Centre for Alcohol Policy Research, La Trobe University, Melbourne, 3086, Victoria, Australia; Social Work and Social Policy, La Trobe University, Bundoora, 3086, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Sociology, University of Copenhagen, DK-1014, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Int J Drug Policy. 2020 Jul;81:102520. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.07.015. Epub 2019 Jul 19.
Men are more likely than women to perpetrate serious violence when they have consumed alcohol, but alcohol does not affect all men in the same way. This paper considers young adults' attribution about agency (the capacity to act) in men's drunken violence.
Interviews about alcohol use in night-time venues, streets or private parties were conducted with 60 young adults aged 18-24 in Melbourne, Australia, and analysed thematically. Participants included seven men who identified as having initiated violence when drunk.
Some interviewees stated that men chose to be violent, or that men's violence when they were drunk was purposeful and therefore involved some component of choice. However, much alcohol-related violence enacted by young men was understood (both by men who reported violence and by other young adults) as impelled by forces outside their control. These forces were: diffusely defined effects of drinking alcohol; proclivities of men and masculinity, and the interaction of alcohol and men's bodies to override capacity for judgement and produce an irresistible urge to fight. The latter was at times explained as caused by the mutually reinforcing actions of alcohol and testosterone, providing a particularly persuasive account of men's violence as biologically-determined.
These categories encapsulate a set of discursive resources that contribute to the rationalisation, naturalisation and production of men's violence. Participants tended to regard alcohol, masculinities and testosterone as inciting violence predictably and consistently, suggesting that men themselves had relatively little agency over its occurrence. In contrast, research evidence indicates that these actors do not cause violence in any uniform way and that their effects are contingent on changing configurations of factors. Highlighting discrepancies between young adults' understandings of responsibility for men's drunken violence, and those expressed in research, presents additional opportunities for intervention.
男性在饮酒后实施严重暴力行为的可能性高于女性，但酒精对所有男性的影响并不相同。本文探讨了年轻人对男性醉酒暴力行为中代理权（行动能力）的归因。
在澳大利亚墨尔本，对 60 名年龄在 18-24 岁的年轻人进行了关于夜间场所、街头或私人聚会饮酒的访谈，并进行了主题分析。参与者包括 7 名承认醉酒时发起暴力行为的男性。
一些受访者表示，男性是出于选择才变得具有攻击性，或者说男性醉酒时的暴力行为是有目的的，因此涉及到一定程度的选择。然而，许多年轻男性实施的与酒精相关的暴力行为被理解（无论是报告暴力行为的男性还是其他年轻人）为是由他们无法控制的外部力量所驱使。这些力量包括：饮酒的模糊定义的影响；男性和男子气概的倾向，以及酒精和男性身体的相互作用，以超越判断力并产生不可抗拒的战斗冲动。后者有时被解释为酒精和睾丸激素的相互增强作用造成的，这提供了一个特别有说服力的解释，说明男性暴力行为是由生物决定的。
这些类别包含了一系列话语资源，有助于对男性暴力行为进行合理化、自然化和产生。参与者倾向于认为酒精、男子气概和睾丸激素能够可预测且一致地煽动暴力，这表明男性自身对暴力行为的发生几乎没有什么代理权。相比之下，研究证据表明，这些因素不会以任何统一的方式导致暴力行为，它们的影响取决于不断变化的因素配置。强调年轻人对男性醉酒暴力行为的责任理解与研究中表达的理解之间的差异，为干预提供了更多机会。
