In immediate danger? Call 112 (emergency) or 101 (police). Not immediate danger but feeling unsafe? Call 1712 — free, anonymous.
ookmannen.be
NL FR EN

Scientific sources

Overview of key publications and research projects that form the basis of this website.

The content of ookmannen.be rests on a consistent body of evidence: male victimization is structurally underreported due to gender norms and "ideal victim" scripts; detection depends on proactive, non-judgmental professionals; and standard risk tools lose validity when implicitly calibrated to male perpetrator profiles.

Key researchers


Key publications

Male victimization and help-seeking barriers

Depraetere, J., Vandeviver, C., Vander Beken, T., & Keygnaert, I. (2020). Big boys don't cry: A critical interpretive synthesis of male sexual victimization. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 21(5), 991–1010. DOI 10.1177/1524838018816979

This synthesis shows how dominant gender roles and rape myths reinforce underreporting of male victimization and how this inhibits self-identification and help-seeking.

Post-separation behavior and gender differences

De Smet, O., Uzieblo, K., Loeys, T., Buysse, A., & Onraedt, T. (2015). Unwanted pursuit behavior after breakup: Occurrence, risk factors, and gender differences. Journal of Family Violence, 30(6), 753–767. DOI 10.1007/s10896-015-9687-9

In 631 ex-partners, rates of unwanted pursuit after separation were comparable between men and women; predictors lay in rumination and anxious attachment rather than gender.

Partner violence as a dynamic process (Belgium)

Le Compte, T.-M., & Groenen, A. (2020). Als liefde overleven wordt: De vele gezichten van partnergeweld. Pelckmans Pro. ISBN 978-94-6337-224-4.

A practical framework for understanding partner violence as a multidimensional, dynamic process — including psychological violence, isolation and coercive control. Widely used by Belgian practitioners.

Gender-sensitive risk assessment

De Vogel, V., De Vries Robbé, M., Van Kalmthout, W., & Place, C. (2014). Female Additional Manual (FAM). Van der Hoeven Kliniek / De Forensische Zorgspecialisten.

Shows that standard risk instruments underperform for female perpetrators. Introduces gender-specific risk and protective factors relevant to cases with female aggressors.

Belgian federal research: male victims and institutional abuse

IPV-PRO&POL (BELSPO/BRAIN-be, 2019–2023). Interdisciplinary federal study on intimate partner violence processes and policy in Belgium. Includes criminal case files, victim and perpetrator interviews, and Delphi panels. Explicit findings on male victims: psychological violence, isolation, post-separation abuse, and institutional/administrative abuse as a recognized form of control.

National survey on intimate partner violence (Belgium)

Janssen, C., & Vesentini, F. (2024). Gendergerelateerd geweld in België: Kerncijfers van de Europese enquête over geweld tegen vrouwen en andere vormen van interpersoonlijk geweld (EU-GBV, 2021–2022). IWEPS/BISA/Statistiek Vlaanderen. publicaties.vlaanderen.be

Representative survey conducted in 2021–2022 among 5,494 people in Belgium (4,529 women, 965 men). Overall prevalence of intimate partner violence is comparable between sexes (men 33.1%, women 31.3% — not statistically significant), but the nature differs fundamentally: men more often experience only psychological violence (74.1% of male victims), women more often physical and sexual violence and combinations of multiple forms (48.7% vs 23.5%). The men's data are described as "exploratory" in the report due to the smaller sample size.


Practical literature for victims


Full sources page with APA citations and DOIs (NL)

Content also based on: Belgian EU-GBV survey, IGVM/IEFH policy frameworks, Keertij, contextthinking.org.