What do you think?
Rate this book
Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life
Coercive control is the most common and devastating means used to subjugate women in personal and family life. Drawing on FBI statistics, health records, interviews with victims and perpetrators, and forensic analysis of dramatic cases from the author's experience, Evan Stark, a leading proponent and scholar, provides the authoritative description of coercive control. The book identifies its elements, dynamics, and consequences, including the harms it poses to liberty rights and privacy rights; and proposes effective interventions, including new laws and means of policing and supporting perpetrators and victims.
Sweeping aside outdated, entrenched views of woman abuse, Coercive Control emphasizes the importance of addressing women's diminishment and subordination in personal life as part of the global equity agenda.
Sweeping aside outdated, entrenched views of woman abuse, Coercive Control emphasizes the importance of addressing women's diminishment and subordination in personal life as part of the global equity agenda.
648 pages, Hardcover
First published March 19, 2007
154 people are currently reading
1354 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews
April 16, 2021
This is a hefty, densely written and well-argued tome that is certainly not a light read. Coercive control is a theory developed by Evan Stark and others as an alternative to and development of more traditional domestic violence models. The book gives a detailed account of the history of domestic violence and the legal system. It is primarily directed at the US, although there is reference to some European countries as well, especially the UK.
The traditional model of domestic violence focussed on isolated acts of violence as the way power is used and sees serious acts of violence as the most important. The theory of coercive control covers a whole series of behaviours, including violence. It covers coercion meant to harm and intimidate, but also behaviour meant to isolate and regulate and to induce shame and embarrassment, helping to keep the abuse secret. Controlling day to day life, access to family, food, money and time. Behaviours like:
Threats and intimidation
Isolating/destroying the partner’s outside relationships in the workplace, as well as from friends and family (including restricting normal social activity – shopping, medical appointments, Parent/Teacher events – the list is not exhaustive)
Controlling access to information and services
Stalking, whether actual or remote via surveillance
Unwanted face-to-face, telephone or electronic contact
‘Where are you now’ and ‘take a picture and prove where you are now’
Monitoring of telephone calls
Dress ‘codes’ and ‘rules’
Forcing/restricting the consumption of food
Hacking
Creating a series of infractions of ‘rules’, whether actual or imaginary, requiring the ‘punishment’ of the partner and/or the children
Economic control and/or exploitation
Sexual abuse/violence, to include unwanted pregnancy
Constant monitoring of movement and criticism
Emotional hostage-taking
The causing of fear and confusion
There are many more, including being forced to keep a detailed diary to account for every minute of the day.
This is long term behaviour and Stark’s theory seeks to present the whole rather than taking the violent episodes and being able to isolate and minimise them. It is a model of abuse that covers a whole range of behaviours and strategies, some of which may not seem sinister until you think about the context. Stark’s purpose is to move coercive control from a second class misdemeanour (in the US) to a human rights violation, a restriction of liberty and a form of indentured servitude. “Experiencing coercive control is like being taken hostage; the victim becomes captive in an unreal world created by the partner/abuser, entrapped in a world of confusion, contradiction and fear.”
There are lots of case studies and examples and three chapters at the end of the book provide detailed case studies of three women who killed as a result of coercive control. Stark is very clear that this is a gendered offence and he makes a very clear case for this. He also examines violence by women and violence within same sex and transgender relationships and argues this is different from coercive control.
I found the arguments convincing and it certainly made me think about my own behaviour in day to day life. I read this for work as I quite regularly deal with domestic violence. It is a well-argued book and coercive control seems so obvious that when it is outlined the response is that it is an idea that one already knew about. It is now enshrined in UK law as well.
The traditional model of domestic violence focussed on isolated acts of violence as the way power is used and sees serious acts of violence as the most important. The theory of coercive control covers a whole series of behaviours, including violence. It covers coercion meant to harm and intimidate, but also behaviour meant to isolate and regulate and to induce shame and embarrassment, helping to keep the abuse secret. Controlling day to day life, access to family, food, money and time. Behaviours like:
Threats and intimidation
Isolating/destroying the partner’s outside relationships in the workplace, as well as from friends and family (including restricting normal social activity – shopping, medical appointments, Parent/Teacher events – the list is not exhaustive)
Controlling access to information and services
Stalking, whether actual or remote via surveillance
Unwanted face-to-face, telephone or electronic contact
‘Where are you now’ and ‘take a picture and prove where you are now’
Monitoring of telephone calls
Dress ‘codes’ and ‘rules’
Forcing/restricting the consumption of food
Hacking
Creating a series of infractions of ‘rules’, whether actual or imaginary, requiring the ‘punishment’ of the partner and/or the children
Economic control and/or exploitation
Sexual abuse/violence, to include unwanted pregnancy
Constant monitoring of movement and criticism
Emotional hostage-taking
The causing of fear and confusion
There are many more, including being forced to keep a detailed diary to account for every minute of the day.
This is long term behaviour and Stark’s theory seeks to present the whole rather than taking the violent episodes and being able to isolate and minimise them. It is a model of abuse that covers a whole range of behaviours and strategies, some of which may not seem sinister until you think about the context. Stark’s purpose is to move coercive control from a second class misdemeanour (in the US) to a human rights violation, a restriction of liberty and a form of indentured servitude. “Experiencing coercive control is like being taken hostage; the victim becomes captive in an unreal world created by the partner/abuser, entrapped in a world of confusion, contradiction and fear.”
There are lots of case studies and examples and three chapters at the end of the book provide detailed case studies of three women who killed as a result of coercive control. Stark is very clear that this is a gendered offence and he makes a very clear case for this. He also examines violence by women and violence within same sex and transgender relationships and argues this is different from coercive control.
I found the arguments convincing and it certainly made me think about my own behaviour in day to day life. I read this for work as I quite regularly deal with domestic violence. It is a well-argued book and coercive control seems so obvious that when it is outlined the response is that it is an idea that one already knew about. It is now enshrined in UK law as well.
