Who or what do young adults hold responsible for men’s drunken violence?

The hammer and the nail: The triple lock of methods, realities and institutional contexts in Australian research on nightlife violence

There is considerable public and policy debate in Australia about measures to reduce violence associated with alcohol and young people in the night-time economy. Though overrepresented in violence, the role of men and masculinities is rarely explicitly addressed in policy responses to such violence, which rest on a narrow range of mainly quantitative research and recommendations favouring blanket alcohol restrictions. Drawing on John Law and colleagues' account of the 'double social life of methods' (2011), we analyse interviews conducted with Australian quantitative researchers about the role of gender in such violence. According to Law et al., methods inhabit and reproduce particular ecologies and reflect the concerns of those who advocate them. From this 'triple lock' of methods, realities, and institutional advocacies and contexts emerges particular modes of knowing. Participants described a research ecology in which the authority of quantitative research methods emerged in relation to an imperative to respond in a 'timely' and 'pragmatic' fashion to public policy debates, and prevailing governmental and policy priorities and public framings of violence. Though participants frequently acknowledged the role of men in violence, these arrangements sustain taken-for-granted assumptions about the properties and effects of alcohol while displacing men and masculinities from policy attention. The political consequences of these arrangements demand the development of innovative policy responses and new modes of knowing that make visible the gendering of violence.

Does drinking modify the relationship between men's gender-inequitable attitudes and their perpetration of intimate partner violence? A meta-analysis of surveys of men from seven countries in the Asia Pacific region

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although men's alcohol misuse and less gender-equitable attitudes have been identified as risks for perpetration of intimate partner violence (IPV), less is known about how men's gender-equitable attitudes and drinking act together to increase risk of IPV. This study aimed to assess the independent relationships of lower gender-equitable attitudes and drinking to perpetration of IPV and their interaction among men in seven countries.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of the United Nations Multi-Country Study on Men and Violence (UNMCS) and Nabilan Study databases consisting of (1) unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression to measure the association of perpetration of IPV with gender-equitable men (GEM) scale score and regular heavy episodic drinking (RHED) and (2) meta-analyses of prevalence and effect estimates adjusted for country-level sites and countries.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 9148 ever-partnered 18-49-year-old men surveyed in 2011-15 from 18 sites in Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka and Timor Leste.

MEASUREMENTS

The outcome variable is reported perpetration of physical or sexual IPV in the previous year.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

GEM scale scores; RHED, defined as six or more drinks in one session at least monthly (compared with other drinkers and abstainers).

FINDINGS

Pooled past-year prevalence of perpetration of IPV was 13% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 9-16%]. GEM scores and RHED were independently associated with perpetration of IPV overall and in most sites. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) for perpetration of IPV with less equitable GEM scores were 1.07 (95% CI = 1.04, 1.09) and with RHED were 3.42 (95% CI = 2.43, 4.81). A significant interaction between GEM score and RHED (P = 0.001) indicated that RHED increased the relationship of less gender-equitable attitudes and perpetration of IPV.

CONCLUSION

Both gender-inequitable attitudes and drinking appear to be associated with perpetration of intimate partner violence by men, with regular heavy episodic drinking increasing the likelihood of intimate partner violence among men with less equitable gender attitudes.