Dr. Matthew Ball, Associate Lecturer, School of Justice, Queensland University of Technology Despite the dearth of research on the issue of violence within male same-sex intimate partnerships, a recurring finding is that victims of such violence rarely seek assistance from police or other service providers. This presentation will examine the interaction between social discourses on intimate partner violence and those on masculinities in order to provide a broad conceptual framework for understanding this phenomenon. Specifically, it will chart the way that social discourses on intimate partner violence, as well as those relating to masculinity, create tensions between performing masculinity, identifying as gay, and positioning oneself as a victim of violence. In doing so, it will consider the potential for analyses of these discourses to help understand and prevent intimate partner violence in these contexts.

1. Male Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence, Masculinity, and the Incomprehensibility of Being a Victim Dr Matthew Ball Associate Lecturer School of Justice, Queensland University of Technology

3. Conceptual framework to understand

4. Importance of discourses on intimate partner violence and masculinity and interaction

5. Chart way discourses create tensions between…

6. Performing masculinity

7. Identifying as gay, and

8. Positioning oneself as a victim of violence

10. Intimate Partner Violence Binary subject positions (Male) perpetrator – heterosexual, working class masculinity (Female) victim – typically ‘feminine’, vulnerable Police and Government Services, Other Research Forums Family violence, violence does not discriminate, liaison officers (Ball and Hayes, forthcoming)

11. Violence and patriarchy connected (Dobash and Dobash 1979) Heteronormative Sex, Violence and Crime: Foucault and the ‘Man’ Question (Howe 2009) Fear that recognising men as victims would detract from a focus on women (challenge core claims of feminism) Based on less violence against men Same-sex violence dismissed as ‘bland’ Feminist Criminology

13. Violence as a resource for performing masculinity

14. Man as violent actor – invisible as victim

15. Homosexuality as subordinate masculinity

16. IPV

17. Generally male perpetrator, female victim - heteronormative

18. Feminism

19. Fixed, heteronormative subject positions, based on patriarchal model

20. Reinforces gendered attitude to GLBTI relationships

22. Conclusion Social and criminological discourses on IPV and masculinity Cannot account for outside heteronormative/feminist frame Impact on help-seeking behaviour What this means Work through discourses on violence, feminism, masculinity Future research Exclusion from society, discourses Identity – interplay of gender and sexuality