Read
February 7, 2022This was extremely dense; for the most part it was full of really good information but I'm not sure about a few things. Mainly, Stark says that coercive control has only emerged recently as a response to women's increasing equality. I'm entirely on board with categorizing abuse this way but I just don't know if there is any evidence that this form of abuse *didn't* exist before the 1970s as he theorizes. It feels like a major speculation to me.
July 4, 2013
In the documentary MAKERS -Women who made America Gloria Steinem said, "being beaten up by your husband, didn't have a name; it was just called "life" " referring to domestic violence. In this marvelous book, Evan Starks writes about how the feminist revolution has in fact got stalled. Starks contests the notion that domestic violence has reduced drastically over time. Rather, the intense focus on extreme physical violence has rendered yet another form of violence - coercive control - invisible in the eyes of law. In the conclusion Starks calls for criminalizing coercive control.
Starks reiterates the importance of framing the problem differently. He says, it is critical to bring in gender inequality as an important parameter within the legal language. Although the feminist movement helped bring about interventions to address domestic violence, gender inequality as an important parameter lost its space. He demonstrates how this oversight had led to the prevalence of coercive control. Moreover, the current notion of gender equality was making it further difficult to address this issue legally.
Starks defines Coercive Control as "“Coercive control entails a malevolent course of conduct that subordinates women to an alien will by violating their physical integrity (domestic violence), denying them respect and autonomy (intimidation), depriving them of social connectedness (isolation), and appropriating or denying them access to the resources required for personhood and citizenship (control).”
He says there are four categories of coercive control – violence, intimidation, isolation and control. He draws from his experience of handling domestic violence cases to demonstrate how perpetrators exercise coercive control.
He also reminds us the importance of asking the right question. Instead of asking "why did the woman stay?" he says, we must ask, "why did the man batter?" Rather than depicting the picture of a victim, Starks clearly demonstrates how battered women resist in various ways and are often forthright about their abuse, if asked.
This book was personally empowering. This book provides a framework to analyze whether relationships are indeed equal as people often claim it to be. Of course, some of those stories are shocking if one has not read about violence within intimate relationships before. It is a long one, but certainly a must read!
Starks reiterates the importance of framing the problem differently. He says, it is critical to bring in gender inequality as an important parameter within the legal language. Although the feminist movement helped bring about interventions to address domestic violence, gender inequality as an important parameter lost its space. He demonstrates how this oversight had led to the prevalence of coercive control. Moreover, the current notion of gender equality was making it further difficult to address this issue legally.
Starks defines Coercive Control as "“Coercive control entails a malevolent course of conduct that subordinates women to an alien will by violating their physical integrity (domestic violence), denying them respect and autonomy (intimidation), depriving them of social connectedness (isolation), and appropriating or denying them access to the resources required for personhood and citizenship (control).”
He says there are four categories of coercive control – violence, intimidation, isolation and control. He draws from his experience of handling domestic violence cases to demonstrate how perpetrators exercise coercive control.
He also reminds us the importance of asking the right question. Instead of asking "why did the woman stay?" he says, we must ask, "why did the man batter?" Rather than depicting the picture of a victim, Starks clearly demonstrates how battered women resist in various ways and are often forthright about their abuse, if asked.
This book was personally empowering. This book provides a framework to analyze whether relationships are indeed equal as people often claim it to be. Of course, some of those stories are shocking if one has not read about violence within intimate relationships before. It is a long one, but certainly a must read!
June 7, 2022
Hard DNF. Okay, so this is a book about abuse that has to beat you over the head in the introduction with the completely unproven claim that "women abuse (physically) just as much as men". No statistics. No data. Just a man and his cope against the world.
The physically smaller gender with a powerful aversion to violent crime 9 times out of 10 (statistics prove that most women in prison for murder have killed their violent abusers and they aren't just doing it for a laugh, nor is it "equal to abuse"). Source: literally any other book besides this one.
If I had seen that this book was written by a man who wasn't Lundy Bancroft, I would have never erred so greatly as to get the audiobook. This is not for anyone intelligent who has experienced or read about abuse.
This is for internet people who love to whine and pretend that despite centuries of evidence demonstrating otherwise, women have upended patriarchy in a miraculous instant and are now abusing men at alarming rates — and absolutely no statistician or CDC or anyone else has collected any data on it, by complete magic.
Which is why you know absolutely no men who have experienced DV but several women.
Which is why men are jailed more for violent crimes and perpetrate them at disproportionate rates against women (Which there's actually evidence of, not just feelings). Which is why femicide is a global problem. I honestly wish I'd never even encountered this buffoonery and I caution you against it.
Brain rot masquerading as useful information. AVOID.
The physically smaller gender with a powerful aversion to violent crime 9 times out of 10 (statistics prove that most women in prison for murder have killed their violent abusers and they aren't just doing it for a laugh, nor is it "equal to abuse"). Source: literally any other book besides this one.
If I had seen that this book was written by a man who wasn't Lundy Bancroft, I would have never erred so greatly as to get the audiobook. This is not for anyone intelligent who has experienced or read about abuse.
This is for internet people who love to whine and pretend that despite centuries of evidence demonstrating otherwise, women have upended patriarchy in a miraculous instant and are now abusing men at alarming rates — and absolutely no statistician or CDC or anyone else has collected any data on it, by complete magic.
Which is why you know absolutely no men who have experienced DV but several women.
Which is why men are jailed more for violent crimes and perpetrate them at disproportionate rates against women (Which there's actually evidence of, not just feelings). Which is why femicide is a global problem. I honestly wish I'd never even encountered this buffoonery and I caution you against it.
Brain rot masquerading as useful information. AVOID.
Read
January 16, 2025I did not expect this book to be as good as it was. So informative! And… nuanced. Probably the most nuanced book in the psychology genre I've read.
First an uncompromising survey of abuse statistics, where the author doesn't just provide shocking numbers like how men are 3x safer from homicide since shelters started, whereas the women are as unsafe as ever, just less likely to see murdering their abusers as their only escape. But anyway, here there is a multi-perspectival critique of abuse statistics, the motives of number-fudgers and various agendas, what we might better be able to understand from the data, and the nuances of intersectionality and whether it is represented there in.
