Pressure and Persuasion: Young Fijian Women’s Experiences of Sexual and Reproductive Coercion in Romantic Relationships

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a violation of women’s human rights and dramatically increases women’s vulnerability to sexual and reproductive health morbidities. This article examines young iTaukei (Indigenous Fijian) women’s experiences of, and responses to, nonphysical forms of coercion in romantic relationships. It draws on ethnographic research with young unmarried women attending university in Suva, Fiji. Young women disclosed experiencing a continuum of coercive behaviors, including verbal pressure, deception, and manipulation by male partners to initiate sexual intercourse, unprotected sex, and unsafe abortions. Findings indicate an urgent need to address IPV within premarital relationships in Fiji to promote young women’s sexual and reproductive health and autonomy.

Keywords

young women Fiji intimate partner violence sexual and reproductive coercion

Introduction

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a complex and multifaceted public health, social, and human rights issue that dramatically increases women’s vulnerability to poor health outcomes, including sexually transmissible infections (STIs), unplanned pregnancies, and other reproductive health morbidities (Campbell, 2002; Coker, 2007; Grace & Anderson, 2016). The emotional and psychological impacts of IPV include low self-esteem, sexual dissatisfaction, depression, and anxiety, as well as negative impacts on current and future relationships (Campbell, 2002; Coker, 2007; Jeffrey & Barata, 2016; Moore, Frohwirth, & Miller, 2010). IPV consists of physical, sexual, emotional, and verbal abuse, or threats of abuse, as well as controlling behavior in an intimate relationship. Gender inequalities and gendered power relations often shape women’s vulnerability to IPV (Jewkes & Morrell, 2010; World Health Organization [WHO], 2002). This includes societal norms that normalize interpersonal violence and support male dominance within intimate relationships.

This article is concerned with young iTaukei¹ women’s experiences of IPV in the form of coerced sexual intercourse (sexual coercion), coerced nonuse of condoms (condom coercion), and coerced termination of pregnancy (abortion coercion). We present two narratives that highlight young women’s experiences of, and responses to, coercion in intimate relationships. Although IPV includes a range of behaviors from verbal pressure to physical violence, we focus here on nonphysical forms of coercion, such as verbal pressure, deception, and manipulation experienced by young iTaukei women in romantic relationships. We discuss how male partner coercion can shape young women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) through reducing their capacity to refuse unwanted sex, practice safe sex, and avoid premarital pregnancy. We argue it is critical to address IPV within young women’s intimate relationships in Fiji to promote their right to sexual consent, and to reduce their vulnerability to STIs, unplanned pregnancies, and increase their wellbeing. This is the first research to engage with young iTaukei women’s experiences of coercion within premarital relationships in Fiji.

Background: Defining Coercion Within Intimate Relationships

IPV can include partner use of coercion to initiate sexual intercourse and nonuse of condoms as well as determining pregnancy outcomes. Coercion, especially the use of verbal pressure and manipulation, is a common dynamic within young women’s romantic relationships with men (Bhana & Anderson, 2013; Eaton & Matamala, 2014; Wagman et al., 2009). Young unmarried women are particularly vulnerable to sexual and reproductive coercion. Dominant gender norms and relationship dynamics underlie young unmarried women’s limited sexual agency and power within romantic relationships (Akintola, Ngubane, & Makhaba, 2011; Bhana & Anderson, 2013).

Definitions of sexual coercion vary, but usually include the use of verbal and/or physical tactics which constrain a person’s choice to refuse unwanted sex, sexual touching, and/or harassment (Eaton & Matamala, 2014; Jeffrey & Barata, 2016). This encompasses the use of verbal pressure, manipulation (e.g., threats of abandonment or infidelity), deception, pleading, arousal tactics (physical touching to sexually arouse), and threatened or actual use of physical violence. The use of nonphysical forms of sexual coercion by male partners has been noted as a strong motivator for sexual debut among young women in cultural contexts with similar complexities of gender inequality as Fiji (Akintola et al., 2011; Nobelius et al., 2010; Wagman et al., 2009; Wood, Lambert, & Jewkes, 2007). Studies in South Africa and Uganda, for example, have demonstrated that persistent and sustained verbal pressure and/or threats (or fear) of abandonment or infidelity drove young women to have sex with their intimate partner for the first time (Akintola et al., 2011; Wagman et al., 2009). Prior to this study, there was an absence of parallel ethnographic research on these dynamics of coercion in premarital relationships in Fiji.

Sexual coercion extends to pressure from an intimate partner to engage in unprotected sex. Condom coercion refers to the use of verbal pressure, manipulation, deception, threats, or physical violence to compel a person to have unprotected sex against their will. Past research has documented young women’s experiences of condom coercion in the context of romantic relationships (MacPhail & Campbell, 2001; Silverman et al., 2011; Teitelman, Tennille, Bohinski, Jemmott, & Jemmott, 2011). These studies have highlighted a range of coercive practices used by male partners to facilitate condomless sex, including deception, emotional manipulation (use of relationship commitment, love and trust, or accusations of infidelity), condom sabotage, as well as physical/sexual violence and threats of violence.

Reproductive coercion refers to behavior/s that attempt to interfere with women’s reproductive autonomy (Grace & Anderson, 2016; Miller et al., 2010; Miller & Silverman, 2010). This can include birth-control sabotage, pregnancy coercion, and control of pregnancy outcomes. Abortion coercion is a form of reproductive coercion and includes pressuring, threatening, or forcing a partner to continue a pregnancy or terminate a pregnancy against their will (Grace & Anderson, 2016). Although most studies describe abortion coercion in the context of male partners seeking to prevent abortion occurring, some studies have also documented intimate partners’ use of coercion to terminate a pregnancy (see, for example, Bennett, 2001; Chibber, Biggs, Roberts, & Foster, 2014; Moore et al., 2010; Silverman et al., 2010). These coercive tactics can include denial of paternity, accusations of infidelity, refusal to support the mother and child if a pregnancy continues, pressure to terminate pregnancy, and threatening violence with the intention of terminating pregnancy.

