Référence bibliographique 
Blais, Mélissa. 2020. «Masculinist Discourses on Intimate Partner Violence: Antifeminist Men Defending White Heterosexual Male Supremacy». Dans Men, Masculinities and Intimate Partner Violence , sous la dir. de Lucas Gottzén, Bjørnholt, Margunn et Boonzaier, Floretta, p. 81-96. Londres (Royaume-Uni): Routledge.
In this chapter, the author has «endeavoured to catalogue the political, organisational, discursive and biographical effects of […] antifeminist attacks on feminists and, more specifically, on feminists providing support to abused women. [She focuses] specifically on the rhetorical devices, […] investigating the profile and motives of antifeminist activists who deploy them.» (p. 81)
For this research, the author «carried out 87 […] interviews between 2005 and 2013 with feminist activists in Quebec, Canada.» (p. 81) Moreover, she analysed «publications (primarily books and websites) and the full interviews conducted by Patric Jean during the production of the documentary La domination masculine […].» (p. 82)
Guide d’entretien semi-directif
Type de traitement des données :
Analyse de contenu
«In light of the masculinist discourses identified, [the author has] suggested that the articulation of a theory of intersectional sexage sheds light on how masculinists advocate for a heterosexual, economically privileged and white masculinity which presupposes having women available to them […]. To defend these interests, it is necessary to convince the public that the feminism blocking their interests is wrong. In other words, the rhetoric identified in [her] research contributes to harm those who work against intimate partner violence against women, including FMS [False Memory Syndrome] and PAS [Parental Alienation Syndrome] theoretical rhetoric, which justify male violence against women and children. Similarly, Guillaumin (1992) stresses that to appropriate children, men must control the sexuality of women. However, this mean available to men to perpetrate sexage is likely to be taken away from them thanks to feminist struggles against sexual violence. Consequently, feminists have come to be seen as a threat by masculinists defending their right to appropriate women, as the significant resources deployed by masculinists to counteract feminist work to support victims of men’s intimate partner and sexual violence bear witness. Just as masculinist attacks on feminist struggles against violence against women are inscribed in this dynamic of male appropriation, so “for them, each time we come out with a plan to act against violence against women, it testifies to the credibility that the government gives to these issues” […].» (p. 92)