Also there is a broad overview of the shelter movement, from grassroots to state entities, the various actors within and the defanging of structural activism. I found it intriguing how the strongholds of stereotyping decide whether a woman was really abused. Aka whether she fits the narrow 'profile' of an abused woman, aka freshly black-eyed, meek, and white. While woman who experience less dramatic forms of violence, belong to minorities, or have the audacity to resist their abuser, or are considered 'unscrupulous' sexually or are physically matched with their abusers are to this day excluded from support, let's not get into those who return to their abusers, and are unable to protect their children.
Also the conceptualization of abuse on an injury per injury basis and the relevance of prevalence not just incidence.
Intriguingly the author takes us through the various defenses used throughout history to defend women who kill their abusers, and how they serve to typify the 'weaker sex'. From insanity to self defense to trauma theory. Having not once heard a single critique of trauma theory I found it fascinating, how it, along with the other paradigms only reinforce this gender stereotype that the decision to kill was the irrational act of a 'not all there' woman, in a desperate situation. But the author offers us an alternative theorization of why women kill, and it reminded me of some study referenced by Lundy B. which proved how woman's intuition proved highly accurate in whether their abusers were soon to kill them. While courts often use the justification of 'well he never attempted to kill you before, so your violence was unjustified. He hasn't escalated to murder for the 17 years you were together, we don't believe your self-defense is justified' Which makes me think about 'feminine' ways of knowing, such as intuition, and the easy dismissal thereof. But these women who kill their abusers often cite recognizing a certain look in the abusers eye, and conversely to the court argument, if a woman has been with their abuser for 17 years, who would know better than she? And contrary to the not-all-there argument of insanity pleas, self-defense from heightened womanly fears, and trauma rendered stupid defenses, there exists a superior explanation. The special reasonableness of abused women. I appreciate this approach which feels empowering rather than infantilizing, and loosens the grip of the paradigm of trauma theory over me, and restores autonomy to survivors.
I appreciate the emphasis the author puts on the broader social context of coercive control and violence against women. As often it is argued that men can be abused too… which is true, and also is not to exclude the unique dynamics of same sex relationships and the inequities facing trans populations. But the lack of coercive control in heterosexual relationships by women, provides support for the special need of men to (reactively or otherwise) control their partners, and erase their autonomy as a what I conclude as perceived threat to their 'manhood' or in some way increasing their masculine status.
An important reflection I've had as I've been able to explore feminist perspectives in greater depth is the preservation of sex differences, and not reducing to the male default, ex: values of community, intuitive knowing, or nurturing that are ascribed to the feminine could be subject to greater emphasis in a world of flattened hierarchy.
Overall I think this book does an amazing job at presenting the author's case for coercive control as the missing link in conceptualizing abuse. I would be interested in re reading it.
First an uncompromising survey of abuse statistics, where the author doesn't just provide shocking numbers like how men are 3x safer from homicide since shelters started, whereas the women are as unsafe as ever, just less likely to see murdering their abusers as their only escape. But anyway, here there is a multi-perspectival critique of abuse statistics, the motives of number-fudgers and various agendas, what we might better be able to understand from the data, and the nuances of intersectionality and whether it is represented there in.
Also there is a broad overview of the shelter movement, from grassroots to state entities, the various actors within and the defanging of structural activism. I found it intriguing how the strongholds of stereotyping decide whether a woman was really abused. Aka whether she fits the narrow 'profile' of an abused woman, aka freshly black-eyed, meek, and white. While woman who experience less dramatic forms of violence, belong to minorities, or have the audacity to resist their abuser, or are considered 'unscrupulous' sexually or are physically matched with their abusers are to this day excluded from support, let's not get into those who return to their abusers, and are unable to protect their children.
Also the conceptualization of abuse on an injury per injury basis and the relevance of prevalence not just incidence.
Intriguingly the author takes us through the various defenses used throughout history to defend women who kill their abusers, and how they serve to typify the 'weaker sex'. From insanity to self defense to trauma theory. Having not once heard a single critique of trauma theory I found it fascinating, how it, along with the other paradigms only reinforce this gender stereotype that the decision to kill was the irrational act of a 'not all there' woman, in a desperate situation. But the author offers us an alternative theorization of why women kill, and it reminded me of some study referenced by Lundy B. which proved how woman's intuition proved highly accurate in whether their abusers were soon to kill them. While courts often use the justification of 'well he never attempted to kill you before, so your violence was unjustified. He hasn't escalated to murder for the 17 years you were together, we don't believe your self-defense is justified' Which makes me think about 'feminine' ways of knowing, such as intuition, and the easy dismissal thereof. But these women who kill their abusers often cite recognizing a certain look in the abusers eye, and conversely to the court argument, if a woman has been with their abuser for 17 years, who would know better than she? And contrary to the not-all-there argument of insanity pleas, self-defense from heightened womanly fears, and trauma rendered stupid defenses, there exists a superior explanation. The special reasonableness of abused women. I appreciate this approach which feels empowering rather than infantilizing, and loosens the grip of the paradigm of trauma theory over me, and restores autonomy to survivors.
I appreciate the emphasis the author puts on the broader social context of coercive control and violence against women. As often it is argued that men can be abused too… which is true, and also is not to exclude the unique dynamics of same sex relationships and the inequities facing trans populations. But the lack of coercive control in heterosexual relationships by women, provides support for the special need of men to (reactively or otherwise) control their partners, and erase their autonomy as a what I conclude as perceived threat to their 'manhood' or in some way increasing their masculine status.
An important reflection I've had as I've been able to explore feminist perspectives in greater depth is the preservation of sex differences, and not reducing to the male default, ex: values of community, intuitive knowing, or nurturing that are ascribed to the feminine could be subject to greater emphasis in a world of flattened hierarchy.
Overall I think this book does an amazing job at presenting the author's case for coercive control as the missing link in conceptualizing abuse. I would be interested in re reading it.
