: Sage.

Frieze, I. (1980) Causes and Consequences of marital rape. In Russell, D.E.H. (Ed), Rape
in Marriage. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing.

Elliott, P.(Ed.)(1990). Confronting Lesbian Battering. St Paul, MN: Minnesota Coalition for
Battered Women.

Gardner, R. A. (1989). Method of conflict resolution and correlates of physical

aggression and victimization in heterosexual, lesbian, and gay male couples. Dissertation
Abstracts International, 50(2-B), 746.

Gay and Lesbian Community Action Council, Minneapolis, MN (1987). A Survey of the
Twin Cities gay and lesbian community: Northstar Project. (Unpublished Manuscript).

Greenwood, G.L., Relf, M.V., Huang, B., Pollack, L.M., Canchola, J.A., Cantania, J.A.
(2002). Battering Victimisation among a Probability sample of men who have sex with
men, American Journal of Public Health, 92, 12, 1964-1969.

Gunther, J., & Jennings, M.A. (1999). . Sociocultural and institutional violence and their
impact on same-gender partner abuse. In J.C. McClennen & Gunther (Eds.), A
Professional guide to understanding gay and lesbian violence in relationships: Understanding practice
Interventions. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press.

Harry, J. (1984) Gay Couples. New York, NY: Praeger Publishers

 18

Hudson, W.W. & McIntosh, S.R. (1981) The Assessment of Spouse Abuse: Two
quantifiable dimensions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 873-885

Island, D., & Letellier, P. (1991) Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them. New York, NY:
Harrington.

Kelly, E.E., & Warshafsky, L. (1987) Partner Abuse in Gay Male and Lesbian Couples. Paper
Presented at the Third National Conference for Family Violence Researchers, Durham,
NH.

Landolt, M.A., & Dutton, D.G. (1997) Power and Personality: An analysis of gay male
intimate abuse. Sex Roles, 37, 335-359.

Lehman, M. Screams in a Vacuum. Retrieved from

www.womanabuseprevention.com/html/screams_in_a_vacuum.html on 17th March,
2003.

Lehman, M. At the End of the Rainbow: A report on Gay Male Violence in relationships and
Abuse. Retreived from
www.lgbt-dv.org/copy_final/end_rainbow.pdf on the 17th March, 2003

Letellier, P. (1994). Gay and bisexual violence in relationships victimization: Challenges

to feminist theory and responses to violence. Violence & Victims, 9, 95-106.

Lie, G. & Gentlewarrier, S. (1991) Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships:

Discussion of survey findings and practice implications. Journal of Social Service Research,15,
41-59

Lie, G., Schilit, R., Bush, R., Montagne, M., & Reyes, L. (1991). Lesbians in currently
aggressive relationships: How frequently do they report aggressive past relationships?
Violence and Victims, 6, 121-135.

Loulan, J. (1987) Lesbian Passion. San Francisco, CA: Spinsters/Aunt Lute.

Marrujo, B., & Kreger, M. (1996). Definition of Roles in Abusive Lesbian Relationships.
Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 4,23-35.

McClennen, J.C., Summers, A.B., & Vaughan, C. (2002) Gay Men’s Violence in
relationships: Dynamics, help-seeking behaviours, and correlates. Journal of Gay & Lesbian
Social Services: Issues in practice, policy & research, 14, 23-49

Merrill, G.S., & Wolfe, V.A. (2000) Battered Gay Men: An exploration of abuse, help
seeking and why they stay. Journal of Homosexuality, 39, 1-30

Miller, A.J., Bobner, R.F., & Zarski, J.J. (2000) Sexual Identity Development: A base for
work with same sex couple partner abuse. Contemporary Family Therapy, 22, 189-200.

Minnesota Program Development. The Power and Control Wheel. Retrieved from
www.dulth-model.org on the 1st May, 2003.
 19

Morrow, S.L., & Hawxhurst, D.M. (1989). Lesbian Partner abuse: Implications for
therapists, Journal of Counselling and Development, 68, 58-68.

Niolon, R. (2002) Violence in relationships in Gay and Lesbian Couples. Retrieved from
www.psychpage.com/learning/library/gay/gayvio.html

Pitt, E.L., (2000). Violence in relationships in Gay and Lesbian Relationships. Journal of the
Gay and Lesbian Medical Association,4, 195-196.

Pitt, E., Dolan-Soto, D. (2001). Clinical Considerations in Working with Victims of

Same-Sex Violence in relationships. Journal of the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, 5,163-
169.

Renzetti, C. M. (1988). Violence in lesbian relationships: A preliminary analysis of causal

factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 3, 381-399.

Renzetti, C.M. (1989). Building its second closet: third party responses to victims of
lesbian partner abuse. Family Relations, 38, 157-163.

Renzetti, C.M. (1992) Violent Betrayal: Partner abuse in lesbian relationships. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.

Renzetti, C. (1997). Violence and Abuse among same-sex xouples. In A.P. Cardarelli
(Ed), Violence between intimate partners: Patterns, causes, and effects. Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.

Rosenberg, M. (1965) Society and the Adolescent Self Image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.

Schilit, R., Lie, G.Y., & Montagne, M. (1990). Substance use as a correlate of violence in
intimate lesbian relationships. Journal of Homosexuality, 19, 51-65.

Schilit, R, Lie, G-Y, Bush, J., Montagne, M., & Reyes, L. (1991). Intergenerational
Transmission of Violence in Lesbian Relationships. Affilia, 6, 72.

Sloan, L., & Edmond, T. (1996) Shifting the Focus: Recognising the Needs of Lesbian
and Gay Survivors of Sexual Violence. Journal of Lesbian and Gay Social Services, 5, 33-52.

Tuel, B.D., & Russell, R.K. (1998) Self-Esteem and Depression in Battered Women: A
comparison of lesbian and heterosexual survivors. Violence Against Women, 4, 344-362.

Turell, S.C. (2000) A Descriptive Analysis of Same-Sex Relationship Violence for a

Diverse Sample. Journal of Family Violence, 15, 281-293.

Walker, L. (1979) The Battered Woman. New York, NY: Harper Perennial

Waldner-Haugrud, L.K. (1995) Male and Female Sexual Victimisation in Dating

Relationships: Gender differences in coercion techniques and outcomes. Violence and
Victims, 10, 125-136.
 20

Waldner-Haugrud, L.K. (1999) Sexual Coercion in Lesbian and Gay Relationships: A

review and critique. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 4, 139-149.

Waldner-Haugrud, L.K., & Gratch, L.V. (1997b) Sexual Coercion in Gay/Lesbian

Relationships: Descriptives and gender differences. Violence & Victims, 12, 87-98

Waldner-Haugrud, L.K., Gratch. L.V., & Magruder, B. (1997a) Victimization and

Perpetration Rates of Violence in Gay and Lesbian Relationships: Gender
issues explored. Violence & Victims, 12, 173-184.

Wallace, H. (1996). Family Violence: Legal, Medical, and social perspectives. Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Waterman, C.K., Dawson, L.J., Bologna, M.J. (1989) Sexual Coercion in Gay Male and
Lesbian Relationship: Predictors and implications for support services. The Journal of Sex
Research, 26, 118-124.
 21

