MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WORK AND SOCIAL ADMINISTRATION

EXPERIENCES OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE (IPV) AMONG MEN IN

KAMULI DISTRICT, A CASE STUDY OF BALAWOLI SUB-COUNTY

BY

MUWOYA MILTON

MASTERS IN SOCIAL SECTOR PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

A RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE AWARD OF MASTERS IN SOCIAL

SECTOR PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT DEGREE OF

MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

JULY, 2020
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction
This Chapter presents the background to the study, statement of the problem, purpose/aim,
objectives, research questions, scope of the study, significance and operational definition of key
terms.
1.1 Background to the Study
Intimate partner violence’ (IPV) describes abusive behaviours between partners in an intimate
relationship and can broadly be classified as abuse of a physical, emotional or sexual nature.
Women are much more likely to be survivors of IPV than men, globally as well as in sub-
Saharan Africa (SSA) (Fahmy, Williamson & Pantazis, 2013). IPV violates human rights and
adversely affects economic and social development. It impacts negatively on physical, mental,
sexual and reproductive health, and is associated with higher rates of low birth weight babies,
unsupervised abortions, depression, alcohol abuse, and HIV infection. The body of research on
IPV prevalence and its health effects is limited but has increased substantially over the past
decade through household and national health surveys, such as the Demographic and Health
Surveys (DHS) and population-based cross-sectional data (Cruz & Klinger. (2011)

Globally, prior to the mid-1800s, intimate partner violence or domestic violence was not
considered as a crime. Most legal systems viewed wife beating as a valid exercise of a husband's
authority over his wife. One exception, however, was the 1641 Body of Liberties of the
Massachusetts Bay colonists, which declared that a married woman should be "free from bodilie
correction or stripes by her husband. Political agitation and the first-wave feminist
movement during the 19th century led to changes in both popular opinion and legislation
regarding domestic violence within the United Kingdom, the United States and other
countries(Maxwell & Stone, 2010). In 1850, Tennessee became the first state in the United
States to explicitly outlaw wife beating.  In 1878, the UK Matrimonial Causes Act made it
possible for women in the UK to seek legal separation from an abusive husband. By the end of
the 1870s, most courts in the United States had rejected a claimed right of husbands to physically
discipline their wives. By the early 20th century, it was common for police to intervene in cases

1
of domestic violence in the United States, but arrests remained rare. In most legal systems
around the world, Intimate Partner Violence or domestic violence has been addressed only from
the 1990s onwards; indeed, before the late-20th century, in most countries there was very little
protection, in law or in practice, against Intimate Partner Violence (EPRC, 2017) . 

IPV affects both men and women, although a greater burden of the consequences of IPV is
placed on the lives of women and girls. The physical violence of IPV is a significant factor,
likely accompanied by emotionally abusive and controlling behavior often indicative of a
systemic pattern of dominance and control by the batterer. Intimately associated with IPV is the
likely result of physical injury, psychological trauma, and even death (Peterman et al., 2007).
According to data from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS),
(2014) nearly one in four adult women and nearly one in seven men in the United States report
receiving severe physical violence from an intimate partner. IPV occurs among all races,
ethnicities, classes, socioeconomic strata, and sexual orientations and across the lifespan, but
findings indicate that IPV disproportionately affects racial, ethnic, and sexual minority groups .

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) systematic review on IPV, using aggregated global
and regional prevalence estimates, reported a worldwide IPV prevalence of 30%, which was
higher (37%) in WHO African regions. Within SSA, lifetime prevalence rates for IPV vary but
are consistently high; the WHO 2006 multi-country study on violence against women, using data
from 10 countries and 15 study sites, reported a lifetime prevalence of physical and/or sexual
IPV of 71% in Ethiopia, 56% in Tanzania and 36% in Namibia. The Kenya 2014 DHS found that
45% of women have experienced physical violence since age 15 years . The Uganda 2016 DHS
found that 58.4% of married women reported ever having experienced emotional, physical or
sexual violence from a spouse, and 39.6% had experienced it within the past year .

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), IPV occurs in virtually all settings and
among all socio-economic, religious and cultural groups in the world (Garcia-Moreno, et al
2012). The conceptualization of IPV is such that men are viewed as mainly the perpetrators of
such violence while women tend to be portrayed as survivors (Dutton & White, 2013). However,
the World Health Organization (WHO) has indicated that women can also be violent in their
relationships with men - often in self-defence - and that the most common perpetrators of

2
violence against women are male intimate partners (Garcia-Moreno, et al 2012). In addition, the
fact that the average male is physiologically stronger than the average female (Leyk, et al 2007)
has created the notion that women are not capable of perpetrating IPV. Thus, the victimized male
may not feel free to admit to being a victim of violence perpetrated by his female partner nor
does he report any incidence to the appropriate authorities for assistance (Dutton & White; 2013;
Nagesh, 2016). These issues draw the researcher’s attention to the occurrence of IPV in
heteronormative relationships (i.e. between people of the opposite sex). Lupri and Grandin
(2004) argued that domestic violence against women has been the dominant focus of studies on
domestic and spousal abuse for many years. Thus, DV against men is neither well known nor
understood academically or socially.

In Uganda, it is hard for society to fathom that men can be on the receiving end of physical and
verbal attacks, particularly in the private arena where they rule as kings. Sexual and gender-
based violence campaigns have always focused on women as survivors and the men only feature
as perpetrators. Yet, intimate partner violence against men has increased from 15% to 22%
between 2001 to 2016 (New Vision, 2016). The number might even be higher because violence
against men is underreported. Most men who experience violence cannot come out because they
fear being labeled weak and not in control of their homes. Like is the case with female survivors,
male survivors also make excuses for their perpetrator’s behavior. The survivors keep hoping
that their perpetrators will relent.

