This article depicts the dominant discourses on intimate partner violence (IPV) in newspaper reports and discusses how the myths about IPV are perpetuated in news reporting in Hong Kong. The myths about IPV consist of a set of prevalent assumptions in society that adversely affect the help-seeking behavior of survivors and impede social change. It is sometimes assumed that the victims cause the abuse and are personally responsible for solving the problem. This study reveals how news reporting in Hong Kong perpetuates the myths about IPV by engendering unequal power relations through the language and text used in newspapers. A critical discourse analysis is performed to depict the language used in the text and the embedded meanings in discourses on IPV in two popular local newspapers, Apple Daily and Ming Pao. The findings indicate that the two newspapers tend to use five major discursive frameworks in their reporting on IPV, namely, (a) gender symmetry, (b) stereotyping the abuser, (c) labeling the abused, (d) blaming the victim, and (e) ignoring women's rights. The study reveals evidence of the systematic stereotyping of IPV abusers and blaming of survivors in newspaper reporting. These powerful discourses may perpetuate the myths about IPV and marginalize IPV survivors in society.

This paper examines the extent to which the influence of Confucianism on the welfare of women erects barriers to the gender mainstreaming (GM) of childcare policy in Hong Kong. GM is a global strategy adopted by the Beijing World Conference on Women in 1995. Adopting a context-sensitive approach in understanding the translation of the international concept of GM in the policy formation and practice in Hong Kong, we find that the Confucian welfare model has profound impact on women's welfare and the effectiveness of GM in Hong Kong. First, childcare support for the family is far from adequate due to the perception of childcare as the individual family's responsibility rather than as a citizen right. Second, the gender-neutral discourse commonly accepted by the policy-makers in Hong Kong reflects the inadequate gender-sensitivity training of government officials. Third, GM has been “watered down” as a technical tool instead of transforming gender inequality in the society.

No abstract

This article examines gender sensitivity among social workers in different service settings, who handle domestic violence cases and its implications for social workers' professional development in Hong Kong. The findings of in-depth interviews with both social workers and survivors of domestic violence revealed that the major difference in the handling of domestic violence cases by social workers in family settings and those working in shelters or with survivors' groups is that the former perceive women's problems as family problems that require mediation and adjustment, whereas the latter consider them to arise from an imbalance in power relations between men and women, thus leading them to focus on enhancing women's well-being in their practice. Helping social workers to recognize structural inequality between men and women is the starting point for the development of gender-sensitive practice in domestic violence cases.