Gender and Sexual Relations in Fiji

Historically, gender norms in iTaukei culture have dictated that a wife should obey her husband; physical violence often underscored early marital relations until male authority was established (Sahlins, 1962; Toren, 1990). Men’s formalized authority over women was secured through their greater access to resources gained through patrilineal inheritance titles (Leckie, 2002; Toren, 1990). The patrilocal residence of women denied them land rights while affording men formalized social and political power (Jala, 1998; Leckie, 2002). Male dominance was legitimated during the British colonial period (1874-1970) by colonial structures that supported chiefly hierarchies and patriarchal inheritance rights that restricted women’s access to land, political authority, and monetary resources (Jala, 1997; Leckie, 2002).

Gender inequality continues to characterize iTaukei social relations in contemporary Fiji, with men typically occupying formal positions of power and authority. This includes domination over their wives and sisters, and gender-based violence remains pervasive and is largely socially sanctioned (Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre [FWCC], 2013; George, 2012). This extends to male control in sexual and reproductive decision-making, where men often determine the timing and conditions of sexual intercourse, contraceptive use, and pregnancy outcomes (FWCC, 2013; Mitchell, 2017; Mitchell & Bennett, 2020).

A recent national survey with 3,193 women demonstrates the extent of IPV experienced by women in Fiji. Among ever-partnered women, 28% had been forced to have sex, 64% had experienced physical and/or sexual violence,² and 15% had been beaten during pregnancy (one third of which were punched or kicked in the abdomen) by an intimate partner in their lifetime (FWCC, 2013). The link between IPV and reproductive coercion has also been established in Fiji, with women living with physical and/or sexual violence being more likely to report unwanted pregnancies, miscarriages and abortion, and intimate partner contraceptive control (FWCC, 2013). In terms of women’s attitudes to gender power relations, in the same national survey 43% of women agreed with at least one “justification” for a man beating his wife, and 60% believed that a good wife should obey her husband (even if she disagrees with him) (FWCC, 2013). These findings suggest that gender inequality and IPV continue to be condoned and normalized, and both women and men participate in reinforcing its social acceptability, despite pockets of active resistance to gender-based violence.³ Although this study provides some useful information regarding the prevelence of IPV in Fiji, further qualitative research that builds on previous survey-based research into violence against women, including young women’s subjective experiences of, and responses to, coercion within premartial relationships is needed.

In addition to gender, age is also a key determinant of social status in Fiji, with young people, especially unmarried women, holding a relatively passive and marginalized role within society (Vakaoti, 2012). Social hierarchies and gender dynamics in iTaukei culture significantly constrain young women’s ability to exercise agency, including sexual agency, because premarital sex is not socially sanctioned for women and young women are not expected to speak out or challenge the authority of adults or men. Thus, the intersection of age, gender, and marital status hierarchies for young unmarried iTaukei women means that they occupy a subordinate social position, which makes them particularly vulnerable to both sexual and reproductive coercion.

Method

The article draws on ethnographic fieldwork conducted with young unmarried iTaukei women attending university in Suva, Fiji. The fieldwork upon which this article is based was undertaken by the first author over 15 months between June 2011 and September 2012 and was supervised by the second author. The problem of IPV was not initially the explicit focus of this research, but rather emerged early in the fieldwork process as an important theme that could not ethically be ignored. Thus, the findings as we report them here should be treated as the results of exploratory enquiry that was seeking to understand the nature and impact of coercion being disclosed by women in the context of a wider piece of research into youth sexuality and sexual risk in Fiji.

Data Collection

This article includes data collected through in-depth interviews and participant observation with young iTaukei women aged 18 to 26 years.⁴ Seventeen young women participated in in-depth interviews and shared their life and sexual histories. These interviews explored a range of themes related to young women’s social and sexual relationships, gender norms and iTaukei culture, and young women’s SRH. In-depth interviews were conducted by the first author. All interviews were conducted in English, lasted between 1 and 1.5 hr, and were digitally recorded. Participants were recruited using snowballing sampling techniques (Patton, 2002) and were informed about the study by either the first author or their peers. Participant observation was conducted by the first author and involved immersion in the daily lives and activities of young iTaukei women over a 15-month period. This included spending time with the women and their peers on campus and in other social spaces, including at the local movie theater, shopping malls, nightclubs, and parks around Suva City.

Data Analysis

Interviews were transcribed verbatim. In the initial analysis, the first author read and reread the transcripts and observation notes to identify themes and evidence regarding IPV. We subsequently used NVivo 10 software to code the data thematically. Inductive analysis techniques (Patton, 2002) were used to identify recurring themes related to young women’s experiences of sexual and reproductive coercion. This included the documentation of observations, concepts, and categories identified in the data and later the coding of themes and subthemes as well as linkages between categories.

Ethics

Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Melbourne, the Fiji National Health Research Committee and the University of the South Pacific Research Ethics Committee. Prior to each interview, participants were provided with an information sheet and consent form. All participants gave written informed consent. Participants were assured their responses were confidential and any questions they had about the study were answered. All women who disclosed experiencing coercion within their relationship were provided with information about a local service that supports women experiencing IPV and referred to a counselor on campus. Pseudonyms have been used throughout to protect the identities of those involved.

Case Studies

Kara’s Story: Love, Trust, and Disappointment

Kara is a young woman in her early 20s who grew up in a small village in the north east of Viti Levu with her parents and six younger siblings. At age 16, Kara was sent to live with her uncle in Suva to complete her final 2 years of high school. During her first year at university Kara started dating and fell in love with Edmond, her cross-cousin.⁵ Her family supported the relationship, expecting she would “bring back the blood” and marry within the extended kin group.