NGOs like MIFUMI, FIDA, Centre for Domestic Violence Prevention and Action Aid, among
others, are actively involved in fighting against atrocities like female genital cutting and other
forms of violence against women; very little effort is geared towards intimate partner violence
against men. The Penal Code recognizes that both men and women can be defiled. But it does
not extend rape to men since it presumes that it can only occur where there is penile-vaginal
penetration (Akumu, 2012).

Females that perpetrate violence towards men usually do it as a result of poverty, drunkardness,
creating superiority complex and family issues. Most women torture their husbands after failing
to buy the required basic needs as a result of either financial challenges or chronic poverty in the
family circles. Such violence can be through using abusive words in front of children, beating the

3
husbands, denying the husband food, denying the husband conjugal rights and others. Men who
take a lot of alcohol are sometimes also abused by their partners. This usually happens when the
family has limited access to some basic needs, and thereby leaving women complaining that
instead of taking alcohol, such money should be used to access basic needs. Whereas other
women just abuse their husbands to stop them from taking alcohol. Some women always feel
inferior in front of their husbands and their by opting for intimate partner violence to reclaim
superiority in the home (Nagesh, 2016)

Men who are raped by other men or objects are thus roundly ignored by the law. The best they
can do is claim assault or battery.  Besides, the stigma attached to homosexual sex further
prevents sexually abused men from coming out. The Domestic Violence Act is the latest effort to
address gender-based violence and recognizes that men too can suffer violence. It is, however,
hard for the general public to interpret it this way because campaigns are geared towards
protecting women against men. In addition, society has programmed people to believe that men,
the stronger sex, can never be in a position of vulnerability. Thus far, there are no shelters for
battered men in Uganda and only very few for battered women(Lamu, 2015). This therefore
created the need for the study to explore the experiences of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)
among men in Balawoli Sub-County Kamuli district.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

In Kamuli district, Female survivors of Intimate Partner violence are increasingly treated by
society with sympathy and support, while male survivors are treated with disbelief. Society’s
view on Intimate Partner violence has been reinforced by the media’s coverage of the issues
surrounding Intimate Partner violence, portraying females as the only survivors and males as the
abusers. Yet UDHS, (2016), indicate that eight percent (8%) of women induced violence on their
husband’s which indicates that violence against men requires attention. In addition, New Vision,
(2016) highlighted that intimate partner violence against men has increased from 15% to 22%
between 2001 to 2016. There are very limited studies that have been conducted on intimate
partner violence against men and most of them have been done outside Uganda. This therefore
created the need for the study to explore the experiences of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)
among Men in Balawoli Sub-County Kamuli district.

4
1.3 Main Objective
The main objective will be to explore the experiences of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) among
men in Balawoli Sub-County Kamuli district.
1.3.1 Specific Objectives
 To establish the nature of Intimate Partner violence against men.
 To explore the factors that lead to Intimate Partner violence against men.
 To explore how men deal/cope with intimate partner violence.
1.4 Research Questions
There will be three research questions that will be used in the research and these are as follows:
 What is the nature of Intimate Partner violence against men?
 What are the factors that lead to Intimate Partner violence against men?
 How do men deal with Intimate Partner violence?
1.5 Significance of the Study
The researcher will improve on his research skills, analytical skills and conceptual skills. The

study will equip the researcher with skills in method of data collection, reporting writing and

presentation

The study has a great contribution to the body of knowledge. Academicians and scholars may

use it as a useful addition to the body of the available information on experiences of Intimate

Partner violence among men

The Ministry of gender and culture will get to understand some of the issues facing married men

such that recommendation measures can be put in place before the situation worsens.

1.6 Scope of the study

1.6.1 Content scope
This study will focus on explore the experiences of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) among men
in Kamuli district focusing only on Balawoli Sub County as the desirable population from which
we shall draw the general results. The study will only be restricted to; establishing the nature of

5
Intimate Partner violence against men, exploring the factors that lead to Intimate Partner violence
against men, examining other response services male survivors of Intimate Partner violence seek
besides reporting and investigating the consequences of Intimate Partner violence against men.
1.6.2 Geographical scope
The study will be carried out in Balawoli Sub County, Kamuli District. Located approximately
4Kms from Kamuli Municipality. Kamuli district has been chosen because it is one of the
districts where Intimate Partner violence prevalence is high as reported by National Population
and Housing Census report (2014)
1.6.3 Time scope
The study will be carried out from March 2020 to Aug 2020. Because this period will enough to
cover all the respondents and parishes in Balawoli Sub County.

1.7 Conceptual frame Work

Socio-Ecological Model
 Individual (Intrapersonal)
 Relational (Interpersonal)
 Community (Organizational)
 Societal (Organizational)

Factors
 Family Background
 Suspicion of Infidelity Intimate Partner Violence
 Drug Abuse
 Social Violence
 Poverty
Men Copying Mechanisms  Economic Violence
 Keeping silent  Sexual Violence
 Separation
 Discussion with family members

Source: Adopted from Uthman et al., (2009) and Re-developed by the Researcher

6
1.8 Definition of Terms

Intimate Partner Violence against Men: refers to abuse against men or boys in an intimate
relationship such as marriage, co-habitation, dating, or within a family.
Violence: any actions using physical force intended to hurt or damage.
Victim: is a person considered infringed upon, harmed or killed.
Gender Based Violence: refers to an act which results in physical, sexual or psychological harm
or suffering of women and men including threats such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of
liberty, whether occurring in public or private life. It is manifested in physical, sexual, emotional
and psychological acts.
Intimate Partner Violence (DV): a type of repeated pattern of behaviours an intimate partner
uses to gain power and control over another (Brodwin and Siu,2007,P.545); an act of violence
that results in physical, sexual, emotional and verbal abuse in an effort to control and gain power
over another individual.
Economic Violence: refers to acts of victimization which are as result of financial or material
deprivation.
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV): refers to any behaviour within an intimate relationship that
causes physical, psychological or sexual harm to those in the relationship.

