Sibling violence goes beyond routine sibling rivalry. Earlier reports found that as
many as 80 percent of American children had engaged in an act of physical violence
toward a sibling (Straus and Gelles, 1990). In a recent sociological study, David Finkel-
hor and his colleagues (2006) found that 35 percent of all children had been attacked
by a sibling in the previous year. Of these, more than a third were serious attacks
(Figure 12.7).
The consequences of sibling violence can be severe. Children who were repeat-
edly attacked were twice as likely to show symptoms of trauma, anxiety, and depres-
sion, including sleeplessness, crying spells, thoughts of suicide, and fear of the dark
(Butler, 2006). Finkelhor and his colleagues found that attacks did not differ by class
or race, or even by gender, although boys were slightly more likely to be victims than
girls. They occurred most frequently on siblings aged 6 to 12 and gradually tapered
off as the child entered adolescence.
Sometime, children use violence against their parents. About 18 percent of chil-
dren used violence against their parents in the past year—about half of which was con-
sidered “nontrivial,” serious enough to cause pain or injury (Agnew and Huguley,
VIOLENCE IN FAMILIES 411Despite dra-
matic gender
differences,
there are some
researchers and political pundits who
claim that there is “gender symmetry” in
domestic violence—that rates of domes-
tic violence are roughly equal by gender
(see, for example, Brott, 1994). One
reason this symmetry is underreported
is because men who are victims of
domestic violence are so ashamed they
are unlikely to come forward—a psycho-
logical problem that one researcher
calls “the battered husband syndrome”
(Steinmetz, 1978).
But a close look at the data suggests
why these findings are so discordant
with the official studies by the
Department of Justice and the FBI.
Those studies that find gender symmetry
rely on the “conflict tactics scale” (CTS)
developed by family violence researcher
and sociologist Murray Straus and his
colleagues over 30 years. The CTS asked
couples if they had ever, during the
course of their relationship, hit their
partner. An equal number of women and
men answered “yes.” The number
changed dramatically, though, when
they were asked who initiated the
violence (was it offensive, or defensive),
how severe it was (did she push him
before or after he’d broken her jaw?),
and how often the violence occurred.
When these three questions were posed,
the results shifted back: The amount,
frequency, severity, and consistency of
violence against women are far greater
than anything done by women to men.
There were several other problems
with the CTS as a measure (see Kimmel,
2002). These problems included:1.Whom did they ask?Studies that
found comparable rates of
domestic violence asked only one
partner about the incident. But
studies in which both partners
were interviewed separately found
large discrepancies between
reports from women and from men.
2.What was the time frame?Studies
that found symmetry asked about
incidents that occurred in a single
year, thus equating a single slapGender Symmetry in IPV
How do we know
what we know
with a reign of domestic terror
that may have lasted decades.
3.Was the couple together?Studies
that found gender symmetry
excluded couples that were
separated or divorced, although
violence against women increases
dramatically after separation.
4.What was the reason for the
violence?Studies that find
symmetry do not distinguish
between offensive and defensive
violence, equating a vicious
assault with a woman hitting her
husband to get him to stop
hitting the children.
5.Was “sex” involved?Studies that
find symmetry omit marital rape
and sexual aggression; because a
significant amount of IPV occurs
when one partner doesn’t want to
have sex, this would dramatically
change the data.Of course, women can be—and are—
violent toward their husbands and part-
ners. Criminologist Martin Schwartz
estimates that women commit as much
as 3 to 4 percent of all spousal violence.
But research such as this requires that
we look more deeply at the questions
asked. Sometimes, the answers are con-
tained in the questions.