October 14, 2020
This book was so much more than I expected. The key takeaway was that as women's status increases, coercive control by men will also increase as they struggle to maintain dominance and enact their masculinity. The author presents an excellent discussion of the social, cultural, psychological and legal implications and offers many real world examples. If more women, and supportive men, read this book the world would be a different place.
April 17, 2025
I expected this book to be about the mechanics of coercive control and how abusers execute it. But the first half was sort of about the history of women’s rights in the US and how intimate partner violence morphed from being viewed as a private family/household shame into a crime punishable by law. That first half was informative, but not what I was looking for.
June 2, 2025
Who should read Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life by Evan Stark?
1. Certainly any heterosexual woman who - like me - has been or is currently in a relationship (or situationship) with a cis man in which she feels any more than the rarest conflict, judgement, guilt, shame, helplessness, or frustration/anger based on patterns within the relationship.
2. Anyone who feels held back, trapped, taken advantage of, "less than," imposed upon, manipulated, isolated, lied to, or otherwise limited or controlled within their relationship.
3. Anyone who is or has experienced intimate partner violence/psychological abuse/domestic abuse. To avoid getting lost in the various definitions here, I'll take the liberty of saying this means anyone who is experiencing any type of behavior from a domestic partner which negatively impacts their wellbeing (typically mental health).
4. The partners of these women*.
5. All my feministas out there!
6. Anyone who lives in a society where gendered social injustice still exists.
7. Based on #6, if you're a human reading this review than this book applies to you.
*This book is intentionally gendered and narrowly focuses on heterosexual relationships. The author sets out to very systematically document the history, definition, harms, and proposed solution to what is by nature a gendered issue as he presents it. He fully acknowledges this and compares it to focusing on blacks (and only blacks) during the civil right movement. Thus he correctly states that social justice reform designed to address coercive control must be well-defined and very specific in focus in order to be successful. He briefly covers homosexual relationships toward the end of the book, correctly identifying that something like coercive control often plays out in these relationships as well but is most often doing so in different ways or significantly influenced by other relationship dynamics unique to these relationships (the varied social pressures exerted on these communities, unique mental health challenges, etc. etc.). He states that coercive control in non-heteronormative relationships is just as important to address, but is not within the scope of his book.
I initially had some very mixed feelings about what felt like a glaring omission, but came to appreciate the wisdom of Dr. Stark's approach. This was the first book to identify coercive control and to propose criminalizing it as such, along with suggesting social support resources for both victims and perpetrators. This in and of itself was a monumental task - which he accomplished brilliantly - and the unfortunate reality is that to bite off more would have de-powered the strength of his message and proposed solutions. As it was, writing and researching this book took him 10+ years. A second, updated edition was published in 2023, which Dr. Stark followed with Children of Coercive Control just prior to his death at age 82 in 2024.
~
“Coercive control entails a malevolent course of conduct that subordinates women to an alien will [most specifically that of their intimate partner] by violating their physical integrity (domestic violence), denying them respect and autonomy (intimidation), depriving them of social connectedness (isolation), and appropriating or denying them access to the resources required for personhood and citizenship (control).” -Evan Stark, Coercive Control
Before reading this well-researched and dense but very readable book I thought I had a reasonably thorough understanding of domestic violence and gender inequality. Afterward? Talk about a world view shift. (And, more personally, I felt seen - and had gained my own clarity - for the first time.)
~
"The victim becomes a hostage in an unreal world created by the abuser, entrapped in a world of confusion, contradiction, and fear." - Evan Stark, Coercive Control
Yes. So much yes! This was my reality, the sum total of my world, up until late last year. Yet this type of injustice from someone I loved very deeply (and who thought he loved me very deeply) was so unimaginable - even and especially as I was living it - that I became further stuck. Further enmeshed. Further confused. Socially isolated. And silent.
~
“Asking clients, 'Is there someone in your life making you afraid? or 'Controlling what you do or say?' promises an even more profound awakening than asking women about violence.”
-Evan Stark, Coercive Control
This resonated because despite the fact that I was lying to my physical therapist about the "misstep" over the weekend that had re-injured my ankle, somehow the standard question "Do you feel safe at home?" from my healthcare providers never truly sunk in (until the end); however, I would like to think that these rephrased questions about intimate partner violence would have prompted a more reflective, honest, and accurate answer about the widespread physical and mental oppression I was living under.
My feelings were constantly being questioned or manipulated. My thoughts and opinions were not my own, and certainly not "allowed" to be private. My reality was always up for debate. I was questioned about my time and my physical needs. I was not allowed to have my own physical space, nor privacy. My career was affected. My life was no longer my own. And yes, I was also getting pushed around physically. Yet I mistakenly and steadfastly believed no closed fists = no domestic violence, or at the very least it "wasn't that bad."
I was optimistic that we could find our way back to the way things "could be." I loved him. I felt bad for him.
I was "OK" with giving up my needs for his. And I gave up everything, until there was nothing left to give.
Then I was ashamed to admit the truth, and was sure it made me a failure.
~
“...in stifling their liberty and obstructing access to rights, coercive control prevents women from practicing freedom. This is the essential wrong that demands correction.” -Evan Stark, Coercive Control
The author goes on to write that women should have “the opportunity for true personhood” and have the right to “a space where self development, consciousness, and decisional autonomy can thrive." In the first section of the book he demonstrates that the domestic rights movement, which began in the 1970's, has been in a prolonged stall and that the benefits of the original focus on reducing violence have been exhausted. Instead, he argues, it is long past time to shift the focus to restoring women's rights. He proposes that a second movement focused on addressing coercive control should aim to restore women's rightful freedoms, including self-expression of women's “intellect, interest, tastes and personality," return opportunities to restart “forestalled life projects," and allow them to experience and express “dignity, capacity, and creative expression," along with “desire, reason, and imagination." He goes on to discuss methods of criminalizing coercive control.
In a word: brilliant.
