Role call: sex, gender roles, and intimate partner violence

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) continues to be viewed in gendered and heteronormative ways. Stanziani, Cox, and Coffey (2018, Adding insult to injury: Sex, sexual orientation, and juror decision-making in a case of intimate partner violence. Journal of Homosexuality, 65(10), 1325–1350) presented participants with a case of alleged IPV while manipulating the sex and sexual orientation of the aggressor/victim dyad. Results suggested participants view violence perpetrated by a man against a woman most abhorrently. The current study replicated and expanded that study, exploring how gender role beliefs influence participant decision-making. Female participants held more adverse attitudes towards IPV when a male assaulted a female. Further, participant gender role beliefs influenced decision-making. Specifically, males who endorsed higher levels of hegemonic masculinity perceived the crime to be less serious, while females who endorsed the same beliefs perceived the defendant as less likely to benefit from treatment. Overall, results suggest individual beliefs regarding gender roles and masculinity may influence their perceptions of IPV, regardless of the gender and sexual orientation of the aggressor and victim.