APPENDIX I: Summary of Key Research Findings

Authors Sample Method Findings/Results
Diamond & 10 lesbians with Self- report/ Drinking was related to an increase in
Wilsnack (1978) alcohol problems semi structured physical and verbal aggression
interviews
Gwat-Young 1,109 lesbians More than half had been abused by a
Lie & female partner in their lifetimes.
Gentlewarrior
(1985)
Brand & Kidd 75 heterosexual Questionnaire Frequency of aggression significantly
(1986) and 55 lesbian higher amongst heterosexual women,
women found that 25% had been physically
abused by a lesbian partner
Loulan (1987) 1566 lesbians Self-report Prevalence of aggression was found to
questionnaire be significantly higher in heterosexual
relationships than amongst lesbian
couples.
Gay and 900 lesbians and Survey 22% had been in a physically violent
Lesbian 1000 gay men in lesbian relationship,
Community Minnesota 17% of the gay men reported having
Action Council been in a physically abusive
relationship
Kelly & 98 lesbians and Survey 46% reported at least one incidence of
Warshafsky gay men physical aggression in their most
(1987) recent relationship
Renzetti (1988) 100 battered Self-report Victims of abuse were extremely
lesbians, questionnaire dependant upon their partner
Renzetti (1989) 100 battered Questionnaire 74% reported 6 or more incidents of
lesbians abusive incidents, with pushing and
shoving being the most common
forms.
Gardner (1989) 43 heterosexual, Questionnaire Those in violent relationships were
43 lesbian, 39 gay more aggressive, hostile, distressed,
male couples, alcohol consuming, and less satisfied
recruited through with their relationships, than those
advertising who weren’t.
Schilit et al. 104 lesbian Questionnaire Substance abuse was significantly
(1990) related to being both a perpetrator of
abuse and a victim.
Coleman (1990) 90 lesbian couples Survey 46% experienced repeated acts of
violence in their relationships
Elliott (1990) The 1987 Lesbian 76% of lesbian participants had
battering experienced some form of indirect
intervention threat of violence from a lesbian
project in partner
Minnesota
Lie et al. (1991) 169 lesbians Survey 76% of lesbians reported experiencing
some form of violence in a lesbian
relationship.
Lie & 1099 Lesbians Questionnaire Over 50% reported some form of
Gentlewarrior abuse, most victims gained support
(1991) from private therapy/counselling
 22

Schilit et al 100 battered Questionnaire History of abuse by a male and/or

(1991) lesbians family origins of violence correlated
with both victimization and
perpetration.
Island & 9.5 million gay Estimated approximately 500,000 are
Letellier (1991) men in the US victims of partner abuse each year
Schilit, Bush, 26% reported abuse (physical,
Montagne & emotional or sexual) in a current
Reyes (1991) relationship
Renzetti (1992) 100 lesbians Questionnaire Jealousy, imbalance of power,
substance abuse, intergenerational
abuse and dependency were all related
to abuse.
Bryant & 560 gay male, & Questionnaire 31% reported abuse, 16% reported
Demian (1994) 706 lesbian verbal abuse, 11% of men and 7% of
couples women reported physical abuse.
Bradford, Ryan 1,925 Lesbians Questionnaire 16% physically abused by adults, 19%
& Rothblum (National of these reported abuse by another
(1994) Lesbian Health female.
Care Survey)
Harms (1995) 393 gay and Questionnaire 26% reported using violence in their
bisexual men most recent relationship, and 25%
reported being victim to it.
Chesley et al 189 lesbians Survey 66% knew of lesbians who had
(1998) experienced domestic abuse in their
relationships, 37 of the 189 viewed
themselves as being in an abusive
relationship, and 20 reported having
experienced some form of physical
assault.
Cruz & 25 self-identify In depth 1 person initially identified himself as
Firestone gay men interviews a perpetrator and later as a victim, the
(1998) other 24 all identified themselves as
victims, although many suggested that
they were capable of provoking
violence, made no clear distinction
between victim and perpetrator.
Merrill & Wolfe 52 gay men, 87% reported severe recurrent
(2000) recruited through physical abuse, 79% had suffered at
programs that least one injury. Over a third did not
offered violence know where to seek help and support
in relationships from.
support services
Greenwood et Probability Telephone 34% reported psychological/symbolic
al. (2002) sample of 2881 interviews. battering, 22% physical battering, 5%
MSM sexual battering.
McClennan et 63 self identified Questionnaire Most common form of abuse was
al. (2002) victims of being verbally threatened
domestic abuse
 23