It is very evident that Dr. Stark cared deeply about social justice and the women and children who are harmed by men in their personal lives. And he dedicated his life to enacting change, whether it be by opening his own home to battered women and children, providing expert testimony in the courtroom, or supporting updated domestic violence laws and social programs.
~
One final note about why I chose to share some of my own story in this review: I wanted to illustrate what Dr. Stark and many others have described, that by necessarily and dramatically portraying Ike and Tina Turner-style domestic violence the movement was in many ways successful. However this focus has unfortunately also been a disservice to victim survivors of intimate partner violence that looks different, yet can be just as damaging. Because our society focuses on battered women in domestic violence, like me many women minimize - or perhaps don't even identify - the injustices they endure if physical violence is "minor" or absent. As Dr. Stark details, women who endure physical violence without psychological abuse often emerge more emotionally and psychologically intact than those who endure more severe forms of coercive control. Research shows that even milder forms of chronic coercive control can cause long lasting psychologic harms. Just because it "isn't that bad" or you are "strong enough to handle it" doesn't mean it's not hurting you, often in ways you don't fully understand until much later. Giving away pieces of your freedom, your agency, your autonomy, your identity, etc. to preserve the peace is NOT ok.
1. Certainly any heterosexual woman who - like me - has been or is currently in a relationship (or situationship) with a cis man in which she feels any more than the rarest conflict, judgement, guilt, shame, helplessness, or frustration/anger based on patterns within the relationship.
2. Anyone who feels held back, trapped, taken advantage of, "less than," imposed upon, manipulated, isolated, lied to, or otherwise limited or controlled within their relationship.
3. Anyone who is or has experienced intimate partner violence/psychological abuse/domestic abuse. To avoid getting lost in the various definitions here, I'll take the liberty of saying this means anyone who is experiencing any type of behavior from a domestic partner which negatively impacts their wellbeing (typically mental health).
4. The partners of these women*.
5. All my feministas out there!
6. Anyone who lives in a society where gendered social injustice still exists.
7. Based on #6, if you're a human reading this review than this book applies to you.
*This book is intentionally gendered and narrowly focuses on heterosexual relationships. The author sets out to very systematically document the history, definition, harms, and proposed solution to what is by nature a gendered issue as he presents it. He fully acknowledges this and compares it to focusing on blacks (and only blacks) during the civil right movement. Thus he correctly states that social justice reform designed to address coercive control must be well-defined and very specific in focus in order to be successful. He briefly covers homosexual relationships toward the end of the book, correctly identifying that something like coercive control often plays out in these relationships as well but is most often doing so in different ways or significantly influenced by other relationship dynamics unique to these relationships (the varied social pressures exerted on these communities, unique mental health challenges, etc. etc.). He states that coercive control in non-heteronormative relationships is just as important to address, but is not within the scope of his book.
I initially had some very mixed feelings about what felt like a glaring omission, but came to appreciate the wisdom of Dr. Stark's approach. This was the first book to identify coercive control and to propose criminalizing it as such, along with suggesting social support resources for both victims and perpetrators. This in and of itself was a monumental task - which he accomplished brilliantly - and the unfortunate reality is that to bite off more would have de-powered the strength of his message and proposed solutions. As it was, writing and researching this book took him 10+ years. A second, updated edition was published in 2023, which Dr. Stark followed with Children of Coercive Control just prior to his death at age 82 in 2024.
~
“Coercive control entails a malevolent course of conduct that subordinates women to an alien will [most specifically that of their intimate partner] by violating their physical integrity (domestic violence), denying them respect and autonomy (intimidation), depriving them of social connectedness (isolation), and appropriating or denying them access to the resources required for personhood and citizenship (control).” -Evan Stark, Coercive Control
Before reading this well-researched and dense but very readable book I thought I had a reasonably thorough understanding of domestic violence and gender inequality. Afterward? Talk about a world view shift. (And, more personally, I felt seen - and had gained my own clarity - for the first time.)
~
"The victim becomes a hostage in an unreal world created by the abuser, entrapped in a world of confusion, contradiction, and fear." - Evan Stark, Coercive Control
Yes. So much yes! This was my reality, the sum total of my world, up until late last year. Yet this type of injustice from someone I loved very deeply (and who thought he loved me very deeply) was so unimaginable - even and especially as I was living it - that I became further stuck. Further enmeshed. Further confused. Socially isolated. And silent.
~
“Asking clients, 'Is there someone in your life making you afraid? or 'Controlling what you do or say?' promises an even more profound awakening than asking women about violence.”
-Evan Stark, Coercive Control
This resonated because despite the fact that I was lying to my physical therapist about the "misstep" over the weekend that had re-injured my ankle, somehow the standard question "Do you feel safe at home?" from my healthcare providers never truly sunk in (until the end); however, I would like to think that these rephrased questions about intimate partner violence would have prompted a more reflective, honest, and accurate answer about the widespread physical and mental oppression I was living under.
My feelings were constantly being questioned or manipulated. My thoughts and opinions were not my own, and certainly not "allowed" to be private. My reality was always up for debate. I was questioned about my time and my physical needs. I was not allowed to have my own physical space, nor privacy. My career was affected. My life was no longer my own. And yes, I was also getting pushed around physically. Yet I mistakenly and steadfastly believed no closed fists = no domestic violence, or at the very least it "wasn't that bad."
I was optimistic that we could find our way back to the way things "could be." I loved him. I felt bad for him.
I was "OK" with giving up my needs for his. And I gave up everything, until there was nothing left to give.
Then I was ashamed to admit the truth, and was sure it made me a failure.
~
“...in stifling their liberty and obstructing access to rights, coercive control prevents women from practicing freedom. This is the essential wrong that demands correction.” -Evan Stark, Coercive Control
The author goes on to write that women should have “the opportunity for true personhood” and have the right to “a space where self development, consciousness, and decisional autonomy can thrive." In the first section of the book he demonstrates that the domestic rights movement, which began in the 1970's, has been in a prolonged stall and that the benefits of the original focus on reducing violence have been exhausted. Instead, he argues, it is long past time to shift the focus to restoring women's rights. He proposes that a second movement focused on addressing coercive control should aim to restore women's rightful freedoms, including self-expression of women's “intellect, interest, tastes and personality," return opportunities to restart “forestalled life projects," and allow them to experience and express “dignity, capacity, and creative expression," along with “desire, reason, and imagination." He goes on to discuss methods of criminalizing coercive control.