Kara grew up listening to adults talk about the importance of abstinence before marriage and knew that any transgression on her part would bring shame on her family. At first Kara was firm with Edmond about wanting to delay intercourse until they were married, and he initially supported her decision. The couple refrained from coitus but engaged in foreplay, which included Kara performing oral sex for Edmond. After a few months, Edmond started to pressure her to have intercourse, promising they would soon be married. Wanting to please Edmond and feeling the gift of her virginity would be the ultimate sign of her love, Kara agreed. The couple began having intercourse in Edmond’s dorm room between classes.

Kara had little knowledge of contraception at the time, believing it was only available to married women. Growing up in the village, she was socialized to believe that women should respect and obey their male partners, so when Edmond told her using the withdrawal method (coitus interruptus) would be safe, Kara accepted his decision. Three months after they started having sex, Kara became pregnant. Confident that Edmond would propose marriage with news of the pregnancy, Kara went to his dorm room. When she arrived, Kara disturbed Edmond having sex with another female student. Shocked and distressed by what she had seen, Kara fled the scene and sought comfort from a close female friend.

When Edmond found out about the pregnancy, he urged Kara to have an abortion, but showing tremendous agency, she refused. Furious, Edmond denied paternity and accused her of cheating, spreading rumors of Kara’s infidelity to avoid taking responsibility for the pregnancy. It was not long before gossip about her pregnancy spread through the student population on campus, resulting in considerable public shame for Kara.

Kara knew her parents would be angry and shamed over her pregnancy, so she avoided telling them. After a few months, Kara went to the local hospital for a checkup and confirmed she was 5 months pregnant. The nurse chastised Kara for getting pregnant out of wedlock. When she arrived home that night, her uncle was waiting. Angry, he told her a nurse had called requesting her to return to the hospital for further tests. Kara’s uncle continued to question her over the hospital visit until she broke down and confessed she was pregnant. Later, Kara called her parents to break the news. Shocked, angry, and bitterly disappointed, Kara’s parents refused to speak to her for the remainder of her pregnancy.

Kara returned to the hospital the following week and informed the nurse she was experiencing increased vaginal discharge. The nurse treated her presumptively for gonorrhea. As Kara’s pregnancy became more visible, the gossiping on campus increased. With Edmond still refusing to take responsibility, Kara felt overwhelmed and stopped attending classes. After failing her exams, Kara lost her scholarship and dropped out of university. Shamed over her pregnancy and still grieving over Edmond’s betrayal, Kara refused to leave the house for the final trimester of her pregnancy.

After the baby was born, Kara’s parents initiated contact and made the journey down to Suva to meet their grandchild. Twelve months later, Kara’s extended family urged her to return to university. Her aunt began to look after Kara’s son during the day so she could return to university to complete her studies.

Rachel’s Story: Love, Manipulation, and Lost Motherhood

Rachel is a young woman in her early 20s who lived with her parents and two older brothers in Nasouri, just outside of Suva. She attended a local girls’ high school and after graduation received a scholarship to study psychology at university. Rachel was introduced to Mikaele, a third-year undergraduate student, by a mutual friend at a party during her first semester. They started meeting up regularly for study dates and walks along the sea wall and before long they started a romantic relationship.

In the first year of their relationship, Rachael practiced premarital abstinence, but the couple enjoyed a sexual relationship that consisted of kissing, hugging, and occasionally, when the situation permitted it, mutual oral sex. As the relationship developed, Mikaele, who was already sexually experienced, became increasingly impatient and began pressuring Rachel to have intercourse. Mikaele used emotional manipulation, suggesting if Rachel “truly loved him,” she would agree to have sex. When Rachel resisted, Mikaele started to mock her, suggesting she was the only virgin left on campus and threatening to leave her for another girl more willing to have sex. These confrontations would often end in the couple fighting and Rachel leaving the room to avoid further pressure to have sex.

Mikaele’s coercive behavior began to take its toll on Rachel. Deeply in love and concerned he might end the relationship, Rachel gave in to Mikaele’s pressure, and the couple started having sex. Rachel tried to broach the topic of condoms with Mikaele, but he claimed condom use would result in him losing his erection. A few weeks later, Rachel tried again to discuss the topic of safe sex with Mikaele who responded angrily, suggesting Rachel must not trust him if she insisted on condom use. Not wanting to go against Mikaele’s wishes and worried about the stability of their relationship, Rachel agreed to continue to use the withdrawal method to avoid pregnancy.

Five months later, Rachel became pregnant. Although she hadn’t planned to have children until she finished school and was married, she was excited about impending motherhood. When Rachel disclosed her pregnancy, Mikaele was angry and refused to support her decision to keep the baby, suggesting the best thing for everyone would be for her to terminate the pregnancy. Rachel resisted, but over the next 2 weeks Mikaele continued to pressure her to have an abortion. He went as far as obtaining the details of a doctor and organizing an appointment for Rachel, and later insisting she go through with the procedure. Feeling overwhelmed and unsure whether she could raise a baby without the support of Mikaele, she yielded to his pressure and agreed to the abortion. Afterward, Rachel was devastated, angry that Mikaele had insisted she terminate the pregnancy and deeply depressed by the lost opportunity of motherhood. Not long after, the couple ended their relationship when Mikaele moved to Nadi for work.

Discussion

Kara’s and Rachel’s narratives provide insight into gender power dynamics that are common within the romantic relationships of young iTaukei women and illustrate the pervasiveness of verbal coercion perpetrated by male intimate partners in this context.⁶ Following the lead of Moore and colleagues’ (2010) work on IPV and reproductive control in the United States, we discuss the coercion disclosed by young iTaukei women within their romantic relationships as occurring along a temporal continuum: prior to sexual intercourse, during sexual intercourse, and post-conception.

