Moreover, he hypothesized that a higher percentage violence was caused by unique risk factors linked to minority stress that is experienced only by LGB people. Messinger (2011) highlighted that all forms of abuse were more likely to occur in homosexual and bisexual couples than in heterosexual ones. When episodes of severe violence were considered, prevalence was similar or higher for LGB adults (bisexual women: 49.3% lesbian women: 29.4% homosexual men: 16.4%) compared to heterosexual adults (heterosexual women: 23.6% heterosexual men: 13.9%) ( Breiding et al., 2013). Life-time prevalence of IPV in LGB couples appeared to be similar to or higher than in heterosexual ones: 61.1% of bisexual women, 43.8% of lesbian women, 37.3% of bisexual men, and 26.0% of homosexual men experienced IPV during their life, while 35.0% of heterosexual women and 29.0% of heterosexual men experienced IPV. (2013) identified that 4.1 million people of the LGB community have experienced IPV in their lifetime in the United States. In addition, over 50% of gay men and almost 75% of lesbian women reported that they were victims of psychological IPV ( Breiding et al., 2013). However, according to one of the most recent and representative study reports, almost one-third of sexual minority males and one-half of sexual minority women in the United States affirmed they were victims of physical or psychological abuse in a romantic relationship. It can be difficult to identify LGB IPV prevalence rates due to the different methodologies used in the researches.
Even though there are a few studies on Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence (SSIPV), they highlight that the phenomenon occurs at a rate that is comparable ( Turell, 2000) or even higher than heterosexual IPV ( Messinger, 2011 Kelley et al., 2012 Barrett and St.Pierre, 2013). IPV in the LGB population has not been studied as frequently as in the heterosexual population: in 2015, research on LGB IPV constituted a mere 3% of the total research on the subject ( Edwards et al., 2015).
The lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) population faces more difficult outcomes compared to the heterosexual population “across different life domains, including mental and physical health, subjective wellbeing, employment, poverty, homelessness, and social exclusion” ( Perales and Todd, 2018, p. The consequences of IPV on mental health and general wellbeing have also been outlined in numerous studies ( Campbell, 2002 Anderson et al., 2008 Murray and Mobley, 2009 Giordano et al., 2014 Costa et al., 2015). According to numerous authors, the expression “IPV” represents a form of violence that both men and women can enact, with no regard to age, marital status, or sexual orientations ( Capaldi et al., 2007 Ali et al., 2016). According to the World Health Organization (2012), IPV is related to any behavior between a couple that involves acts of physical and sexual violence, emotional and psychological abuse, and controlling behavior. Over the past few decades, intimate partner violence (IPV) has received increasing interest from mental health experts. The reviews lead us to the conclusion that it is essential to create a place where this subject can be freely discussed and approached, both by LGB and heterosexual people. We identified the main themes discussed in the published studies that we have reviewed here. Our findings show there is a lack of studies that address LGB individuals involved in IPV this is mostly due to the silence that has historically existed around violence in the LGB community, a silence built on fears and myths that have obstructed a public discussion on the phenomenon. Such features are mainly related to identification and treatment of SSIPV in the community and to the need of taking into consideration the role of sexual minority stressors. While similarities between heterosexual and lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) IPV were found, unique features and dynamics were present in LGB IPV.
Despite the myth that IPV is exclusively an issue in heterosexual relationships, many studies have revealed the existence of IPV among lesbian and gay couples, and its incidence is comparable to ( Turell, 2000) or higher than that among heterosexual couples ( Messinger, 2011 Kelley et al., 2012). This paper presents a narrative review on IPV occurring in same sex couples, that is, same sex IPV (SSIPV). Over the past few decades, the causes of and intervention for intimate partner violence (IPV) have been approached and studied.
Department of Psychology, University of Torino, Turin, Italy.