7
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
This chapter presents the review of the literature related to the study from the previous studies

carried out by various scholars. Theoretical perspectives related to this topic have also been

reviewed and are presented in this chapter.

2.1 Theoretical Perspective

The study will be guided by the Social Ecological Model. Bronfen Brenner created the
ecological model as a new way of examining human development; looking at the developing
person, the environment, and the interaction between the two (Terry, 2014). The social
ecological model is tailored to show that the different levels are constantly interacting to
influence violence against women.
Since the social ecological model can be tailored, numerous researchers have used the social
ecological model to try to better understand violence against women. For example, White
proposed gender be at the center of her social ecological model and social identity as a meta-
construct since identity is influenced by all levels. The other levels in her social ecological
model: individual (intrapersonal), assault, microsystem (interpersonal), meso/exosystem (social
networks/ community), macrosystem (society), and chronosystem, which is defined as “the
ongoing changes and cumulative effects that occur over time as persons and their multiple
environments interact”
The ecological model puts IPV into a broad perspective and describes its determinants at the
individual (intrapersonal), relational (interpersonal), community (organizational), and societal
(organizational) levels.
The ecological model helps explain how social relations need to be changed and framed in order
to decrease the IPV in specific contexts (Ellsberg & Heise, 2005; WHO, 2007).
The ecological model of IPV. The individual level comprises biological and personal
characteristics such as being male or female and other individual experiences related to gender
norms and expectations. These factors are predictors of how an individual is at higher risk of
being an IPV perpetrator or victim. In some societies, women are more likely than men to justify

8
IPV. Women who accept IPV are more likely to experience it (Uthman et al, 2009), and men
who believe it is acceptable to reprimand their wives are at greater risk of being perpetrators than
others (Abrahams et al, 2004).
Use of alcohol, low economic status, low education and unemployment are other individual
attributes that increase the risk of being a perpetrator (Lawoko, 2006; Boyle et al, 2009; Dalal et
al, 2009). Witnessing violence or being abused as a child or as an adolescent are also individual
risks factors (Parish et al, 2004; Dibaba, 2008).
The family/relational level focuses on close relationships such as family and friends, and refers
to the context in which abuse may occur. Gender relations and how these shape the life
circumstances of men and women are important. Men’s controlling behaviours, as well as
control over family resources and decision making, are known risk factors (WHO, 2005c; Krantz
& Nguyen, 2009). Men with multiple sexual partners also are at higher risk of perpetrating
violence because they are isolated from emotional bonding with their spouses or permanent
partners (Jewkes et al, 2006a). The community level extends to family, neighbours, colleagues,
work environment, and other social networks. IPV risk factors include restrictive marriage
norms.
2.2 Intimate Partner Violence against Men
Worldwide, there are few statistics about Intimate Partner violence against men because it has
just been accepted as a problem. However, violence against men by women is now being
recognised throughout most of the world as a significant social problem. It has been identified by
many countries, the United Nations and the European Union as an issue of human rights (Koenig
et al, 2006).
Traces of concrete statistics of Intimate Partner violence against men can be seen in the western
literature beginning as far back as the first U.S. National Family Violence Survey of 1975 which
unexpectedly found women to be as violent as men (Carney, 2006). The findings were not
readily accepted because it contradicted both common sense and the burgeoning feminist
scholarship.
Steinmetz‟s study in 1977 also affirmed that the number of threats of Intimate Partner violence
from wives against husbands exceeded the threats from the husbands and it concluded that
women have more intentionality of violence than men. The study was conducted on fifty-seven
residential families in New Castle County, Delaware, United States. The result was that 93 per

9
cent of the sample of people interviewed used verbal aggression and 60 per cent used physical
aggression, like throwing objects or pushing their spouse to solve marital conflicts.
More recently the United States Department of Justice in 2000, surveying 6,000 Americans
found that 7.4 per cent of men reported being physically assaulted by a current or former spouse,
cohabiting partner. The survey further reported that 0.9 per cent of men reported experiencing
Intimate Partner violence in the previous year and this translated into about 2.5 million survivors
per year. Despite the existence of studies that confirm Intimate Partner violence against men in
the USA, evidence of the existence as well as extent of Intimate Partner violence has been at
least confounding. Carney et al (2006) though, have argued that the statistics of IPV against men
is deliberate, it is done to explain away or diminish IPV against men in intimate relationships.
This according to them has resulted in violent women being portrayed as engaging in self-
defensive violence, less serious violence, or being the survivors of gender biased reporting
differences (Carney, 2006). There are however, some scholars in the USA who believe that in
fact, rates of Intimate Partner violence in intimate relationships are equivalent to or exceed male
rates; they include Intimate Partner violence against non-violent males. Even when analysed for
level of severity, they state that IPV has more serious consequences for males than is male
initiated violence for females (Archer, 2000).

A UK Home Office paper (2004) shows that less than one in four women and one in ten men
(23% and 8%) respectively of the worst cases of Intimate Partner violence were reported to the
police. This statistic may not be very reliable because it is solely based on police data, which
means that many cases of Intimate Partner violence were obviously not recorded.
However, Smith et al (2012), in the latest analysis of the British Crime Survey (BCS) self-
completion survey on intimate violence, comments that although the under-reporting of crime to
the police is especially prevalent with Intimate Partner, intimate violence, that the BCS self-
completion survey has the advantage of being able to gain more information not reported to the
police. He states (2012) that “around 6 per cent of women and 4 per cent of men had experienced
partner abuse in the last year, equivalent to around 900,000 females and 600,000 male
survivors”. Non-physical abuse, such as emotional or financial, was the most common type with
about 57 per cent of women and 46 per cent of men experiencing this since the age of 16.

