Advertisement

Reconceptualising Typologies of Violence

  • Heather NancarrowEmail author
Chapter
  • 301 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Victims and Victimology book series (PSVV)

Abstract

This chapter presents a reconceptualised typology of violence that emerged from the analysis in preceding chapters and of police reports at the beginning of this chapter. The reconceptualised typology explicitly uses an intersectional analysis of race and gender to distinguish coercive control and fights. It adds the concept of “chaos context violence”, identified in the research on which the book is based, and contemporary forms of traditional Aboriginal dispute resolution from Australian anthropological literature. These are primarily subsets of fights. Case studies from police reports illustrate the typology. They highlight sex and race differences in the use and meanings of violence in intimate partner relationships.

Keywords

Typology of violence Intimate partner violence Family violence Police reports Coercive control Violent resistance Fights Chaos Alcohol Jealousy Aboriginal dispute resolution Sex differences Race differences 

References

  1. Behrendt, L. (1993). Aboriginal women and the white lies of the feminist movement: Implications for Aboriginal women in rights discourse. Australian Feminist Law Journal, 1, 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blagg, H. (2008). Crime, aboriginality and the decolonisation of justice. Sydney: Hawkins Press.Google Scholar
  3. Burbank, V. K. (1994). Fighting women: Anger and aggression in Aboriginal Australia. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  4. Coker, D. (1999). Enhancing autonomy for battered women: Lessons from Navajo peacemaking. UCLA Law Review, 47(1), 1–111.Google Scholar
  5. Johnson, M. P. (2008). A typology of violence: Intimate terrorism, violent resistance, and situational couple violence. Lebanon, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  6. Langton, M. (1988). Medicine square. In I. Keen (Ed.), Being black: Aboriginal cultures in ‘settled’ Australia (pp. 201–226). Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.Google Scholar
  7. Memmott, P. (2010). On regional and cultural approaches to Australian Indigenous violence. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 43(2), 333–355.  https://doi.org/10.1375/acri.43.2.333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Memmott, P., Stacy, R., Chambers, C., & Keys, C. (2001). Violence in Indigenous communities. Canberra: Crime Prevention Branch, Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mow, K. E. (1992). Tjunparni: Family violence in Indigenous Australia. Canberra: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission.Google Scholar
  10. Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Queensland Domestic Violence Task Force (QDVTF). (1988). Beyond these walls. Brisbane: Queensland Government.Google Scholar
  12. Schechter, S. (1982). Women and male violence: The visions and struggles of the battered women’s movement. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.Google Scholar
  13. Stark, E. (2006). Commentary on Johnson’s “Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence”. Violence Against Women, 12(11), 1019–1025.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801206293329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Williams, N. (1987). Two laws: Managing disputes in a contemporary Aboriginal community. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ANROWSSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations