In England and Wales, public discourse has portrayed domestic violence as an enormous and pressing social problem. Feminist analyses in the refuge movement and feminist organizations have portrayed domestic violence, as well as all male violence against women, as stemming from male domination and power over women and thus as a gender-related phenomenon. Against this background, this paper reflects on doctoral research conducted in a county in Northern England (fictitiously named Hillshire), with attention to two areas in the county (fictitiously named Pittplace and Steelsite). The focus is on transitions in domestic violence and its prominence, populism, and politics. The discussion first describes the research on which the paper’s reflections are based. This is followed by a discussion of the political and philosophical background for the portrayals of domestic violence and the development of analyses and action related to domestic violence and other gender-related violence. The paper then compares how these issues have emerged and evolved in Pittplace and Steelsite. The differences and difficulties at the local level are compared with national policy discourse and developments. The gender-neutral analysis of domestic violence adopted in Pittplace offer a clear challenge to the feminist framework that has traditionally dominated how the problem has been conceptualized. In Steelsite, on the other hand, domestic violence was viewed as a gendered crime issue, and services were framed in terms of violence against women rather than as a community crime-prevention issue. The danger in the Steelsite approach is that the gendered focus may limit access to broader resources and collaborations in the crime prevention field. The danger of the Pittplace approach is that the dominant gendered dynamics of domestic violence will be ignored. 8 notes and 60 references