Coercion Prior to Sexual Intercourse

Female sexuality is closely monitored and managed in Fiji and there is a strong sociocultural expectation that young women will abstain from sex until marriage (Kaitani, 2003; Labbé, 2011; Mitchell, 2017; Mitchell & Bennett, 2020). This is highly evident in Kara’s narrative. Like most young iTaukei women, from a young age Kara was educated on the immorality of premarital sex and the importance of abstinence by her church minister, her parents, and village elders. The value placed on female virginity in iTaukei culture results in young women fearing the impact of shame and perceived loss of morality resulting from female sexual transgression (Mitchell, 2017; Mitchell & Bennett, 2020). In contrast, there is little monitoring or control of male purity in iTaukei culture. Indeed, urban iTaukei men often face significant peer pressure to engage in sex prior to marriage, with ideal masculinity linked to male sexual prowess (Jones, 2009; Kaitani, 2003). The impact of female sexual transgression means that practicing premarital abstinence is important for many young iTaukei women. These young women constantly negotiate the tension between male partner pressure to initiate a sexual relationship and their own desire to adhere to sexual abstinence in the context of their romantic relationships.

The majority of young women (13 out of 17) in this study described varying degrees of verbal pressure, coercive tactics, and manipulation from romantic partners to engage in premarital sex. Male partners frequently used constructions of romantic love and commitment to pressure young women into having coitus (see also, Akintola et al., 2011; Bhana & Anderson, 2013; Wood et al., 2007). For example, Elenoa (19 years old) shared how her ex-boyfriend used love as a tactic to try to pressure her to have sex: “He always used to say, ‘If you love me, you’ll have sex.’” This tactic was also highly evident in Kara’s story. Edmond used the promise of impending marriage to manipulate Kara into having sex, suggesting if she “truly loved him” she would demonstrate it through agreeing to sexual intercourse. Kara’s belief that virginity was a gift that would demonstrate her love and commitment to Edmond underpinned her decision to acquiesce to Edmond’s pressure to have coitus. Thus, tropes of romantic love were pivotal to the dynamics of sexual coercion in this instance.

Rachael’s experience of sexual coercion demonstrates more aggressive forms of verbal manipulation and threat. At first, Mikaele also deployed “love” as a tactic to pressure Rachel to have sex. Rachel’s resistance led Mikaele to taunt her by suggesting virginity among university students was uncommon, despite the strong social pressure for women to remain virgins. Mikaele then threatened to end their relationship and have sex with someone else if she did not comply with his requests. The pressure Rachel felt to satisfy her sexually experienced partner to preserve their relationship and prevent him from seeking sex elsewhere, led her to yield to Mikaele’s pressure and have sexual intercourse for the first time (see also, Akintola et al., 2011; Bhana & Anderson, 2013; Wagman et al., 2009). Rachel’s fear of abandonment was not unfounded, as many other women who participated in this research linked their premarital abstinence with their romantic partner’s infidelity, asserting that their boyfriends had sought sex elsewhere because they were not willing to have intercourse.

Other coercive behaviors used by men included attempting to romance or arouse female partners through flattery, hugging, kissing, and touching. As Paulini (19 years old) explained:

We were lying in bed . . . we were telling stories, eh? and he [boyfriend] is very horny, and I was like, I was listening to his stories . . . and then he was coming nearer to me . . . trying to like hug me and I said “OK, what are you doing?” and he said, “no, I’m just hugging you” and I said “OK, hug me” and then this is what happened, Elke, we were kissing and stuff and hugging and all of a sudden he asked me “Do you want to have sex?” and I said “No!” I told him “I will only have sex after marriage” and I told him my reason, ah, because this is what the Lord, my mum and stuff say. But he kept kissing me and stuff, so I got up and left the room.

Young women also disclosed a range of strategies they used to withstand sexual coercion in romantic relationships. This included verbal resistance, such as explaining their reasons for premarital abstinence, physically leaving the room/location to stop the advancement of sexual activity, and breaking up with a partner when coercion continued. Marisia (26 years old) shared how she resisted her partner’s coercive behavior:

Elke:

How does your boyfriend respond when you tell him you want to wait to have sex?

Marisia:

He doesn’t like it. It’s like he tries to force me to have sex

Elke:

Do you feel pressure to have sex with him?

Marisia:

Yes

Elke:

How do you respond to his pressure in the moment?

Marisia:

I usually just stand up and leave the room.

Although some young women successfully refused or delayed sexual intercourse with their intimate partners, others disclosed that male partners reacted aggressively to their attempts to resist pressure to have sex, which often ended up in arguments.

The use of oral sex and non-penetrative forms of sexual activity to placate male partners was another common strategy young iTaukei women used to reduce male pressure to engage in sexual intercourse. As Serena (21 years old) shared, “Some of them [friends] they do the same thing [as me]. They’ll usually have oral sex to satisfy their partner.” Initially, Kara and Rachel chose to abstain from coitus while enjoying sexual relationships that included oral sex and foreplay. Young women and men in Fiji typically define “virginity” as never having had vaginal–penile intercourse. Thus, for young iTaukei women, oral sex was a way of maintaining their virginity while also allowing them to act on their sexual desire and intimately connect with their partners through non-penetrative forms of sexual activity. Choosing to refrain from penetrative sex (at least in the short-term) is one way that young women resisted sexual coercion by male partners and also protected themselves from HIV/STIs and unplanned pregnancy.

Coercion During Sexual Intercourse

Dominant sexual scripts in iTaukei culture dictate how young people should act within the context of their sexual relationships (Mitchell, 2017). This includes female passivity and purity, and male authority and prowess. Thus, female and male sexual scripts are set in opposition to one another; men should seek sex and women should resist it. This, in turn, contributes to an innately conflicted script within the context of young iTaukei’s intimate relationships, where male dominance of sexual activity, including the use or nonuse of condoms, often wins over mutual sexual decision-making (Mitchell, 2017; Mitchell & Bennett, 2020).

To live up to these gender ideals, Kara enacted what Teitelman et al. (2011, p. 253) have described as “self-silencing of condom negotiation.” Kara chose not to bring up the topic of condom use and instead relied on Edmond’s knowledge to determine contraceptive use and followed his decision to use the withdrawal method. Like Rachel, she also prioritized the stability of her romantic relationship over safeguarding her SRH. Many other young women disclosed that their male partners determined the use or nonuse of condoms in their romantic relationships.