In a word: brilliant.
It is very evident that Dr. Stark cared deeply about social justice and the women and children who are harmed by men in their personal lives. And he dedicated his life to enacting change, whether it be by opening his own home to battered women and children, providing expert testimony in the courtroom, or supporting updated domestic violence laws and social programs.
~
One final note about why I chose to share some of my own story in this review: I wanted to illustrate what Dr. Stark and many others have described, that by necessarily and dramatically portraying Ike and Tina Turner-style domestic violence the movement was in many ways successful. However this focus has unfortunately also been a disservice to victim survivors of intimate partner violence that looks different, yet can be just as damaging. Because our society focuses on battered women in domestic violence, like me many women minimize - or perhaps don't even identify - the injustices they endure if physical violence is "minor" or absent. As Dr. Stark details, women who endure physical violence without psychological abuse often emerge more emotionally and psychologically intact than those who endure more severe forms of coercive control. Research shows that even milder forms of chronic coercive control can cause long lasting psychologic harms. Just because it "isn't that bad" or you are "strong enough to handle it" doesn't mean it's not hurting you, often in ways you don't fully understand until much later. Giving away pieces of your freedom, your agency, your autonomy, your identity, etc. to preserve the peace is NOT ok.
October 26, 2021
Important arguments being made about coercive control, particularly how we should be paying more attention to how coercive control has become a means by which some men defend patriarchal privileges and continue to control women in an environment where violence against women is more tightly regulated and policed ... pushing men into new forms of policing women in intimate relationships. Failing to talk about the tactics of coercive control can lead to the many ways in which women are coerced in subtle, yet powerful ways, fading into the background. The only signal that something is wrong in a relationship will then be physical acts of violence, which makes much that should not be invisible, be invisible to the broader community.
September 16, 2012
this book is excellent--it provides a sophisticated Foucaultian framework for domestic violence (DV) and is among the best of the DV texts; it is definitely not a relaxing book nor a great self-help book but in terms of research on this issue, he really understands the issue and doesn't fall into the traps that authors like Kathleen Ferraro or Andrea Westlund fall into
October 12, 2012
Just started Coercive Control by Evan Stark, doing my socio 222 essay on it.
December 2, 2024
Easy to read but shows a thorough understanding of the tactics, complexities and effects of psychological abuse.
This book clarified a lot of things for me. My perspective and language that I needed to articulate and comprehend regarding the abuse in my past relationships.
This newfound understanding empowered me to delve deeper into myself, leading to a better understanding.
It made me reevaluate the seemingly insignificant details in my last relationship that had been bothering me.
I began to notice subtle discrepancies in communication and behaviour that I had previously brushed aside. These small yet significant issues contributed to a growing sense of unease and feeling trapped in situations that didn't truly reflect my values or desires.
By recognising these lingering discomforts, I could understand the deeper dynamics and consider how they affected my overall well-being and happiness.
It helped me realise the signs of psychological abuse, allowing me to reflect on the specific moments that drove me to seek refuge in the bathroom for hours!
I began to understand that these instances were not random but rather tactics employed by my ex-partner to manipulate and control me.
It became clear how I had been subjected to emotional turmoil, making it essential for me to recognise and validate my feelings of distress.
This validation of my experiences was crucial in empowering me to seek support.
Stark comprehensively and thoughtfully presents "the framework of coercive control" chapter by chapter. He emphasises the potential of new laws, innovative policing methods, and supportive measures to effectively combat this form of abuse. By framing coercive control as a crime against "freedom" rather than merely a crime of violence, Stark encourages a deeper understanding of its impact. Additionally, he critically assesses the recent adaptations of coercive control laws, highlighting their significance in the ongoing global movement toward equality.
This behaviour is so unacceptably normal that no one recognises coercive control (in whatever form) as abuse or talks about it.
This book offers a comprehensive and authoritative understanding of coercive control, backed by FBI statistics, health records, victim and perpetrator interviews, and forensic analysis of actual cases from Evan Stark's professional practice. It provides a wealth of knowledge on the subject, ensuring the reader is well-informed and knowledgeable.
This book delivers three influential case studies of highly violent and controlling relationships, demonstrating how the concept of Coercive Control is essential for understanding victim behaviour. It makes a compelling case for new legal and law enforcement strategies, advocating for enhanced training for law enforcement officers and the introduction of specific laws that effectively target coercive control in intimate partner violence.
September 28, 2022
Just finished Evan Stark’s book ”Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women In Personal Life.” His insights on the oppression of women by men are largely worthwhile, but I wish he had extended his insights to other populations including men, disabled people, elders, workers, and of course youth. My main criticism of the book is that he is so focused on this one (albeit important) form of oppression that he loses out on opportunities to extend these insights into other relevant domains.
I also disagree with his view that women almost never coercively control men. I agree that sexism - both personal and structural - makes the coercive control of women by men a more socially significant phenomenon than the other way around, but I get the sense that this guy is so fixated on the narrative of women as victims and men as perpetrators that he could meet a couple like Manling and Neal Williams and somehow come away with the idea that Manling was the real victim.
I also feel like he missed an opportunity to trace the roots of coercive control of adult partners in families to the coercive control of children by parents and other adults in their lives like teachers.
This book is nonetheless excellent and is regarded as a landmark text on domestic violence for good reason. His key insight is that the law - by focusing its analysis and remedies for abuse almost solely on physical violence - fails to give a voice to and provide remedies for victims who become entrapped by controlling partners who control them in ways that restrict their ability to move freely through the world. He speaks of partners who employ emotional terrorism, restrict access to the outside world, make absurd demands about everything from housework to how a partner dresses, isolate victims from others, and the like. I strongly agree with this key insight.