10
In Africa studies of Intimate Partner violence against men are rare. But this is not surprising
because it is in this part of the world where discourses of patriarchy and male-dominated cultures
are most common and thus Intimate Partner violence against men is theoretically farfetched. In
Botswana however, a study by Raditloaneng (2010) acknowledged that both men and women are
survivors of IPV. Furthermore, Botswana Police Service reports (2012) and statistics on IPV
from the Ministry of Labour and Home affairs indicate that in 2003, there were fifty-four passion
killings, which claimed forty-six women and eight men.
In Uganda, a similar pattern about the dearth of literature on Intimate Partner violence against
men exists. Even if gender based violence has been an endemic problem and that it manifests in
many ways such as spouse battering, property grabbing, rape, incest, defilement and sexual
harassment (National Gender Policy, 2000), it is only literature on male initiated violence which
utmost exists. However, the researcher is aware of the research conducted on Intimate Partner
violence against men in Uganda but it is not yet published. In 2013, the VSU reported cases of
violent crimes disaggregated by sex and it shows that violence against women was the most
reported type of violence (Victim Support Unit, 2013).
The Uganda Demographic and Health Survey (UDHS 2013-2014) is probably the most
comprehensive survey in Uganda and it indicates that 8 per cent of women reported that they had
initiated physical violence against their husbands and 5 per cent had done so in the past twelve
months. Intimate Partner violence against a husband who got drunk was at 19 per cent and 20 per
cent of the women were violent to the spouse as a way of self-defence.
The National Plan of Action on IPV (2010-2014) provided for Intimate Partner violence against
men to be recognised as a fundamental violation of human rights. To avoid responses that focus
initiatives on women and girls as survivors, it is essential to look at gender relations between
men and women and boys and girls to address the notion that exists that men are the only
perpetuators of violence and women are the only survivors. Furthermore, it recommends that the
Ugandan government should adopt the above-mentioned approach so that policy makers can
begin to change to include men as survivors of IPV too.
The USA Department of Justice (2007) indicates that both women and men have been killed and
physically abused because of Intimate Partner violence. It further stresses that physical violence
often occurs after a period of months or even years of other forms of abuse, such as threats,
intimidation and controlling behaviours such as restrictions of the other person's self-

11
determination, through isolation, manipulation and placing of limits on personal choices and
freedoms.
Follingstad and Dehart (2000) argue that emotional abuse is the form that is common among
male survivors of violence. They hold that emotional abuse include threatens, intimidations and
behaviour that undermines the victim’s self-worth or self-esteem, or controls the victim’s
freedom. The Istanbul Convention defines emotional violence as "the intentional conduct of
seriously impairing a person’s psychological integrity through coercion or threats". This is the
form of violence against men which has been said to be the most common and the most
devastating. In the UK qualitative literature, the most severe form of abuse cited by male
respondents was emotional victimisation, normally cumulative and involving long-term trauma,
which at the extreme may lead to suicide attempts, depression, eating disorders, and drug and
alcohol abuse. This type of abuse also contributes to the escalation of HIV and AIDS as the men
usually avoid going home early and eventually find solace in other women who will not abuse
them (Josolyne, 2011).
Constant criticism of the husband, devaluing statements, and name-calling are emotionally
abusive behaviours which most of the women do to their partners in most homes. Such abusive
behaviours in homes lead the men to question themselves, causing them to believe that they are
making up the abuse or that the abuse is their fault. Verbal abuse is also another form that is
coming out of literature. Although in some reviewed literature it usually overlaps with emotional
abuse, it can be described as different from emotional violence because it involves the use of
language, which can involve threats, name calling, blaming, ridicule, disrespect, and criticism.
This also encompasses less obvious aggressive forms of verbal abuse which include attempts to
humiliate, falsely accuse, or manipulate others to submit to undesirable behaviour, make others
feel unwanted and unloved, threaten others economically, or isolate survivors from support
systems (Carney et al, 2006). Furthermore, Josolyne (2011) says that verbal abuse is one of the
major methods women use to inflict violence on men as they can easily insult and undress a
husband in the presence of the children.
Economic abuse as a form of violence against men happens when their wives have control over
their access to economic resources. Brewster, (2003) contends that economic abuse is real in
situations where the husband doesn’t work and depends on the wife for financial support.
Economic abuse may involve preventing a spouse from resource acquisition, limiting the amount

12
of resources to be used by the victim, or by exploiting economic resources of the victim.
Furthermore, it is argued that the motive behind preventing a spouse from acquiring resources is
to diminish the husband’s capacity to support himself, thus forcing him to depend on the wife
financially and this makes men to be slaves in the homes (Follingstad and Dehart, 2000).

2.3 Factors influencing Intimate Partner violence against men

There is no consensus in literature about the factors influencing Intimate Partner violence against
men. Most of the literature especially those which have feminist overtones suggest that women
only engage in violence in self-defence, fear or retribution for real or perceived wrong doing on
the part of men (Ellsberg & Heise, 2005). Self-defence is often listed as a motivation for
committing violence. In an analysis of women’s motivations for violence by Swan and Snow
(2003), self-defence was the most frequently endorsed motive, with 75 per cent of participants
stating that they had used violence to defend themselves. The same study provides some
evidence that women often used violence to get even with their partners for something they had
done against them. In terms of fear, Archer, (2000) indicates that some women’s violence occurs
in the context of fear of assault from their partners and the need to protect themselves from
physical harm.
It is further argued that in the 1980s “the construction of the “victimised woman” drew attention
to women’s experiences in violent intimate relationships thereby highlighting intimate partner
violence as a major social problem. Women’s victimization by their partners has been shown to
be the primary aetiological factor in their perpetration of lethal and non-lethal violence”. To this
end, it can be argued that women who initiate violence against men are playing the masculine
gender role.
However, some scholars have refuted the above hypotheses and tagged them, a feminist way of
denying the phenomenon of women as perpetrators of violence.
Peterman et al., (2007) are perhaps the fiercest critics of the self-defence hypothesis. They argue
that data doesn’t support such a hypothesis, instead, they posit that there are three reasons found
from empirical studies why IPV against men exist: “to resolve an argument; to respond to family
crisis; and to stop him bothering me.”

