Situational Couple Violence, Intimate Terrorism and Violent Sample Clauses

Situational Couple Violence, Intimate Terrorism and Violent. Resistance In response to findings from community-based surveys, family violence researchers have sought to categorise nuances in the nature and severity of violence perpetrated in intimate relationships. For example, Xxxxxxx makes a distinction between ‘situational couple violence’, ‘intimate terrorism’ and ‘violent resistance’ (Xxxxxxx, 2008). ‘Situational couple violence’ describes infrequent violence that arises as an intermittent response to occasional conflicts of everyday life; it is not seen to escalate over time and is not associated with a general pattern of control. In contrast, ‘intimate terrorism’ describes a continued pattern of violence, intimidation and control that is characterised by severe and frequent violence; it is seen to escalate over time and comprises one component in a general pattern of coercive control. Finally, ‘violent resistance’ describes violence that is used by one partner in response to the others use of ‘intimate terrorism’ (Xxxxxxx, 2008; Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx & Xx, 2008). Xxxxxxx’x research suggests that there are distinct gender differences in these three forms of violence: ‘intimate terrorism’ and ‘violent resistance’ is largely perpetrated by men against their female partners, whereas ‘situational couple violence’ is seen to be comparable among men and women (Xxxxxxx, 2010). Support for Xxxxxxx’x typologies have been found in other research studies, which examine patterns of violence within intimate relationships (Xxxxxx, 2000; Xxxx, Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx, et al, 2006; Xxxxxx-Xxxxx & Xxxxxx, 2003; Xxxxx, Xxxxxxx, Xxxxx, et al, 2004; Xxxxxx, 2010). However, detailed examinations of the nature and degree of violence within intimate relationships indicates that controlling behaviours are present within each of the three typologies (Xxxxxx- Xxxxx & Xxxxxx, 2008). Moreover, distinct gender differences are seen to be present in the perpetration of mutual violence within the ‘situational couple violence’ typology (Prospero, Xxxxxx & Ofori-Dua, 2009). Finally, feminist scholars argue that classifications of violence such as these, which focus exclusively on individual and couple dynamics, fail to take in to consideration gender disparities and systems of oppression (e.g. heterosexism, classism, race and religious factors) (Xxxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxx, 2011; Xxxxxx & Xxxx, 2010a). Variations between the models of Xxxxxx and Xxxxxxx may partly reflect differences in the conceptualisation of domestic violence among feminist and family viole...