APPENDIX II: Questionnaire

The following questionnaire is part of a project commissioned by Yorkshire Mesmac,

into the prevalence of violence and abuse among same-sex couples in Yorkshire. We are
hoping to identify how many of you have experiences of domestic abuse and whether
there is sufficient service provision in Yorkshire to help, advise and support individuals
with such experiences.
The questionnaire is relatively short and should take no longer than 15 minutes to
complete. The questionnaire is split into two parts, the first part focuses on whether you
are or have ever been in an abusive relationship, and the second part focuses on whether
you have been abusive towards a partner. Some questions require you to simply tick
boxes, whereas others require more detailed responses in the spaces provided. We
understand that some questions may be difficult to answer, and we would like to stress
that it is not our intention to offend or embarrass you, we would also like to emphasise
that your privacy and confidentiality is maintained at all times, we do not ask your name
or for any other information which we may be able to use to identify you. We do ask for
the first part of your post code, however this is simply to make sure that you live in
Yorkshire.
We would also like to thank you in advance for taking the time to complete this
questionnaire, and if you would like any further information on the project please do not
hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely

Nathalie Noret Andrew Richards

Researcher Researcher
School of Sports Science & Psychology School of Sports Science & Psychology
York St John College York St John College
Lord Mayors Walk Lord Mayors Walk
YORK YO31 7EX YORK YO31 7EX

[email protected] [email protected]

We have included some help line Numbers if you would like to talk to anyone about
domestic abuse.

Men: 0208 644 9914

An organisation which supports men who are experiencing domestic abuse.

Women: 0870 5995443

Refuge provides counselling and support for women experiencing abuse
 24

Violence and Abuse in Same-Sex Relationships

First Part of Your Postcode: _____

1) Age: _____ years 2) What Gender do you identify with?

Male
Female

3) How would you describe yourself? (Tick appropriate box)

White UK G IrishG G G Other G G

Black Caribbean G AfricanGG G UKG G
Somali G OtherG G G
Asian Pakistani G IndianG G G BangladeshiG
Turkish G GreekG G G ChineseGG
Turkish Cypriot G Greek Cypriot G Asian otherG
Other please specify which ________________________________

4) How would you describe your social class? (Please specify) ______________________

(e.g. working, lower middle, middle, upper middle, upper)

5) Are you currently at secondary School/ College or university?

Yes
No

6) What is your current occupation? _______________________________________

7) How would you describe your sexual orientation? ____________________________

8) Are you currently in a Relationship?

Yes If yes, for how long? ________________________
No

9) Have you ever been in an abusive relationship?

Yes, my current relationship
Yes, in one of my previous relationships
Yes, in a number of my past relationships How many? ______
No, never

10) Are you afraid of your current partner?

Yes
No

11) Were you ever afraid of a previous partner?

Yes
No

12) If you suffered abuse in a previous relationship, how long did the relationship last for?
Less than a month G
More than a month, less than six months
More than six months, less than a year
More than a year

13) Did the relationship end as a result of the abuse?

Yes
No
 25

14) If you are currently in an abusive relationship can you explain the reasons why you do not
leave you partner?

15) If you are currently in an abusive relationship, or have been in the past, how long was it
before the relationship became abusive?
Within the first month
After the first month, within the first six months
After the first six months, within a year
After a year
Other, please state________________________________________

16) Have you ever told anyone about the abuse you are experiencing/ have experienced?
Yes
No

If yes, who did you tell?

Friend(s) G Domestic Violence HelplineG
Member of family G Support GroupG G G
Work Colleague G Counsellor/therapistG G
GP G PoliceG G G G
Other Medical professional G Other (please state) _________________

17) If you have never told anyone about the abuse can you explain why not?

18) Did you ever suffer any form of abuse after the relationship ended?
Yes
No

19) If yes, what types of abuse did you experience?

None
Stalking
Abusive phone calls
Other (please state)________________________________________
________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________
 26

20) Your experiences of abuse. Below is a list of abusive behaviours, please read the list
below and write in the relevant column the number of times you have experienced the abusive
act, either in a current relationship or a previous relationship. If you have never experienced a
particular act please leave the columns blank.

In a current In a previous
Relationship Relationship
Hits you
Punches you
Throws objects at you
Kicks you
Pushes/ shoves you
Slaps you
Chokes you
Threatens you with physical violence
Hits you with objects
Cut you with a sharp object
Forces you to have sex against you will
Forces you to have unsafe sex
Threatened to give you HIV
Criticises/ ridicules your sexual performance
Told you that you would have nothing if the relationship ended
Threatened to kill you if you left
Threatened to commit suicide
Criticises you
Intimidates you
Humiliates you
Demeans you/ puts you down
Swears as you
Calls you name
Insults you
Accuses you of being unfaithful
Blames you for his/her abusive behaviour
Constantly checks up on you
Tells you that no one else would want you
Locks you in a room/ in the house
Locks you out of the house
Tries to stop you seeing/talking to friends and/or family
Restricts you access to money/ finances
Steals your money
Gets you into debt
Damages your property
Smashes things in the house
Breaks your things
Threatens to out you to family/friends/work colleagues
Other, Please state

21) How frequently is/was your partner abusive towards you?

Daily
2+ times a week
Once a week
2+ times a month
Once a month
Less than once a month
 27

22) Do/did you ever become abusive in retaliation to your partners abuse?
Yes G
No

23) When your partner becomes/became abusive towards you, how do/did you react?

24) How does your partner react/behave after he/she has been abusive towards you?
Apologises G Becomes very loving and attentive
Promises it will never happen again G Expresses guilt/shame/sorrowG
Promises to change G Blames you for the abuse G
Other (please state)_____________________________________________

25) Have you ever received any injuries as a result of your partner’s abuse?
Yes
No

26) If yes, what injuries did you receive as a result of the abuse?
Scratches G G Difficulty breathing/faintingG
Bruises G G knocked unconsciousG G
Nose/ Lip bleeds G G Head InjuryG G G
Black eye/ other facial bruising G G Serious cuts/woundsG G
Broken Teeth G G ScarsG G G G
Broken arms/legs or ribs G G Contracted HIVGG G
Broken nose/ jaw/ cheekbone G G Contracted other STIG G
Burns
Other Physical Injury, (please state):_________________________________

27) Did you ever receive medical treatment for any physical injury you may have received?
Yes G How many times? _________________________
No

28) Did you inform the medical staff of the cause of your injuries?
Yes G Please go to question 29
No G Please go to question 30

29) If yes, can you describe the reaction of the medical staff?
 28

30) If no why not?

Felt ashamed/embarrassed Feared my partners reaction
Did not think they would understand Did not think they would help me
Feared a homophobic reaction Thought they would not believe me
Other (Please state) _____________________________________________
__________________________________________________________

31) Did the police ever become involved as a result of your partners violence?
Yes
No

32) If yes, how did the police react to the situation?

33) Have you ever experienced any of the following problems as a result of your partner’s
abusive behaviour?
Forced to give up job
Forced to give up home
Lost contact with friends
Lost contact with family
Became dependant on drugs
Became dependant on alcohol
Other (please state)_______________________________________

34) Have you ever accessed any support services/groups/help lines?

Yes
No
35) If yes, which one? _________________________________________________

36) If no, why not

Do not believe that my situation is that serious
Am not aware that such services exist
Do not know where these services are
Do not believe they would understand my problems
Fear my partner finding out
Fear a prejudiced reaction
Other (Please specify) _____________________________________
_____________________________________________________
 29

37) Abuse you committed towards a partner, please read the list below, and write in one or
both of the columns, the number of times you have committed this act towards a partner,
either in a current relationship or in a previous relationship. If you have never committed a
particular act, please leave the columns blank.