13
The contemporary understanding of domestic violence against men is a man being subjected to
an ongoing pattern of abusive behavior by an intimate partner; this is motivated by the desire to
dominate, control or oppress man and cause fear.
It can be noted that many societies focus only on men as perpetrators of violence towards women
and do not believe or want to recognize that men can suffer from domestic violence in the same
way as women.

Maxwell & Stone, (2010) discussed the ‘Battered Husband Syndrome’ back in the late 1970’s
and still today it is a taboo subject amongst patriarchal societies. This lack of recognition for
male survivors of domestic violence means they have to cope without any help, support and
guidance.

Govind, (2015) recognizes that women can be violent and create a fearful environment for their
husbands but argues there is no sufficient evidence that this is a large syndrome as it is with
women. It has been proposed that violence inflicted on a husband or partner by their wife or
girlfriend is only carried out in self-defense. For the majority of people in society it is an
implausible idea that a woman would hit a man for any other reason than in self-defense (Cruz &
Klinger, 2011)

When faced with a violent domestic situation, men are placed in a difficult situation. They have
to make the decision whether or not to stand up for themselves and confront the situation like a
‘real man’ in their traditional, stereotypical role or reject that role and allow themselves to
become a victim of domestic violence and be rendered powerless, (Fahmy, Williamson &
Pantazis, 2013). Using severe violence or even weapons can be justified with the argument that
women have no other way of defending themselves from their male attacker. Previous studies of
domestic violence (Robertson & Murachver, 2009), argued that because of this, women should
remain the principal focus of intervention because men were found to use violence more often,
were likely to do more damage due to size differences. It is also argued that women are
economically trapped in a marriage and many women only use violence to defend themselves.

2.3.1 Alcoholism and drug abuse

Alcohol, drugs and abuse is a major contributor of violence against men since men cannot
contribute to the economy and socially. Excessive drinking by male partner can exacerbate

14
financial difficulties, child care problems and infidelity. Strong links have been found between
alcoholism and occurrence of intimate partner violence in many countries. Evidence suggest that
alcohol use by male partners increases the occurrence and severity of domestic violence (Dienye,
2009)
Alcohol is thought to reduce inhibitions, cloud judgment, and impair ability to interpret social
cues. However, biological links between alcohol and violence are complex. Research on the
social anthropology of alcohol drinking suggests that connections between violence and drinking
and drunkenness are socially learnt and not universal. Some researchers have noted that alcohol
may act as a cultural “time out” for antisocial behaviour. Thus, men are more likely to act
violently when drunk because they do not feel they will be held accountable for their behavior
and in response their partners respond out of anger. In some settings, men have described using
alcohol in a premeditated manner to enable them to beat their partner because they feel that this
is socially expected of them. It seems likely that drugs that reduce inhibition, such as cocaine,
will have similar relations to those of alcohol with intimate partner violence, but there has been
little population-based research on this subject, (Cook, 2009).
Alcoholism makes men to become irresponsible. Such men may be physically present but they
do not contribute to household income. In fact they are a liability to the family because they
might sell family property to fund alcohol and drug abuse. This immensely leads to violence
against men by women, (Adenyeri & Aderonke, 2012).
2.3.2 Family or Emotional Terrorism
As with violence against women, domestic violence against men is by no means limited to
simply physical assaults. In her work with family violence, Raditloaneng, (2010) has long
recognized that there are women involved in emotionally and/or physically violent relationships
who express and enact disturbance beyond the expected (and acceptable) scope of distress. Such
individuals, spurred on by deep feelings of vengefulness, vindictiveness, and animosity, behave
in a manner that is singularly destructive; destructive to themselves as well as to some or all of
the other family members, making an already bad family situation worse. These women have
been described as ‘family terrorists’.” Such women often become even more violent as their
partner tries to break away. Raditloaneng, (2010) notes that for family terrorists: “While the
family remains together, however miserable that ‘togetherness’ might be the terrorist maintains
her power.”

15
“The terrorist, and the terrorist’s actions, know no bounds. Intent only to achieve the goal the
terrorist will take such measures as: stalking a spouse or ex-spouse, physically assaulting the
spouse or the spouse’s new partners, telephoning all mutual friends and business associates of
the spouse in an effort to ruin the spouse’s reputation, pressing fabricated criminal charges
against the spouse (including alleged battery and child molestation), staging intentionally
unsuccessful suicide attempts for the purpose of manipulation, snatching children from the
spouse’s care and custody, vandalizing the spouse’s property, murdering the spouse and/or the
children as an act of revenge.”
2.3.3 Suspicion of infidelity
Infidelity contributes largely to violence against men. Some men allegedly cheat on the wives
with their wives friends and even house girls, who makes wives biter and when chance presents
they are beaten with anger. Some men just run away from their responsibility like paying school
fees for their children and upkeep having spent money elsewhere (Fowler, 2002: 96).
Out of suspicion, a woman may become angry if he so much as speaks to another woman.
Conversely, she may begin flirtations with every male around her, and business trips, or mini-
vacations with her girlfriends may become a new feature of her life, (Atmore 2001: 13)

2.3.4 Family background

White and Kowalski (1994) present arguments for the application of social learning theory and
the different behaviours in men and women. They refer from the work of Bandura who
considered that: “as role expectations of women and men become more similar, female and male
patterns of aggressive behavior will become more similar” They propose three possible causes of
Intimate Partnerviolence: masculinization, where the female takes on a more masculine role as
they play a more masculine role in society.
Secondly, as an opportunity based crime is described as where offenders “typically behave like
criminals only in certain settings, that is, slices of time and space within which relevant people
and things are assembled”. White and Kowalski (1994) also draw from social learning theory to
consider that as females move into the male workplace they experience role strain which will
increase the likelihood of them taking out anger and frustration on their male partner.