The book deals in depth with the issue of women who kill abusive partners. Stark argues that by painting these women primarily as victims of PTSD and similar syndromes, we pathologize reasonable and appropriate acts of self-defense. He argues that we must expand our definition of self-defense instead of painting these women as hysterical even when doing so is used as a strategy to keep them out of prison. I couldn’t agree more strongly with this insight.
When an individual kills a coercively controlling and abusive family member, as far as I’m concerned, they are the moral equivalents of the brave American military members who took out Osama bin Laden. They should be similarly celebrated. Bin Laden was a terrorist whose crimes we all recognize as evil and this is as it should be. Those abused in the home take out another kind of terrorist when they strike back lethally in self-defense and the law should recognize this. These terrorists operate on a smaller scale but their reigns of terror are horrific as well; they just focus on a few isolated individuals or one isolated individual. Instead of painting these individuals who strike back as irrationally blinded by trauma, we need to paint them as rational, morally intelligent people who make the life affirming choice to fight back against those who don’t value human life or human flourishing. The definition of legal self-defense has changed little since the fifteenth century. We need to expand our legal conception of self-defense to come into alignment with the realities of both youth and adults who are abused in the home.
I also disagree with his view that women almost never coercively control men. I agree that sexism - both personal and structural - makes the coercive control of women by men a more socially significant phenomenon than the other way around, but I get the sense that this guy is so fixated on the narrative of women as victims and men as perpetrators that he could meet a couple like Manling and Neal Williams and somehow come away with the idea that Manling was the real victim.
I also feel like he missed an opportunity to trace the roots of coercive control of adult partners in families to the coercive control of children by parents and other adults in their lives like teachers.
This book is nonetheless excellent and is regarded as a landmark text on domestic violence for good reason. His key insight is that the law - by focusing its analysis and remedies for abuse almost solely on physical violence - fails to give a voice to and provide remedies for victims who become entrapped by controlling partners who control them in ways that restrict their ability to move freely through the world. He speaks of partners who employ emotional terrorism, restrict access to the outside world, make absurd demands about everything from housework to how a partner dresses, isolate victims from others, and the like. I strongly agree with this key insight.
The book deals in depth with the issue of women who kill abusive partners. Stark argues that by painting these women primarily as victims of PTSD and similar syndromes, we pathologize reasonable and appropriate acts of self-defense. He argues that we must expand our definition of self-defense instead of painting these women as hysterical even when doing so is used as a strategy to keep them out of prison. I couldn’t agree more strongly with this insight.
When an individual kills a coercively controlling and abusive family member, as far as I’m concerned, they are the moral equivalents of the brave American military members who took out Osama bin Laden. They should be similarly celebrated. Bin Laden was a terrorist whose crimes we all recognize as evil and this is as it should be. Those abused in the home take out another kind of terrorist when they strike back lethally in self-defense and the law should recognize this. These terrorists operate on a smaller scale but their reigns of terror are horrific as well; they just focus on a few isolated individuals or one isolated individual. Instead of painting these individuals who strike back as irrationally blinded by trauma, we need to paint them as rational, morally intelligent people who make the life affirming choice to fight back against those who don’t value human life or human flourishing. The definition of legal self-defense has changed little since the fifteenth century. We need to expand our legal conception of self-defense to come into alignment with the realities of both youth and adults who are abused in the home.
December 20, 2024
This is the definitive academic book on the subject, by Stark, who really did as much as anyone else to define the subject, and has worked for decades to research it, understand it, and eventually, to advocate for legal changes to outlaw it. Essential reading for anyone who wants to understand what it is, and why men (its very much but not exclusively a guy thing...) do it. Essential, but not easy reading. It is a huge book, with this 2023 2nd edition updating the original 2007 edition, and drawing from research going back to the 1970s. He is a committed feminist, and the book is strongly informed by feminist theory, his decades of work as a sociologist and social worker, and his partnership with Anne Flitcroft, a specialist in domestic violence. Together, they redefined the thinking behind domestic violence, moving it far beyond the legal definition of violence, and into the more insidious and just as harmful paradigm of control that we now know (and outlaw) as coercive control. His book walks through this history, the sociology, the legal evolution, and the growing understanding of WHY men do this - and why it should be outlawed. Its heavily supported with impeccable research & analysis, as well as some truly harrowing case studies, and it can be very heavy going (hence 4 stars not 5) - but its very much accessible to the layperson (if you focus....), and is incredibly useful for understanding the phenomenon better.
My big takeaway from the book was understanding structurally why men do this, and why its seemingly becoming more of a problem today in the western world, not less. Jess Hill had partly answered that in her stunning book See What You Made Me Do - sheer sense of frustrated entitlement - but that answer never fully sat right with me. Stark built on my understanding by very clearly explaining that as men's legal domain over women is reduced (as it has moved towards full equality in the west) then a subset of men feel compelled to re-exert it in a very personal and secretive way within their marriages and partnerships. Some 27% of Australian women over 18 have experienced some form of violence and/or emotional / financial abuse by a partner (source AIHS) so its not a small subset either.
So it feels like the very least we should do is read about and understand the phenomenon, in order to be able to support our partners, educate our kids and loved ones, and stand up to it when we see it in our friends, family and others - because this isn't 6 degrees of separation, we all know people who have been or are currently subjected to it. And this book is perhaps the most authoritative resource out there.
My big takeaway from the book was understanding structurally why men do this, and why its seemingly becoming more of a problem today in the western world, not less. Jess Hill had partly answered that in her stunning book See What You Made Me Do - sheer sense of frustrated entitlement - but that answer never fully sat right with me. Stark built on my understanding by very clearly explaining that as men's legal domain over women is reduced (as it has moved towards full equality in the west) then a subset of men feel compelled to re-exert it in a very personal and secretive way within their marriages and partnerships. Some 27% of Australian women over 18 have experienced some form of violence and/or emotional / financial abuse by a partner (source AIHS) so its not a small subset either.