Gender norms and male dominance in sexual relationships create an environment in which condom coercion can easily occur. Seven young iTaukei women disclosed experiences in which they felt pressured, manipulated, or deceived into having sex without a condom by their romantic partners. Rachel initially attempted to negotiate condom use with Mikaele, concerned that unprotected sex might lead to pregnancy. Mikaele resisted, using emotional manipulation to pressure Rachel into having condomless sex. Initially, Mikaele used erectile dysfunction as a tactic to instigate nonuse of condoms. Later, when Rachel tried to broach the topic of condom use again, he questioned Rachel’s motivation for condom use and implied it represented a lack of trust on her behalf in their relationship (see also, Teitelman, Bohinski, & Tuttle, 2010; Teitelman et al., 2011).

The use of constructions of love, commitment, and trust by male intimate partners was again a common strategy used to coerce nonuse of condoms. Ana (24 years old) explained her experience of condom coercion in the following way: “[He said] if you love me, like if you trust me, then don’t use a condom.” Similarly, Lulu (21 years old) disclosed that her boyfriend frequently insisted, “If you love me then you’ll feel me.” Pleasure (or lack of pleasure due to condom use) was another tactic frequently used by male partners to manipulate young women into unprotected sex (see also, Teitelman et al., 2011). As Pippa (20 years old) explained: “He [boyfriend] always says ‘using condoms is just like using a plastic bag or something, you don’t feel anything.’” Promising to take care of a young woman and her child if pregnancy occurs was also a strategy used by male partners to pressure young iTaukei women into condomless sex.

Some young women, like Amelia (22 years old), successfully negotiated condom use or refused to have sex without a condom: “Sometimes [name of boyfriend] is very hesitant so I’ll be like ‘it’s either that [condoms] or there’s no sex, simple.’” However, others gave in to condom coercion. Fear of male partners ending relationships, and the desire to adhere to iTaukei cultural and gender norms, often resulted in young women remaining submissive and acquiescing to male partner pressure to engage in unprotected sex. Coerced nonuse of condoms increases young women’s vulnerability to poor SRH outcomes. “Natural methods,” such as the withdrawal method used by Kara and Rachel, are common family planning methods among young iTaukei in romantic relationships. Despite its popularity in Fiji, as both Kara and Rachel’s narratives highlight, it puts women at risk of unplanned pregnancy and offers no protection against STIs.⁷

Coercion Post-Conception

Male dominance in romantic relationships among young iTaukei in this research extended to attempting to control pregnancy outcomes. Four women who had experienced pregnancy divulged facing a range of coercive practices from male partners related to their pregnancy, including verbal pressure to have an abortion, threats and defamation if they refused to terminate a pregnancy, and abortion coercion under duress. Such acts of coercion radically reduced young iTaukei women’s reproductive autonomy. Young iTaukei women experienced abortion coercion even when their partners had elected to forgo contraceptive use to avoid pregnancy. In the narratives shared by young women, young men did not appear to prioritize avoiding the risk of pregnancy, but later, postconception, were typically unwilling to support women to continue their pregnancies. As Kara and Rachel’s narratives suggest, young iTaukei women’s ability to successfully resist abortion coercion by male partners can vary. Although male partners’ pressure to terminate a pregnancy leads some young women to obtain an abortion, others resisted partner coercion and continued their pregnancy.

Despite his declaration of love and promise of marriage, Edmond attempted to coerce Kara into having an abortion when he discovered she was pregnant. When Kara refused, he denied paternity and used verbal slander and sexual defamation to avoid taking responsibility for the pregnancy. In a very challenging situation, and in the face of Edmond’s coercive and hurtful behavior, Kara demonstrated tremendous agency and continued her pregnancy. As she explained: “When I told him I was pregnant he was shocked, and he told me to get an abortion . . . [but] I couldn’t even . . . I didn’t want to have an abortion. So, I kept the baby.”

Rachel’s experience of premarital pregnancy was markedly different from Kara’s. On disclosing she was pregnant, Rachel was exposed to continued verbal pressure and manipulation from Mikaele to have an abortion, including threats to leave the relationship and refusal to care for the child if she continued the pregnancy. Despite Rachel’s desire to keep the baby, Mikaele made an appointment for her at a private clinic to terminate the pregnancy. Mikaele’s sustained pressure and unwillingness to support Rachel ultimately led to her having an abortion under duress. Rachel expressed regret over allowing Mikaele to control the outcome of her pregnancy and disclosed experiencing depression for a prolonged period after the abortion.

Similarly, without the support of her boyfriend, Lulu (21 years old) also felt like she had no other option but to give in to her partner’s pressure to have an abortion:

I was 19. He honestly, he opened me up to a whole new world [laughs] . . . I completely trusted him. . . . Like most of the decisions in our relationship he would make. Inside of me I wanted to keep the baby, but I just needed someone to tell me “OK, you can keep it.” But then he was not at all supportive.

Abortion is illegal in Fiji except where pregnancy is a threat to the life of the pregnant woman, or to preserve her physical or mental health (Fiji Ministry of Health and Medical Services [FMHMS], 2016). Even though abortion laws exist, unsafe abortion services are available in Suva, but they are expensive and dangerous. Young women also opt for self-induced abortions using herbal remedies and violent massage. Unsafe abortions increase young iTaukei women’s risk of maternal morbidity and mortality (Haddad & Nour, 2009), thus compounding the harm resulting from men’s reproductive coercion.

