1. Running Head: SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: DOES SEXUAL
ORIENTATION MATTER?
Seriousness of Domestic Violence: Does Sexual Orientation Matter?
Skyler Saunders
May 8, 2014

2. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 2
INTRODUCTION
Although many people believe that domestic violence is a heterosexual-specific event,
this is simply not true. Research has shown that gay and lesbian domestic violence exists and
occurs at approximately the same rate as heterosexual domestic violence (Elliot, 1996). One
study by Schilit et al. (1991) found an incidence rate of about 26% of lesbians reporting domestic
abuse in their current relationship; this abuse was physical, sexual, or emotional. Another study
done by Kelly and Warshafsky (1987) found that 46% of the gay men and lesbians surveyed
reported using physical aggression as a means of resolving conflicts with their partners. These
studies, and many others, support the idea that domestic violence does occur in homosexual
couples.
Since domestic violence occurs at approximately the same rate in both heterosexual and
homosexual couples, it is important to see if it is being treated the same across all dyads by law
enforcement and the general public. The present study attempts to explore if sexual orientation
matters when people judge the seriousness of events of domestic violence presented to them. Do
people treat domestic violence within homosexual couples as seriously as they do within
heterosexual couples?
This research is needed, first, because if people do think domestic violence within
homosexual couples is not as serious as domestic violence within heterosexual couples, there
could be major implications within the criminal justice system. Law enforcement officials may
take their own personal views when called to these violent events, and if these views are
homophobic, then they may not file a report or they may decrease the charge. Throughout
history, homosexuals have been treated differently through the eyes of the law. From anti-
sodomy laws making it illegal to be gay to laws making it illegal to get married, homosexuals

3. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 3
have struggled to gain the same protections that heterosexuals have. This seriousness of domestic
violence issue could lead to even more discrimination within the criminal justice system.
Secondly, this research is needed because the current research is outdated. Most of the
research was done in the 1990s-early 2000s, making it about twenty years old. In 2013, the
Supreme Court ruled the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), making it illegal for homosexuals
to marry federally, as unconstitutional. This could have an effect on the present study because
peoples’ perceptions of married couples are different than that of dating couples.
Finally, research on homosexual domestic violence is needed because the current
theoretical framework completely ignores it. Many people adhere to the feminist perspective
where the idea is that a powerful man is always the offender and a woman is always the victim.
These feminist models have no explanation for the domestic violence that occurs in homosexual
couples. Because homosexual domestic violence does not involve a powerful man beating a
woman, this violence can argue against these feminist models that are so universally
acknowledged. If people do keep adhering to these feminist perspectives, domestic violence
where the woman is a victim will always be treated more seriously. There needs to be a new
theoretical model developed and researched that is inclusive of homosexual couples. Domestic
violence is too serious to be ignored in any couple.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Background
I begin this review of relevant literature by establishing some key definitions. Domestic
violence is defined as violent behavior that typically involves the abuse of a partner. A
homosexual couple is defined as a relationship between two people of the same sex. Domestic
violence in heterosexual couples and in homosexual couples has some similarities, but also many

4. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 4
differences. One important similarity between the two is that, when domestic violence occurs, it
is the more powerful actor in the relationship committing the violence (Elliot, 1996). Same-sex
domestic violence includes physical, emotional, sexual, and psychological abuse, just like
heterosexual domestic violence.
An obvious difference is that within homosexual couples, the partners are of the same
biological sex. Being the same sex gives both partners the opportunity to offend because either
one can become more powerful and try to control the other. Another difference is that the threats
used in abuse may differ somewhat. For example, the threat of “outing” a partner to friends and
family is a homosexual-specific type of psychological abuse that one partner may use against the
victim to force him/her to stay in the abusive relationship (Elliot, 1996). A third difference that
has many policy implications is that victims of homosexual domestic violence have little
protection within the legal system. There are shelters designed for heterosexual victims of
domestic abuse to go, but homosexual victims do not receive the same help (Elliot, 1996).
Victims in homosexual relationships may experience discrimination throughout the help-seeking
process that victims in heterosexual relationships do not experience.
When considering these differences, one can assume that domestic violence within
homosexual couples is most likely occurring at much higher rates than the ones I previously
reported. This domestic violence is likely being under-reported because of the fear of
discrimination. The facts that partners in homosexual relationships experience abuse specific to
the homosexual community, both partners have the opportunity to offend, and there is not legal
protection for homosexual victims strengthen the argument that domestic violence in the
homosexual community is something that needs to be taken seriously moving forward. In the

5. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 5
next three subsections, I examine the current research on the topic and continue to strengthen my
argument for why this type of research is useful and needed.
Theoretical Background
Domestic violence has been studied extensively, and there have been a few theories that
have been produced to try to explain this phenomenon. Most of the theories generalize to
heterosexual couples. Some of these theories cannot be used to explain the abuse that happens
within homosexual couples.
The main theory that has been used to predict incidence of domestic violence is a
feminist theory that assumes that domestic violence is a heterosexual event and is a gender issue
(Letellier, 1994). In these models, batterers are almost always viewed as “oversocialized males
who rigidly adhere to sexist patriarchal values” (Hamberger & Hastings, 1988, p.763) and
victims are always female. This analysis attempts to show that domestic violence is completely
gender-based where men are trying to control women. Feminists took the issue and made it a
women’s issue (Merrill, 1996). After the creation of these models, experts began to try to
integrate lesbians and gay males into these feminist theories, even though it clearly does not
work. Domestic violence within homosexual couples cannot be fully addressed by a theory that
assumes the offender is a powerful male trying to control the female. Feminist theory and sexism
alone cannot explain why abuse occurs in homosexual couples at the same frequency and
severity as heterosexual couples (Merrill, 1996). Adhering to this model causes people to view
violence against women as more serious than violence against men. Logically, heterosexual
domestic violence would then be considered more serious than homosexual domestic violence.
Merrill (1996) proposes a model that integrates feminist theory and psychological theory.
He first argues that an integrated model allows us to see that domestic violence is a gender issue,

6. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 6
men are usually the perpetrators. Secondly, he brings in psychological theory by proposing that
gender is not the only factor that can predict domestic violence and the absence of gender
inequity, like in same-sex couples, does not mean that violence will not occur (Merrill, 1996).
Feminist theory and psychological theory are not mutually exclusive and can be brought together
to form a model that can include heterosexual and homosexual couples under one framework.
One can see that the homosexual community has been left out of the theoretical
explanations of domestic violence by assuming the feminist theory that many people adhere to.
People who adopt the framework of the feminist model may not even see domestic violence
within homosexual couples as a serious problem because the theory does not allow it. The
integrated social-psychological model proposed by Merrill (1996) does provide a way to include
same-sex couples. Although for some reason, there is not much research on the topic using this
integrated theory.
Gender Roles
Before 1994, there had been no studies done on perceptions of domestic violence within
same-sex couples as opposed to heterosexual couples. Harris and Cook (1994) produced a study
where participants read one of three different fictitious newspaper reports where one third of the
stories were a husband abusing his wife, one third were a wife abusing her husband, and one
third were a male abusing his husband. After reading, they completed an eleven item
questionnaire where each question was on a 7-point scale. Questions included were: “(1) as
crimes go, how violent was the incident? (1=not violent to, 7=very violent) and (2) in this case
should the batterer be convicted of assault?” (1=definitely, 7=definitely not) (Harris & Cook,
1994). Results showed that the wife-battered situation was always seen as more violent than
either of the other two situations. Participants also felt that the battering husband should be

7. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 7
convicted for assault more than the battering wife. When looking at the gay partner battering, the
results were unclear (Harris & Cook, 1994).
In agreement with feminist theory, gender roles seem to play the biggest part when
participants are asked to look at seriousness of domestic violence. Eric and Sheila Seelau
published two studies that look at these gender-role stereotypes and examine if sexual orientation
matter. Results were consistent with the Harris and Cook (1994) study. They found victim and
offender sex plays the biggest role in responses, rather than sexual orientation. A husband
battering his wife was always seen as most serious, “domestic violence perpetrated by men or
against women was judged more serious than violence perpetrated by women or against men”
(Seelau & Seelau, 2005). When asking participants if the offender should receive a guilty
verdict, they also found that these were most common when the victim was a female (Seelau et
al. 2003). Sexual orientation seemed to not be a factor when determining seriousness of domestic
violence.
Although these findings show that people are not judging seriousness of the crime based
on sexual orientation of the couple, they prove that people are judging domestic violence where a
female is a victim as more serious. These studies also prove that gender roles are strong
predictors of domestic violence, which is in line with feminist theory. They also seem to give
some counter evidence to social-psychological models that say that sexual orientation is a factor
that matters in incidence of domestic violence.
The present study will be an extension of these studies in more modern times that will
attempt to see participants’ perceptions about this issue now. These studies have all been more
than ten years ago, so there needs to be more recent data on this topic. Marriage equality and the
gay rights movement could have a huge impact on how people will judge seriousness of

8. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 8
domestic violence within homosexual couples, and there has not been a study that has examined
if that has made a difference. My study will also be more focused on the implications in the
criminal justice system that might come from people judging domestic violence against women
as more serious, which is discussed in the next subsection.
Implications within the Legal System
The final part of previous literature that is relevant are studies on the implications that
may occur within the criminal justice system. Because homosexuals in our culture have always
been oppressed, domestic violence laws used to not even extend into homosexual partnerships.
Until 1994, homosexual couples in California were not included in state laws regarding domestic
violence (Younglove et al., 2002). Although homosexual couples are included in these laws now,
one can see how homophobia and heterosexism has made its way into the criminal justice
system. Domestic violence in homosexual couples is virtually ignored in our legal system. Many
laws are heterosexist in nature; for example, in some states homosexual victims are not even able
to obtain restraining orders against their partner (Brown, 2008). Many people in the homosexual
community do not even report domestic violence because of the lack of resources available to
them if they do. Homosexuals have also found that when they do report they are met with
discrimination and homophobia (Brown, 2008). Poorman and colleagues (2003) found that
because domestic violence within homosexual couples is not seen as serious, “gay male and
lesbian victims of domestic abuse may encounter dispatchers, police officers, attorneys, judges,
jurors… who will find their cases less serious, their reports less believable, and may be less
likely to recommend pressing charges,” (Poorman et al., 2003). So even though people do not
seem to think that sexual orientation matters, just by thinking it is less serious in homosexual
partnerships tends to cause huge implications within the criminal justice system.

9. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 9
In reference to past discrimination within the domestic violence laws, law enforcement
for much of history has viewed homosexuality as immoral and wrong. Because of this, many gay
men and lesbians believe that they will not be given the same treatment as their heterosexual
counterparts and police officers will respond differently to domestic violence within homosexual
couples (Younglove et al., 2002). This assumption is not supported by the current research in the
field. In a study by Younglove and colleagues (2002), they gave police officers four different
vignettes of a scenario where two officers were responding to a domestic violence call and the
only thing that changed is the sexual orientation of the couple. They were then asked a series of
questions about how likely it is an arrest will be made, how likely a restraining order will be
issued, etc. Results go against common belief and found that these law enforcement officers had
little bias when looking at the difference between heterosexual and homosexual domestic
violence (Younglove et al., 2002). The idea that “sexual orientation matters” in the criminal
justice system was not supported in this study. This gives us optimism that homophobia has not
taken hold of the legal system like many assume, but could it be that these officers were
responding to the study trying to be politically correct? There is a possibility that they knew what
the study was looking at and for fear that it might make them look bad, they said they would
respond the same way whether it was a homosexual or heterosexual partnership.
CURRENT INVESTIGATION
My study will be very similar to the gender role studies conducted by Seelau et al. (2003
& 2005) and Harris & Cook (1994). It will be an experimental study administered online or in a
lab setting. Participants will be given one of four different vignettes. Each vignette will be a
fictitious newspaper article or police report detailing an incident of domestic violence in a
heterosexual relationship, a man hitting a woman or a woman hitting a man, and in a homosexual

10. SERIOUSNESS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 10
relationship, a man hitting a man or a woman hitting a woman. These vignettes will not be biased
at all and will only represent the facts of the incident. The only things that will change between
the four will be the victim and offender sex. The age and race of both partners and how the event
is played out will stay consistent. All four dyads will be portrayed as married.
After reading the vignette, participants will be given a survey. It will ask questions like,
“How serious would you rate this crime?” and include statements like, “The offender should
receive jail time or probation.” The participant will rate these on a scale from one to five, with
answers respective to the question. I may also include questions at the end of the survey that ask
if the participant has ever been the victim or offender of domestic violence or if they have
experienced it in another way, like as a child with their parents. I think this could have an impact
on results.
I will then compare these data and look at how people judge the seriousness of domestic
violence whether being a heterosexual couple or a homosexual couple. After looking at the
previous literature, I have two competing hypotheses for my study. The first is that people will
judge domestic violence in heterosexual couples as more serious than homosexual domestic
violence (sexual orientation will make a difference). The second is that sexual orientation of the
couple will not matter when judging seriousness, but incidents where victims are female will be
judged as more serious. Either will contribute to huge policy implications within the criminal
justice system.