Recently, the extent to which domestic violence is a gender issue has been the subject of debate, since violence takes place within lesbian relationships. Gender is socially
constructed and, as such, is always present in human relationships. Gender is relevant to men's violence against women and to intra-lesbian battering, but gender plays out differently in the significantly
different relational contexts. Because lesbian battering doesn't neatly fit into the theoretical model of heterosexual battering, it doesn't mean that we throw out our theory.
A more productive approach would be to
understand the continuities and discontinuities between violence in heterosexual and lesbian relationships. Obviously, there will be some similarities in why acts of physical violence are perpetrated in intimate
relations, but there will be many differences as well between heterosexual and gay/lesbian relationships.
The only way to develop a more complete and nuanced picture of the underlying dynamics is to contextualize our
understanding; otherwise we may take the regressive step of proposing a purely psychological model which does not take social relations into account.
Instead, we need to understand the forces of systemic
subordination, such as heterosexism, sexism, racism, classism and differences in abilities, as these contribute to the shape violence in intimate relationships may take. Specifically, how are lesbian lives shaped,
constrained and limited by the systems of oppression? To what degree and finally with what effect? We need to question whether the form and function of lesbian battering is the same as 'wife abuse'
perpetrated by men against their female intimates.
What both forms of abuse may share is the function of social control, albeit for entirely different reasons. Heterosexual men internalize the belief of male
dominance, that is, that they are entitled to control their female partners in order to keep their privilege and dominance in place. Men's violence against women in intimate relationships is inextricably a part of
male entitlement, a belief in men's right to control women and in male superiority. These beliefs are widely reinforced institutionally throughout our culture. Unlike heterosexual woman abuse, there are no
wider cultural messages reinforcing lesbian superiority over their partners, or women's entitlement to exert control over their intimates to explain why some women may abuse their female partners.
In a lesbian
relationship, on the other hand, the sense of isolation, invisibility and silence that is often the result of homophobia and heterosexism increases the dependency of the partners on each other. This increased
dependency and isolation may result in an increased need to control one's partner, especially in relationships where one lesbian passes as heterosexual while her partner does not, or when one partner seeks more
independence or separation. These disruptions may pose a threat to the integrity of the relationship. This could result in a lesbian partner responding with emotional or physical violence as an attempt to
control her partner and keep her in the relationship. Additionally, a consequence of internalized sexism and homophobia may very likely be decreased self-worth and possibly self hate. This sense of
powerlessness and worthlessness that a lesbian may feel about herself can be transferred onto her partner. It is much easier to batter and violate someone you view with contempt, especially when that contempt is
socially produced and reinforced through homophobia. Internalized homophobia and sexism are manifestations of oppression.
Although these oppressions have clear psychological dimensions in terms of how they are
manifested, they are still socially constructed, and gender is always implicated. This distinction between seeing a phenomenon as socially constructed versus one that is purely psychological is not just a matter
of semantics. How we theorize and understand the problem gives direction to how we develop our strategies and interventions. If we see lesbian battering as a consequence of psychological problems, the
approach would be to offer treatment to the individual, devoid of any attention to the social context of the relationship. If, however, we see the problem as socially constructed as a result of the intersections of
different oppressions, then our approach is also one of social change, including creating safer communities, connection and support for lesbians, while working to eradicate homophobia and heterosexism.
It is
unlikely that physical violence, coercion and control characterize lesbian relationships to the same extent that repeated research has shown in random
samples of women's experiences in heterosexual relationships. There is no historical and contemporary legacy legitimizing physical violence in lesbian relationships as there is underpinning men's violence against women in intimate relationships. Clearly this is a fundamental difference in the gender dynamics at play in violence in heterosexual and lesbian/gay relationships. We need a body of methodologically sound empirical research to document the pervasiveness, scale, effect and impact of violence in lesbian relationships. This would help reveal the differences and similarities between lesbian and heterosexual relationships.
Lori Haskell is a psychologist, researcher and educator on issues of violence against women and children.