A Continuum of Sexual and Reproductive Coercion

Young women’s intimate relationships can include what Wood and colleagues (2007, p. 284) have described as a “continuum of ‘force’” and Wagman and colleagues (2009, p. 2075) refer to as a “continuum of coercion” during sexual encounters, ranging from verbal harassment and sexual touching to physical force. Building on these contributions, we suggest young women in Suva are not only susceptible to an array of behaviors designed to coerce sexual intercourse, but often also experience a continuum of sexual and reproductive coercion by male intimate partners. For young iTaukei women like Kara and Rachel, coercion is rarely limited to one temporal period (e.g., male partner pressure to have sex); rather, coercion is typically an ongoing and constant dynamic of their romantic relationships. The commonality of different forms of coercion seemed to follow a pattern whereby pressure to have sex was experienced by most women (13 out of 17), pressure not to use condoms was experienced by half those women who had been pressured initially to have sex (seven out of 13), and then abortion coercion was experienced by all the women who had disclosed becoming pregnant (n = 4). Understanding young iTaukei women’s experiences of coercion along a temporal continuum has important implications for promoting their right to sexual and reproductive automony and reducing their vulnerability to STIs, unplanned pregnancy, and other poor health outcomes.

Young iTaukei women in the study did not explicitly refer to the concept of sexual consent being required by both partners within the context of their romantic relationships, which reflects cultural norms that position men as sexual decision makers and women as passive recipients of those decisions (Labbé, 2011; Mitchell, 2017). Rather, young women repeatedly noted the difficulty in even discussing issues such as their preferences regarding the timing and nature of sexual activity, condom use, and reproductive outcomes with their male partners. Thus, two-way dialogue about sexual preferences and consent was largely absent from their premarital relationships. In the context of interviews, young women also described the impact this lack of sexual and reproductive choice had on their overall health and well-being but did not discuss these impacts with their current or past male partners.

The physical, emotional, and psychological impact of IPV is significant and includes young women’s vulnerability to poor reproductive health outcomes (STIs, unintended pregnancy, miscarriage, and abortion), low self-esteem, and mental health issues, as well as negative effects on current and future relationships (Campbell, 2002; Coker, 2007; Jeffrey & Barata, 2016; Moore et al., 2010). The long-term impact of intimate partner coercion was particularly evident in Rachel’s narrative. Suffering from depression, it took Rachel 2 years to recover from the grief related to her abortion and relationship with Mikaele, before she began dating again. The consequences of experiencing IPV extended to her future relationships, where Rachel was apprehensive about dating and found it difficult to invest emotionally or trust a new partner, which demonstrates the long-term impact of IPV on young women.

Conclusion

The findings discussed in this article have established that there is a range of different forms of coercion present for young iTaukei women in their romantic relationships, including male partner pressure to initiate sexual intercourse, to have unprotected (condomless) sex, and to undertake abortions when pregnancy occurs. Our analysis of these forms of coercion illustrates how they typically occur along a continuum, which is similar to patterns of IPV directed at young women in a variety of cultural contexts (Jeffrey & Barata, 2016; Moore et al., 2010; Thiel de Bocanegra, Rostovtseva, Khera, & Godhwani, 2010; Wagman et al., 2009; Wood et al., 2007). Findings of this research in Fiji are also consisitent in relation to the common tactics of coercion used by male partners to dominate young women in other cultural contexts with similar complexities of gender inequality (Bhana & Anderson, 2013; Jeffrey & Barata, 2016; Wagman et al., 2009; Wood, 2006). The tactics of coercion identified by young women in this research included the use of verbal pressure, manipulation (e.g., threats of abandonment or infidelity), deception, pleading, and unwanted arousal. Local constructions of romantic love and the value placed on female virginity as a gift also factored into women’s decisions to acquiesce to the pressures placed on them by male partners. The common absence of explicit recognition of young women’s right to sexual consent, or other forms of sexual and reproductive decision-making in their premarital relationships, is typical of cultures that condone sexual and reproductive coercion. Thus, widspread recognition of young Fijian women’s rights to consent and sexual decision-making within intimate partnerships is a prerequisite to reducing the prevalence and societal acceptance of sexual and reproductive coercion.

This article has documented the detrimental impact of multiple forms of IPV on young women and their reproductive and mental health in the immediate and short term. However, further research into the longer-term impact of IPV within romantic relationships prior to marriage in Fiji is needed. It is important to establish how experiences of coercion during women’s youth affect women’s marital relationships, and if and to what extent early experiences of coercion may be a precursor to IPV within subsequent relationships for iTaukei women, as has been shown in other studies (Basile, 2008; Halpern, Spriggs, Martin, & Kupper, 2009). Research with young women’s romantic partners is also needed to better understand the dynamics of coercion from male persepctives.

We have described how the subordinate social status of young iTaukei women (e.g., young, female, and unmarried) leads to their heightened vulnerability to sexual and reproductive coercion. Consequently, attempts to prevent such coercion must explicitly promote young women’s status and acknowledge their right to sexual and reproductive autonomy. The case studies and quotes highlight how young iTaukei women’s experiences of coercion are perpetuated by dominant heterosexual gender norms and sexual scripts in Fiji. Therefore, legion shifts in local constructions of these dominant gender norms and sexual scripts are required before sexual and reproductive coercion are widely understood as unacceptable by both men and women. Male romantic partners of young iTaukei women will need to be at the center of interventions seeking to prevent and end IPV (Lundgren & Amin, 2015; Wood, 2006). To that end, research with this group of men that specifically seeks to uncover opportunities for attitudinal and behavioral change among men is crucial. Future research in Fiji that delves into male understandings of, motivations for, and dividends from the perpetration of IPV is also important because it would acknowledge that men are directly responsible for these behaviors and that women should not take the blame for the coercion they experience.

We have documented how young iTaukei women respond to different forms of coercion in their romantic relationships, exercising varying degrees of agency and acquiescence at different points in time and in different contexts. Acknowledging the existence of young women’s agency in the face of sexual and reproductive coercion in this setting is crucial to provide positive examples of women’s success in exercising their sexual and reproductive rights, despite the structual inequalities within which they are positioned. To further enable young iTaukei women to exercise their sexual and reproductive autonomy in romantic relationships, SRH interventions in Fiji should explicitly acknowledge these women’s rights to sexual consent, abstinence, condom use, and reproductive autonomy (Mitchell, 2015). Young women who willingly choose sexual relationships before marriage should have access to skill building that will better enable them to identify and manage male coercive behaviors, while making it clear that young women are not responsible for men’s behavior. Current SRH programs in Fiji fail to adequately address issues of sexual consent and reproductive rights, and they do not provide the skills women need to manage sexual and reproductive coercion (Mitchell, 2015).