16
Thirdly they consider the opposite tendency, where there is frustration at not being able to
participate in a male work environment that leads to aggressive behaviour to obtain money and
power from the male partner (Cope 2008).

The other possible cause of Intimate Partner violence which was proposed by Corry (2000) is
that of masculinisation. The concept entails that females can take on a more masculine role in
society and this makes them perform gender roles typical for men. Such women can enact
controlling behaviour on other people including men. This is like the concept of performativity
as coined by Judith Butler which she uses to deny the existence of rigid and natural gender roles
in society (Josolyne, 2011). Both concepts posit that people choose to either perform masculine
or feminine gender roles depending on their social environment.

It is significant that in profiling the type of women who kill, the literature often concludes that
masculine traits can be identified. Comack and Brickey (2007) put it clearly that the construction
of the masculinised woman provides a plausible explanation for her acts and in this way the
masculine-feminine binary is maintained and violence and aggression remain within the
masculine realm.
Furthermore, Felson 1998 in Cope (2008) argues for what he calls an opportunity based crime as
another motivation for female perpetrated violence. Although this concept was not originally
meant for female-induced violence, it can thus be applicable. He argues that offenders “typically
behave like criminals only in certain settings, that is, slices of time and space within which
relevant people and things are assembled”. In this case whenever females engage in violence
against their male counterparts, it means they have usurped that behaviour only in conducive and
specific circumstances and such are not meant to be sustainable.

Dienye & Gbeneol, (2009) also drew from social learning theory to consider that as females
move into the male workplace they experience role strain which will increase the likelihood of
them taking out anger and frustration on their male partner. On the other hand, they consider the
opposite tendency, where there is frustration at not being able to participate in a male work
environment that leads to aggressive behaviour to obtain money and power from the male
partner. It is not clear whether this argument is valid as there is no empirical study done to
elucidated evidence in that respect.

17
Robertson and Murachver (2009) have pointed to the emotional imbalance manifested in all
perpetrators of violence and they argue that female perpetrators are not an exception in this
regard. They hold that perpetrators of both sexes often have emotional control problems and a
related inability to communicate while talking through issues in homes. They also argue that
many perpetrators were survivors of Intimate Partner violence themselves previously, this could
be when they were growing up as children. It can also be reasonably concluded as such from this
current study as seen in chapter four.
2.4 Men copying mechanisms for Intimate Partner Violence

Despite over 30 years of research documenting that men can sustain female-perpetrated physical,
sexual, and psychological IPV, these findings remain controversial. Those that are especially
controversial are statistics showing that women report using physical IPV at equal or higher rates
than men, a finding that has been replicated in dozens of studies (Archer 2000). This finding of a
high rate of violence by female partners has been challenged primarily on conceptual bases
because it is inconsistent with the dominant theoretical perspective of the cause of IPV: the
patriarchal construction of our nation (Miller and White 2003). This controversy may help
explain why men may face difficulties when seeking help for IPV victimization.

The literature on male help seeking, in general, indicates that men are less likely than women to
seek help and that men who do seek help must overcome internal and external obstacles to do so
(Galdas et al. 2005). Men are not likely to seek help for problems that their larger community
deems non-normative or determines that they should be able to solve or control themselves
(Addis & Mahalik, 2003). When seeking help for any type of IPV victimization, one can imagine
that the obstacles must be great, given our gendered notions of male and female roles in
heterosexual relationships (Sweeney 2007) and the framing of IPV as a women’s issue (Hines et
al. 2007).

Qualitative research has documented the experiences of men who seek help for female-to-male
IPV (Cook 2009). For example, Cook (2009) performed in depth interviews of 30 men who
sustained all types of IPV from their female partners and tried to seek help. This work shows that
men often experience barriers when seeking help. When calling domestic violence hotlines, for
instance, men who sustained all types of IPV report that the hotline workers say that they only

18
help women, infer or explicitly state that the men must be the actual instigators of the violence,
or ridicule them. Male help seekers also report that hotlines will sometimes refer them to
batterers’ programs. Some men have reported that when they call the police during an incident in
which their female partners are violent, the police sometimes fail to respond. Other men reported
being ridiculed by the police or being incorrectly arrested as the primary aggressor. Within the
judicial system, some men who sustained IPV reported experiencing gender-stereotyped
treatment. Even with apparent corroborating evidence that their female partners were violent and
that the help seekers were not, they reportedly lost custody of their children, were blocked from
seeing their children, and were falsely accused by their partners of IPV and abusing their
children. According to some, the burden of proof for male IPV survivors may be especially high
(Cook 2009).

Based on this perception that partner abuse often involves physical violence, abused men
typically do not report their problems fearing that they would be laughed at, humiliated, or
reversely accused of being the abuser due to a belief that men are physically capable of fighting
back when being challenged (O’Brien, Hunt, & Hart, 2005). Because of men’s reluctance to seek
protection, it is important for the helping professionals to examine the needs of specialized
services designed for men to minimize resistance or fear.

Gender-inclusive services Integration with other existing therapeutic services, better linkages
between male victimization and perpetration Domestic violence, spouse abuse, and disability
advocates work together.
These suggestions are related to the various service needs of male survivors that require specific
service delivery, education, and training. It is also important to publicize these needs so that
government funding and resources can be secured to support social services for men.
They may think that their problem is too personal to handle (Allen, Lehrner, Mattison, Miles, &
Russell, 2007). As a result, men choose to minimize their abuse and try to avoid social stigma
against their inability to protect themselves; therefore, they generally hide or deny having been
abused.
2.5 Summary of Literature gaps
It can be noted from the analysis above that many studies have been done on intimate partner
violence both at international level and continental level, although much of these studies have

19
not specifically focused on men but instead on women. Also, very few have been done in
Uganda’s context as most of them were done from the Western countries. In Uganda’s case, no
study has been done to focus specifically on Kamuli district and therefore creating the need for
research.