In a current In a
Relationship previous
Relationship
Hit him/her
Punched him
Thrown objects at him/ her
Kicked him/her
Pushed/ shoved him/her
Slapped him/her
Choked him/her
Threatened him/her with physical violence
Hit him/her with objects
Cut him/her with a sharp object
Forced him/her to have sex against their will
Forced him/her to have unsafe sex
Threatened to give him/her HIV
Criticised/ ridiculed your partners sexual performance
Told him/her that they would have nothing if the relationship
ended
Threatened to kill yourself if he/she left
Threatened to commit suicide
Criticised him/her
Intimidated him/her
Humiliated him/her
Demean him/her/ puts him/her down
Swear at him/her
Call your partner names
Insult your partner
Accused him/her of being unfaithful
Blame your partner for your abusive behaviour
Constantly checking up on your partner
Tell your partner that no one else would want him/her
Lock your partner in a room/ in the house
Lock your partner out of the house
Try to stop your partner seeing/talking to friends and/or
family
Restrict your partners access to money/ finances
Steal your partners money
Get your partner into debt
Damage your partners property
Smash things in the house
Break your partners things
Threaten to out your partner to family/friends/work
colleagues
Other, Please state

38) How frequently are/were you abusive towards your partner

Daily
2+ times a week
Once a week
2+ times a month
Once a month
Less than once a month
 30

39) Can you explain the reasons why you were/ are abusive towards your partner?

40) Can you describe the circumstances that cause you to be abusive towards your partner?

41) Do/did you drink before you are/were abusive?

Yes
No

42) Do/did you use any drugs before you are/were abusive?
Yes
No

43) Has your partner ever sustained any injuries as a result of your abusive behaviour
Yes
No

44) If yes, what injuries did he/she receive as a result of the abuse?
Scratches G G Difficulty breathing/faintingG
Bruises G G knocked unconsciousG G
Nose/ Lip bleeds G G Head InjuryG G G
Black eye/ other facial bruising G G Serious cuts/woundsG G
Broken Teeth G G ScarsG G G G
Broken arms/legs or ribs G G Contracted HIVGG G
Broken nose/ jaw/ cheekbone G G Contracted other STDG G
Burns
Other Physical Injury, (please state):_________________________________

45) Can you explain how you feel/behave after you have been violent towards your partner
 31

46) Have you ever experienced any of the following problems as a result of your abusive
behaviour?
Forced to give up job
Forced to give up home
Lost contact with friends
Lost contact with family
Became dependant on drugs
Became dependant on alcohol
Have been arrested
Other (please state)_______________________________________

47) Have you ever talked to anyone about your abusive behaviour?
Yes
No

48) Who did you talk to?

Friend(s) G Domestic Violence HelplineG
Member of family G Support GroupG G G
Work Colleague G Counsellor/therapistG G
GP G PoliceG G G G
Other Medical professional G Other (please state) _________________

49) Have you ever sought any professional help for your abusive behaviour?
Yes
No

If yes, where did you go?_______________________________________________

50) If no can you explain why? (Please tick all that apply)
Do not think they would understand my problems G
Worry they will not be accepting of my sexuality
Do not know where to go
Worry they may judge me
Other (Please state)_____________________________________________
 32

We have included a blank page, if you would like to make some additional comments about
your experiences or issues raised in this questionnaire please us this space.
 33

About the Authors

Andrew Richards, BA, is a researcher within the School of Sports Science and
Psychology at York St John College, a college of the University of Leeds and a Church of
England Foundation.

Nathalie Noret, BSc, is a researcher within the School of Sports Science and
Psychology at York St John College, a college of the University of Leeds and a Church of
England Foundation.

Ian Rivers, PhD, is Reader in Psychology within the School of Sports Science and
Psychology at York St John College, a college of the University of Leeds and a Church of
England Foundation. He is the author of over 40 journal articles and book chapters
focusing upon lesbian, gay and bisexual development, and is the recipient of the British
Psychological Society’s 2001 Award for Promoting Equality of Opportunity for his work
as a psychologist.