The importance of increasing dialogue about the need for gender equity and sociocultural norms that reject gender-based violence within SRH interventions is well recognized (Mane & Lawson, 2007; Ricardo, Barker, Pulerwitz, & Rocha, 2006). This includes developing programs that engage with and respect the beliefs, experiences, and needs of young people (Bell & Aggleton, 2013). In Fiji, there is an urgent need for interventions specifically focused on young people at university, where this research has established that female iTaukei students are particularly vulnerable to male partner coercion. Such interventions could easily be undertaken under the umbrella of creating “safe campus cultures,” where gender equity, respect, and nonviolence are explicit values promoted via multiple channels, such as through the formal curriculum, extra curricular events, student associations, and via university health and welfare services.

The Fijian government has an obligation to protect women from suffering further in instances where unwanted pregnancies occur as a result of coercion. Abortion law reform is central to protecting women against gender-based violence and advancing their sexual and reproductive rights (Cook & Dickens, 2003). Amendment of legislation that criminalizes abortion and commitment to securing the delivery of comprehensive and safe abortion services to young women throughout Fiji is needed and would reduce young women’s risk of reproductive mortality and morbidity. This should include nonjudgmental counseling and support to ensure young women have appropriate information and time to decide their options regarding pregnancy. Ensuring that national laws and police safeguard the rights of girls and women and prevent IPV is also necessary.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported by the Nossal Institute for Global Health at the University of Melbourne, the Australian Awards–Endeavor Research Fellowship and Graduate Women Victoria.

ORCID iD

Elke Mitchell

Notes

Author Biographies

Elke Mitchell, PhD, is a research fellow at the Kirby Institute at UNSW Sydney. Her research focuses on the cultural and social aspects of sexual, reproductive and maternal health, gender-based violence, and HIV. Her work is concentrated in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly Fiji, Papua New Guinea, and Australia.

Linda Rae Bennett, PhD, is an associate professor and head of Education and Learning at the Nossal Institute for Global Health, the University of Melbourne. She is a medical anthropologist and expert in sexual and reproductive rights, and gender-based violence. Her research includes studies of intimate partner violence, violence directed at women during pregnancy, coerced early marriage, sexual and reproductive coercion in premarital relationships, rape and sexual assault committed during ethnic violence, and the systematic perpetration of rape as a weapon of war. She has worked primarily with youth and women in Southeast Asia and the Pacific regions.

References

Akintola

Ngubane

Makhaba

(2011). “I did it for him, not for me”: An exploratory study of factors influencing sexual debut among female university students in Durban, South Africa. Journal of Health Psychology, 17, 143-153.

Basile

K. C.

(2008). Histories of violent victimization among women who reported unwanted sex in marriages and intimate relationships: Findings from a qualitative study. Violence Against Women, 14, 29-52. doi:10.1177/1077801207311857

Bell

Aggleton

(2013). Social influences on young people’s sexual health in Uganda. Health Education, 113, 102-114.

Bennett

L. R.

(2001). Single women’s experiences of premarital pregnancy and induced abortion in Lombok, Eastern Indonesia. Reproductive Health Matters, 9(17), 37-43.

Bhana

Anderson

(2013). Gender, relationship dynamics and South African girls’ vulnerability to sexual risk. African Journal of AIDS Research, 12, 25-31.

Campbell

(2002). Health consequences of intimate partner violence. Lancet, 359, 1131-1136.

Chibber

K. S.

Biggs

M. A.

Roberts

S. C.

Foster

D. G.

(2014). The role of intimate partners in women’s reasons for seeking abortion. Women’s Health Issues, 24, e131-e138.

Coker

A. L.

(2007). Does physical intimate partner violence affect sexual health? A systematic review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 8, 149-177.

Cook

R. J.

Dickens

B. M.

(2003). Human rights dynamics of abortion law reform. Human Rights Quarterly, 25, 1-59.

10.

Dude

Neustadt

Martins

Gilliam

(2013). Use of withdrawal and unintended pregnancy among females 15-24 years of age. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 122, 595-600.

11.

Eaton

A. A.

Matamala

(2014). The relationship between heteronormative beliefs and verbal sexual coercion in college students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 1443-1457.

12.

Fiji Ministry of Health and Medical Services. (2016). Fiji adolescent health situational analysis: 2016. Retrieved from https://www.aidsdatahub.org/sites/default/files/Fiji_Adolescent_Health_Situational_Analysis_2016.pdf

13.

Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre. (2013). Somebody’s life, everybody’s business! National research on women’s health and life experiences in Fiji (2010/2011): A survey exploring the prevalence, incidence and attitudes to intimate partner violence in Fiji. Retrieved from https://pacificwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/FWCC-National-Research-on-Womens-Health-Fiji.pdf

14.

George

(2012). Situating women: Gender politics and circumstance in Fiji. Canberra: Australian National University E Press.

15.

Grace

Anderson

(2016). Reproductive coercion: A systematic review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 19, 371-390.

16.

Haddad

L. B.

Nour

N. M.

(2009). Unsafe abortion: Unnecessary maternal mortality. Reviews in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2, 122-126.

17.

Halpern

C. T.

Spriggs

A. L.

Martin

S. L.

Kupper

L. L.

(2009). Patterns of intimate partner violence victimization from adolescence to young adulthood in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45, 508-516. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.011

18.

Jala

P. I.

(1997). The status of Fiji women and the constitution. In Lal

Vakatora

(Eds.), Fiji in transition: Research papers of the Fiji Constitution Review Commission (Vol. 1, pp. 80-104). Suva, Fiji: School of Social and Economic Development, University of the South Pacific.

19.

Jala

P. I.

(1998). Law for Pacific women: A legal rights handbook. Suva: Fiji Women’s Rights Movement.

20.

