By: Clarence Ndabahwerize, Staff Writer
Associate professor of criminology, Alexandra Lysova, recently received the Sterling Prize in Support of Controversy, honouring years of research on men who are victims of domestic violence. The prize is committed to recognizing work that provokes and contributes to the understanding of controversy. The spirit of such work should present new ways of looking at the world and challenging complacency.
Lysova opened this year’s Sterling Lecture by acknowledging former SFU president Andrew Petter’s statement on freedom of speech in universities. “Universities operate on the principle that freedom of speech is a core component of intellectual inquiry and is central to the pursuit of knowledge,” he said in 2010.
“There is controversy that is beneficial and can promote an attitude of inquiry and the critical spirit, which is so necessary for critical thinking,” Lysova said. This was after she noted how she often experiences the use of personal attacks to discredit her research, rather than the attacks against the research itself.
“I realise that it’s not easy to talk about controversy [ . . . ] because while it encourages interest and increases likelihood of discussion, it simultaneously increases discomfort, which decreases the likelihood of discussion.”
She quoted Nobel Prize Laureate Alexandr Solzehnistyn: “No longer does violence always unnecessarily lunge straight for the throat, more often it demands of its subject only that they pledge allegiance to lies and participate in falsehood.” She noted academic controversy is inevitable, especially in the field of criminology.
Lysova, talking about intimate partner violence (IPV), referred to it as a “very serious social, public health, and crime related issue in many countries in the world, including Canada.” She noted IPV is defined simply as, “a behaviour perpetrated with intention to hurt an intimate partner physically or sexually.”
“If we add more forms of abuse which [and] psychological aggression, coercive and controlling behaviour, legal and administrative abuse, that will be a broader definition for intimate partner violence,” she added. She explained legal and administrative abuse is a more recent form of abuse being discovered in the field. It involves the “use, or threat of use, of administrative systems like courts, law enforcement, and child protective services against a partner in an abusive manner.”
Explaining the controversies, as well as myths and realities surrounding men’s victimization, she talked about how the prevalent framework in the field of IPV was conceptualised in the ‘60s and ‘70s. She said during this time, researchers studying IPV framed domestic violence as being synonymous with violence against women. Lysova added that the advocacy work was important to address the issue of violence against women, but influenced perceptions of who can be a victim.
“When [aggression from women] was discussed, it was in the context of battered women; women who are abused, killed, or perpetrate violence as a response to violence” — which is distinctive to those who are abusive.