So it feels like the very least we should do is read about and understand the phenomenon, in order to be able to support our partners, educate our kids and loved ones, and stand up to it when we see it in our friends, family and others - because this isn't 6 degrees of separation, we all know people who have been or are currently subjected to it. And this book is perhaps the most authoritative resource out there.
October 28, 2021
This is another great book! I gleaned this title from a list published by the journal Violence and Gender called "Literature Watch." This is an important read for anyone interested in the technology of coercive control and how it's mechanisms are deployed in terms of the sexual batterer and oppressive partner. The technology of coercive control is also deployed by federal and state bureaucratic apparatus. For this reason this book makes a great read for people working with women trapped in cycles of domestic violence and intimate partner violence who are stuck with controlling partners. As such, it provides a wealth of insights. Although primarily these batterers have been male, it holds the possibility for a great theoretical framework on anyone caught in abusive relationship cycles, including homosexuals and transgender individuals. Although this books previews coercive control from a patriarchal standpoint, the abuses employed can be funneled down into the narcissistic abuse by one individual against another and those suffering with partners who possess personality disorders. It discusses issues of domestic dependence, and the heart of the book states the same paradox that allows women to live independently also provide a major incentive for masculine coercive control. "Because women are more equal then ever before, men intent on subordinating them have expanded their tactical repertoire beyond coercion, relying heavily on the huge gap that still separates women's formal status as men's equals from their reality."
February 23, 2019
Perspective & Research: A book you need in your library.
This is an excellent resource book. I met Dr. Evan Stark a few years back in Billings, Montana when he was speaking at the McGuire Memorial Conference on Family Violence. He is a founder of one of the first shelters for abused women in the United States. He is the recipent of numerous awards for his resarch and service. Dr. Stark was also the lead witness for the plaintiffs in the landmark federal class action suit, Nicholson v. Williamson. The book is academic in nature and a helpful resource for those interested in learning more about domestic violence, partner assault, battered women and its challenges.
This is an excellent resource book. I met Dr. Evan Stark a few years back in Billings, Montana when he was speaking at the McGuire Memorial Conference on Family Violence. He is a founder of one of the first shelters for abused women in the United States. He is the recipent of numerous awards for his resarch and service. Dr. Stark was also the lead witness for the plaintiffs in the landmark federal class action suit, Nicholson v. Williamson. The book is academic in nature and a helpful resource for those interested in learning more about domestic violence, partner assault, battered women and its challenges.
January 15, 2026
I read it all in about 2 days - so I need to go back and properly summarize it bc it is a lot of information.
But it is DELICIOUS TO READ.
It makes so much sense, and lifts a veil on the ways control and abuse show up interpersonally, and throughout history.
It weaves every sinewy tie among subtle coercive tactics, their specific uses , and their greater role in bigger tapestry of abuse and its purpose in the context of the psychological roots of abusers themselves.
Basically ….once you read it, it’s like a huge blindfold is lifted where not only can you not UNSEE the patterns of coercive control you learned, but you also realize it is EVERYWHERE.
But it is DELICIOUS TO READ.
It makes so much sense, and lifts a veil on the ways control and abuse show up interpersonally, and throughout history.
It weaves every sinewy tie among subtle coercive tactics, their specific uses , and their greater role in bigger tapestry of abuse and its purpose in the context of the psychological roots of abusers themselves.
Basically ….once you read it, it’s like a huge blindfold is lifted where not only can you not UNSEE the patterns of coercive control you learned, but you also realize it is EVERYWHERE.
May 31, 2023
I found the argument of placing DV in a social and cultural context where men use their privilege to dominate women unjustly to be spot on. Also, the classification of DV as a capture crime where women are deprived of their personal autonomy was new to me. I wish the US could advance the cause of Coersive Control as a crime like the UK has done. I think this book would be extremely beneficial to anyone working with women in the health care and social service fields.
August 22, 2023
I use this book for research purposes. An excellent academic dive into coercive control, legislative reform, behavioural science and trauma. Essential reference material for people who do research on violence against women and children. Case studies go back decades & follow through throughout the book. Giving it 3 stars only because it’s an academic work, not something you pick up and read front to back for relaxation. Otherwise 5 stars.
October 3, 2024
Ok. Hard to rate. Very important information, but it's not written in a nice format, easily digestible. I recently read No Visible Bruises: What We Don't Know About Domestic Violence Can Kill Us by Rachel Louise Snyder, and a year ago or so I read Missoula: Rape and the Justic System in a College Town by Jon Krakauer. Those books on similar topics were really good reads, good stories. This book read more like straight-up summaries of studies.
October 8, 2020
This was a complete waste of time and money for my situation. I really thought it would help with coercive control but it doesn’t. It really only talks about domestic violence etc. Not the situation I am dealing with. Trying to get refund of the £10 from amazon is so stressful and like getting blood out of a stone 😡😡😡😡
March 8, 2025
A really important topic written in such a dry way, it’s almost impossible to read and retain any information. Would have been much better to use case studies to explore the different ideas. Instead, case studies are used almost as a side thought.
June 19, 2025
This was a really tough read. The author writes like a lawyer and is full of ideas and desires for a better world. I was never really able to get a concrete idea of how he wanted the culture and legal system to change.
January 4, 2026
this is definitely a dense and academic read, but it's worth the effort if you are leaving a DV relationship and trying to understand your situation, which is what I was doing. I listened to it as an audio book, which helped.
November 21, 2020
Stark really knows what he's talking about. Watch him on TED Talks to add to the book. You should have a good understanding of domestic violence once you've completed both.
Read
August 27, 2021Read for research. Good book. Hard topic to read. Would recommend to professional who deal with men.
October 2, 2021
Comprehensive of a specific prototype. Doesn’t overlap with NPD as much as I’d thought it would. Dense and dispassionate. Best for clinicians.
March 3, 2023
Very heavy read and a lot of information. We know the how, just not how to get rid of the stigma now, and how to make women be believed when they are in these situations.
Read
September 8, 2023Started reading the first few pages, and put it down
February 1, 2024
The definitive text--literally--on coercive control.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 38 reviews