Why We Need to Talk About Gender in Domestic Violence
By Jackie Wruck, Asia Pacific Regional Manager, Safe & Together Institute
When we talk about domestic and family violence, we need to be honest about a difficult truth: Most perpetrators are men, and most survivors are women and their children.
This isn’t about erasing anyone’s experience or making assumptions about individual cases. It’s about naming a pattern that the data shows us repeatedly. In one Australian report, it is suggested that one in four women compared to one in 14 men are survivors of intimate partner violence. Understanding this gendered pattern helps us address the root causes of violence—including patriarchy, power imbalances, and gender inequality that continue to shape our society.
But here’s where it gets complex: We need to hold two truths at the same time. This is what the Safe & Together Model calls “the gender paradox.”
On one hand, we must acknowledge these statistical realities. When most perpetrators are men and most survivors are women, pretending the issue is gender-neutral obscures important insights. We can’t address how perpetrators weaponise their role as fathers to harm children. We can’t see how gendered expectations lead to mothers being blamed while fathers escape accountability. And we can’t tackle the underlying social structures—patriarchal attitudes, male entitlement, unequal power dynamics—that enable violence to continue.
On the other hand, when assessing individual cases, we must remain objective and behavioural. The Safe & Together Model’s pattern-based approach means looking at specific behaviours and their impact—not making assumptions based on gender. Violence happens across all gender combinations. Men can be victims. Women can use violence. Same-sex and gender-diverse relationships experience violence too. Each situation must be assessed on its own behavioural patterns, not demographic assumptions.
This balance matters because effective domestic violence work requires both perspectives. Using gendered language in educational materials and acknowledging statistical patterns makes the systemic nature of violence visible. It helps us allocate resources effectively and address root causes. But maintaining a gender-neutral, behavioural approach in individual assessments ensures we don’t erase any survivor’s experience or fall into the trap of gender-based assumptions.
The goal isn’t to choose between acknowledging patterns and being inclusive—we need both. We can recognise that violence is fundamentally shaped by gender inequality while also ensuring our practice frameworks work equally well regardless of who is using violence and who is experiencing it.
When we name the gendered nature of abuse honestly, we’re not dismissing anyone. We’re being clear-eyed about patterns so we can create better responses. We’re ensuring perpetrators—most often fathers—are held accountable as parents. And we’re making space for all survivors by building assessment tools based on behaviours and impact rather than stereotypes.
Regional and Cultural Context in the Asia Pacific
Across the Asia Pacific, domestic and family violence takes shape within diverse cultural, social, and historical contexts. While gendered patterns of violence are consistent—most perpetrators being men and most survivors being women and children—the ways these patterns are expressed and addressed vary greatly. In many communities, patriarchal traditions, family hierarchies, and social expectations about women’s roles continue to influence how violence is understood and whether it is reported. At the same time, the legacy of colonisation, economic pressures, and migration can intersect with gender inequality to deepen both risk and isolation for survivors.
For practitioners, this means that applying a gendered lens must also include cultural humility and curiosity. Effective practice requires understanding how gender, culture, and power operate together in each local context. This might mean partnering with community leaders, recognising the influence of extended family systems, or adapting engagement strategies to ensure that safety planning is both culturally safe and survivor-centred. By integrating a gender-aware approach with respect for cultural realities, practitioners can respond more effectively to the complexity of families’ lives across our region.
Talking about gender honestly doesn’t divide us—it helps us work smarter, with clearer eyes and deeper compassion. When practitioners hold both truths, we move closer to systems that keep all families safer.
Real change requires us to see violence clearly, in all its complexity. That means acknowledging both the overwhelming pattern and the important exceptions.
Additional Resources
Blog: Rethinking Children’s Best Interests: Moving Beyond Trauma and Tackling Gender Double Standards
Safe & Together Institute’s domestic abuse–informed trainings
Safe & Together Institute’s upcoming events
David Mandel’s book Stop Blaming Mothers and Ignoring Fathers: How to Transform the Way We Keep Children Safe from Domestic Violence
