When discussing privilege, we often consider it a zero‐sum quantity, one either has it or one does not. Since privilege is distributed along a range of axes, we consider three sites in which male privilege is compromised by marginalization by other statuses: disability status, sexuality, and class. Employing a Symbolic Interactionist approach, derived from Erving Goffman's Stigma (1963), we observe strategies employed by disabled men, gay men and working class men to reduce, neutralize, or resist the problematization of masculinity as a constitutive element of their marginalization by class, sexuality, or disability.

While just over one in three heterosexual women will experience intimate partner violence (IPV) in her lifetime, 61% of bisexual women and 78% of non-monosexual women will. Combining previous research and theories on power, social resources, binegativity, and gender-based violence, this article analyzes the role of power and inequality in non-monosexual women's IPV victimization. Using data from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, this article first examines rates of IPV victimization for statistically significant differences between monosexual (e.g., only have dating, romantic, and sexual partners of one sex/gender) and non-monosexual (e.g., have dating, romantic, and sexual partners of multiple sexes/genders) women in the United States and, second, introduces theoretically important variables to logistic regression analyses to determine the correlates of IPV victimization among non-monosexual women (age, race ethnicity, income, education, immigration status, and indigeneity; partner gender; sexual identity). Findings indicate that non-monosexual women are more likely to experience sexual, emotional, and psychological/control violence, and intimate stalking, but have an equivalent risk of experiencing physical violence. Moreover, having an abusive partner who is a man, having a lot of relative social power, and self-identifying as "bisexual" are all significant factors in violence victimization. Importantly, this is the first study using nationally representative data that confirms non-monosexual women are particularly at risk for sexual identity-based violence at the hands of their male/man partners, suggesting binegativity and biphobia may indeed be linked to hegemonic masculinity. Suggestions for moving research forward include improving data collection efforts such that we can disentangle gender from sex and individual aggregate power from relationship inequalities, as well as more adequately account for the timing of sexual identity disclosures within relationships, relative to the timing of violent episodes.

There is significant evidence to suggest that intimate partner violence (IPV) is associated with mental health problems including anxiety and depression. However, this research has almost exclusively been conducted through heteronormative and cisgender lenses. The current study is an exploratory, quantitative analysis of the relationship between experiences of IPV and mental health among transgender/gender nonconforming (TGNC) adults. A national sample of 78 TGNC individuals completed a survey online measuring participants' experiences with IPV and depression, anxiety, and satisfaction with life. Of the sample, 72% reported at least one form of IPV victimization in their lifetime: 32% reported experiencing sexual IPV, 71% psychological IPV, 42% physical IPV, and 29% IPV assault with injury. All four types of IPV were positively associated with anxiety, and all but physical abuse was significantly associated with depression. None of the four types of IPV was associated with satisfaction with life. In a canonical correlation, IPV victimization and mental health had 31% overlapping variance, a large-sized effect. Sexual IPV and anxiety were the highest loading variables, suggesting that TGNC individuals who have experienced sexual IPV specifically tended to have higher levels of anxiety. These findings support previous qualitative, small-sample studies suggesting that IPV is a pervasive problem in the TGNC community. TGNC individuals who have experienced IPV may be at increased risk for mental health problems, and therefore, IPV history may trigger appropriate mental health screenings and referrals for this population in health care settings.

This study explored patterns of intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization and perpetration in 150 sexual minority women (SMW): 25.3% had been sexually victimized, 34% physically victimized, 76% psychologically victimized, and 29.3% suffered an IPV-related injury. A latent class analysis found four behavioral patterns: (1) minor-only psychological perpetration and victimization; (2) no IPV; (3) minor-severe psychological, physical assault, and injury victimization, and minor-only psychological, physical, and injury perpetration; and (4) severe psychological, sexual, physical assault, and injury victimization and perpetration. Individuals who experienced and/or perpetrated all types experienced the greatest heterosexism at work, school, and in other contexts.

No abstract