20
 CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction
The chapter includes; research design, population of the study, sample size, sampling technique,

data collection methods and instruments, procedure of data collection, data validity and

reliability, data presentation and analysis, ethical consideration and limitations of the study.

3.1 Research Design

The research will employ case study research design that will employ qualitative approach.

According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003), a case study design is used because of its in-depth

investigation of an individual, group, institution and makes detailed examination of a single

subject. Rowley, (2002) noted that case study is widely used because it provides insights that

cannot be achieved by other approaches. It permits marriage of diverse techniques within the

same study. In addition, it helps to generate new understandings, explanations or hypotheses

about the problem.

Qualitative approach will be helpful in interpreting people’s opinions, perceptions about the

study variables using interviews. The qualitative data also will give narrative and descriptive

information that will explain and give deeper understanding and insight into a problem as

suggested (Amin, 2005).

3.2 Study Site and Population

The study will be carried out in Kamuli district in eastern region, focusing on Balawoli Sub

County. The justification for this selection is that Kamuli District, according to UNBS is one of

the districts where Intimate Partner Violence against men is very high. Balawoli consist of 8

parishes of which 4 will be considered for the study

21
The study target population will be married men, district probation officers and community

leaders in Balawoli Sub County, Kamuli district. The sub-county consist of 478 married men,

85 women local leaders, 85 local council leaders, 2 CFPUs and 2 district probation officers that

will participate in the study. The sample size will depend on the point of saturation for each

respondent group. According to Amin, (2005) the point of saturation is usually between 10 to 15

respondents.

3.3 Sampling techniques and procedures

Purposive sampling will be used for selecting men, local council leaders and women leaders.

Men that are survivors of intimate partner violence will be considered for the study. Local

council leaders and women leaders that have been in their positions for long will also be

considered to participate in the study. The local leaders will also help to identify the men

survivors of intimate partner violence. Purposive Sampling will be employed by the researcher

because ;it excludes people who are unsuitable for the study and remain with the most

suitable candidates , it is less time consuming, reduces the costs for carrying out the sampling

project, the results of purposeful sampling are usually expected to be more accurate than those

achieved with an alternative form of sampling.

3.4 Data collection methods and instruments

3.4.1 Focus group discussions

This method will be employed while collecting data from women local leaders and local council

leaders. 5 Groups of 10 members will be organized consisting of both local council leaders and

women leaders. These groups will help to provide information about intimate partner violence

among men (Mugenda and Mugenda, 2003). Focus group checklist will be used in collecting the

data.

22
3.4.2 In-depth Interviews
In depth interview method that will comprise of personal (face to face) interviews with key

individuals considered to have the necessary information relevant to objectives of the study will

be applied using interview guides. This will be mostly used in collecting data from district

probation officers and Men (Survivors of IPV). The number of survivors to consider will depend

on the point of circulation. Structured interviews with a set of pre - determined questions and

standardized recording as constructed in the interview guide will be used. This method have an

advantage of providing in depth data which cannot be got using the questionnaire (Mugenda and

Mugenda, 2003).

To supplement the data from in-depth interviews, will be used to key respondents who will be

probation officers and local leaders. This will be used in face-to-face interviews intending to

have in-depth understanding of the study variables.

3.5. Data Validity

McMillan & Schumacher (2006) stated that validity refers to the degree of congruence between

the explanations of the phenomena and the realities of the world. Validity is the extent to which

the instrument gives the correct answer. The questionnaire will be tested for validity of all the

possible dimensions of the research topic. To measure validity, the researcher will employ

triangulation method. This will involve use of both Focus Group Discussions and in depth

interviews as the methods of data collection.

3.6. Procedure of Data Collection

The researcher will get an introductory letter from the University to seek necessary permission

from different authorities. The letter will be presented to the local leaders for permission. A

covering letter accompanying the questionnaire explaining the purpose of the study will be

23
distributed directly to the respondents in their respective areas to be filled. The cover letter will

also be used to provide access to the interview process which will be done on an appointment

with the respondents.

3.7. Data analysis and presentation

Qualitative data will be obtained by conducting interviews with key informants using interview

guides and open ended questionnaires. Content analysis will be employed. Qualitative analysis

will involve categorizing data and then attaching it to the appropriate categories. The analysis of

the interview responses will be edited according to the themes developed in the objectives of the

study. The data from open ended questionnaires and interview responses will be analyzed by

listing all the respondents’ views under each question category. Where necessary, quotes from

respondents will be used to strengthen the interpretation.

3.9. Ethical Considerations

The Key ethical issues for this study will include; data confidentiality, voluntary participation of
respondents and respondents’ safety. These issues will be addressed in the following ways;

Data Confidentiality. Given the nature of the research anonymity will be observed as some

people may not want their names and age to be recorded. The researcher will observe extreme

confidentiality while handling the responses. Information will be availed to the respondents that

the researcher would not cause any danger directly or indirectly and that participation will be

voluntary.

Voluntary Participation of Respondents. The researcher will also ensure to obtain consent from

all the respondents individually. Explanation will be given to the respondents about the purpose

of the study and informed that participation is not by force.

24
Respondents’ Safety. To assure the respondents of safety after participation, the researcher will

obtain an introductory letter from the university research coordinator for assuring respondents

that information is for academic purposes only. The researcher shall also seek for permission

from the local leaders to enable him to carry out the research from the selected Villages. The

researcher will ensure to appreciate the respondents for their time used while answering the

questionnaires.