Jeffrey

N. K.

Barata

P. C.

(2016). “He didn’t necessarily force himself upon me, but . . . ”: Women’s lived experiences of sexual coercion in intimate relationships with men. Violence Against Women, 23, 911-933.

21.

Jewkes

Morrell

(2010). Gender and sexuality: Emerging perspectives from the heterosexual epidemic in South Africa and implications for HIV risk and prevention. Journal of the International AIDS Society, 13, Article 6.

22.

Jones

(2009). Fijian masculinity and alcohol use: An ethnographic study of male drinkers living in Qauia settlement (Master’s thesis). University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji.

23.

Kaitani

(2003). Bridging the gap: The changing reproductive and sexual expectations of Fijian men (Doctoral thesis). Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

24.

Labbé

(2011). Living with HIV and AIDS: Perspectives of women and men in Fiji (Report prepared for the Fiji National Health Research Committee, Ministry of Health). Retrieved from https://www.aidsdatahub.org/sites/default/files/documents/Living_with_HIV_and_AIDS_Perspectives_of_Women_and_Men_in_Fiji.pdf

25.

Leckie

(2002). The complexities of women’s agency in Fiji. In Yeoh

B. S. A.

Teo

Huang

(Eds.), Gender politics in the Asia-Pacific region (pp. 156-180). London, England: Routledge.

26.

Lundgren

Amin

(2015). Addressing intimate partner violence and sexual violence among adolescents: Emerging evidence of effectiveness. Journal of Adolescent Health, 56(1, Suppl.), S42-S50. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.08.012

27.

MacPhail

Campbell

(2001). “I think condoms are good but, aai, I hate those things”: Condom use among adolescents and young people in a Southern African township. Social Science & Medicine, 52, 1613-1627.

28.

Mane

Lawson

(2007). HIV prevention, gender and sexual health. International Journal of Sexual Health, 19(3), 47-52.

29.

Miller

Decker

M. R.

McCauley

H. L.

Tancredi

D. J.

Levenson

R. R.

Waldman

, et al. (2010). Pregnancy coercion, intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy. Contraception, 81, 316-322.

30.

Miller

Silverman

J. G.

(2010). Reproductive coercion and partner violence: Implications for clinical assessment of unintended pregnancy. Expert Review of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 5, 511-515.

31.

Mitchell

(2015). The Fiji national response to HIV and sexually transmitted infections: Mapping key success and challenges. Journal of Pacific Studies, 35(1), 5-25.

32.

Mitchell

(2017). Risk, resilience and youth sexuality: Negotiations of sexual risk among iTaukei women university students in Suva, Fiji (Doctoral thesis). University of Melbourne, Australia.

33.

Mitchell

Bennett

L. R.

(2020). Young women’s perceptions and experiences of sexual risk in Suva, Fiji. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 22(5), 504-519. doi:10.1080/13691058.2019.1614669

34.

Moore

Frohwirth

Miller

(2010). Male reproductive control of women who have experienced intimate partner violence in the United States. Social Science & Medicine, 70, 1737-1744.

35.

Nobelius

Kalina

Pool

Whitworth

Chester

Power

(2010). Delaying sexual debut amongst out-of-school youth in rural southwest Uganda. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 12, 663-676.

36.

Patton

(2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

37.

Ravuvu

(1983). Vaka i Taukei: The Fijian way of life. Suva, Fiji: Institute of Pacific Studies of the University of the South Pacific.

38.

Ricardo

Barker

Pulerwitz

Rocha

(2006). Gender, sexual behaviour and vulnerability among young people. In Ingham

Aggleton

(Eds.), Promoting young people’s sexual health: International perspectives (pp. 61-78). London, England: Routledge.

39.

Sahlins

M. D.

(1962). Moala: Culture and nature on a Fijian island. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

40.

Silverman

Decker

McCauley

Gupta

Miller

Raj

Goldberg

(2010). Male perpetration of intimate partner violence and involvement in abortions and abortion-related conflict. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 1415-1417.

41.

Silverman

McCauley

Decker

Miller

Reed

Raj

(2011). Coercive forms of sexual risk and associated violence perpetrated by male partners of female adolescents. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 43, 60-65.

42.

Teitelman

Bohinski

Tuttle

(2010). Condom coercion, sexual relationship power, and risk for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections among young women attending urban family planning clinics. Family Violence Prevention and Health Practice, 1(10), 1-20.

43.

Teitelman

Tennille

Bohinski

Jemmott

(2011). Unwanted unprotected sex: Condom coercion by male partners and self-silencing of condom negotiation among adolescent girls. Advances in Nursing Science, 34, 243-259.

44.

Thiel de Bocanegra

Rostovtseva

D. P.

Khera

Godhwani

(2010). Birth control sabotage and forced sex: Experiences reported by women in domestic violence shelters. Violence Against Women, 16, 601-612.

45.

Toren

(1990). Making sense of hierarchy: Cognition as social process in Fiji. London, England: The Athlone Press.

46.

Vakaoti

(2012). Mapping the landscape of young people’s participation in Fiji. Retrieved from http://www.youthpolicy.org/national/Fiji_2012_Participation_Youth_Mapping.pdf

47.

Wagman

Baumgartner

J. N.

Geary

C. W.

Nakyanjo

Ddaaki

W. G.

Serwadda

, et al. (2009). Experiences of sexual coercion among adolescent women: Qualitative findings from Rakai district, Uganda. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 2073-2095.

48.

World Health Organization. (2002). World report on violence and health. Retrieved from http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/42495/9241545615_eng.pdf;jsessionid=C56BDCC8CBB9909554AAF045ACE3E218?sequence=1

49.

Wood

(2006). Sexual violence and young people’s sexual health in developing countries: Intersections. In Ingham

Aggleton

(Eds.), Promoting young people’s sexual health: International perspectives (pp. 113-133). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

50.

Wood

Lambert

Jewkes

(2007). “Showing roughness in a beautiful way”: Talk about love, coercion, and rape in South African youth sexual culture. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 21, 277-300.