3.10. Limitations of the study

The researcher will face problems of unresponsive respondents in conducting the research. The

fact that the study will be undertaken within business hours, the researcher will face the timing of

respondents as a challenge because there will be no time convenient to everyone. Respondents

will be involved in their day-to-day activities thus, sparing time for an interview or filling the

questionnaire will somehow be regarded as an inconvenience and interruption of one’s working

schedule. However the researcher will solve this by being polite and humble and seeking for

respondent’s attention and audience in this regard. By so doing the researcher will create rapport

process, explaining to them why one’s responses to the study is vital and therefore sparing some

little time to adjust and participate in the study could be important and desirable. In cases of un

adjustable schedules, appointments will be secured for the next time. Lunch time hours will also

mostly be used.

The researcher will face the challenge of some category of participants not being genuine as far

as answering adequately and responsibly to the administered tools as it is required from them

hence leading to the risk of uncoordinated data that could affect the quality of the study. The

25
researcher will endeavor to first assure the various participants of confidentiality about the

information delivered to the researcher.

REFERENCES
Archer, J. (2000). “Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners”. A meta-
analytic review.Psychological Bulletin 126, 651−680.
Barnett, O.W. (2001), "Why Battered Women Do Not Leave, Part 2: External Inhibiting Factors-
Social Support and Internal Inhibiting Factors". Trauma, Violence and Abuse.
Brodwin,M.G.,Siu,F.W.(2007).Domestic violence against women who have disabilities: what
educators need to know.Education,127(4),548-55.
Bryman, A. (2012), Social Research Methods, 4rd ed. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Carney, M., Buttell, F., Dutton, D. (2006). “Women who perpetrate intimate partner violence: A
review of the literature with recommendations for treatment”. Aggression and Violent
Behavior 12 (2007) 108–115.
Comack, E. and Brickey, S. (2007), “Constituting the violence of Criminalized Women”.
Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice.
Cook, J.P. (2009).Abused Men: The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence. Praeger Publishers:
West Port. USA.
Cook, P.W. (2009). Abused Men—The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence: Preager, second
edition 2009
Corry, C.E. (2002).Domestic Violence Against Men. Oxford Press: Oxford.
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five
Approaches, 2ndedn, SAGE Publications: London.

26
Cruz, A. and S. Klinger. (2011). Gender-based violence in the world of work: Overview and
selected annotated bibliography. Geneva, ILO

Dienye, P.O. and Gbeneol, P.K. (2009). Domestic Violence Against Men in Primary Care in
Nigeria. American Journal of Men’s Health, 3(4) 333–339
Dobash, R.P. and Dobash, R.E. (2002), “Women‟s Violence to Men in Intimate
EPRC, (2017). Rural women entrepreneurship in Uganda: A synthesis report on policies,
evidence and stakeholders. EPRC, working paper

Fahmy, E., Williamson, E. and C. Pantazis. (2013). Evidence and policy review: Domestic
violence and poverty A Research Report for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, University
of Bristol School for Policy Studies

Felson, R. B. (2002). Violence and Gender reexamined. Washington, DC: American

Follingstad, D.R.; Dehart, D.D. (2000), "Defining Psychological Abuse of Husbands toward
George, M.J. (2004). “The Great Taboo and the Role of Patriarchy in Husband and Wife Abuse”.
International Journal of Men's Health 6 (1), 7-21.
Govind Kelkar, (2015). Women's Asset Ownership and Reduction in Gender-based Violence,
Landesa Rural Development Institute

Hoyle, C. and Young, R. (Eds.) (2002).New Visions of Crime Survivors. Portland Oregon:
Heart Publishing.
Johnson, M.P. (2005), “Domestic Violence: It is not about Gender-Or is it”. Journal of Marriage
and Family.67:1126-1130.
Josolyne, S. (2011), Men‟s experiences of violence and abuse from a female intimate partner:
Power, masculinity and institutional systems. Unpublished PhD thesis: University of East
London.
Kelly, L. (2003), “Disabusing the Definition of Domestic Abuse: How Women Batter Men and
the Role of the Feminist State”, 30FLA.ST.U.L.REV.791.
Maxwell, D. C and R. J. G. Stone. (2010). The Nexus between Economics and Family Violence:
The Expected Impact of Recent Economic Declines on the Rates and Patterns of Intimate,
Child and Elder Abuse. Working paper, U.S. Department of Justice.

27
OXFAM, (2018). Gender roles and the care economy in Ugandan households: The case of
Kaabong, Kabale and Kampala districts-Final Report. OXFAM Uganda

Peterman, A., Pereira, A, Bleck, J., Palermo, T. M. and K. M. Young. (2007). Women’s
Individual Asset Ownership and Experience of Intimate Partner Violence: Evidence from
28 International Surveys American Journal of Public Health; 107(5): 747–755. May.
doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.303694

Pizzey, E., (2000). A comparative study of battered women and violence-prone women, \
www.dvmen.org, accessed on 14/7/2004.
Raditloaneng, W.N. (2010), Women, Poverty and Literacy: A Botswana Case study. Lambert
Publishers.
Robertson, K., Murachver, T. (2009), "Attitudes and Attributions Associated with Female and
Male Partner Violence". Journal of Applied Social Psychology 39.Sibling and Elder
Abuse. SAGE Publications: New York.
Smith, K., Osborne, S., Lau, I and Britton, A. (2012), Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate
Violence 2010/11. London: British Home Office.
Swan, S.C. and Snow, D.L. (2003), “Behavioural and Psychological Differences Among Abused
Women Who Use Violence in Intimate Relationships”.Violence against Women.

28
APPENDIX I: MORGAN AND KREJCIE TABLE FOR DETERMINING SAMPLE SIZE

29
30