3. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
This paper focuses on domestic violence (DV) within heterosexual relationships in which males are the batterers and females the victims. Though DV, also known as Intimate Partner Violence or Family Violence, can be committed by both men and women and develop in homosexual and heterosexual relationships, the vast majority of cases of DV are perpetrated by men towards women and other family members. Studies, such as those conducted by the US Department of Justice, have consistently shown that the overwhelming majority of DV victims are female. Therefore, in this paper, "batterer" is often used synonymously with "male," and "victim" with female. I recognize that women are in some cases the abusers and that men are occasionally the victims and do not intend to diminish the seriousness of these crimes by not addressing them at length. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge that DV is a complex social phenomenon with historical roots in the power dynamics between men and women. These power dynamics and the way they manifest in society reinforce widespread social patterns that may result in the perpetuation and justification of various types of violence against women.
DV is a pervasive criminal justice and public health concern, indiscriminately affecting families across the diverse spectrum of cultures, races, religions, classes, and ethnic groups. DV is one of the most common forms of gender-based violence, as it is primarily a crime against women, being committed by male intimate partners or ex-partners. Throughout the world, DV shares dangerous commonalities, “It is perpetrated by men, silenced by custom, institutionalized in laws and state systems, and passed from one generation to the next.”63 Although DV results in the violation of human rights on a global scale, it is not often seen, mentioned, or reported to police, as it happens primarily in the private sphere where victims often remain stigmatized and silenced and perpetrators go unpunished.
In the United States, DV constitutes the leading cause of injury to women between the ages of 15 and 44, more so than injuries caused by car accidents, muggings, and rapes combined. 64 It has also been estimated that one in four women in the United States will experience an abusive relationship,65 while in other countries it is said that as much as up to half of the female population will be victims of DV. This was a finding of the World Heath Organization's 2005 Multicountry study on DV. The report found that over half of all women surveyed in Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Peru, Tanzania, and Samoa reported that they had been physically and/or sexually assaulted since the age of fifteen, with the overwhelming majority of the abuse perpetrated by the woman's male intimate partner.
This finding illustrates the extent to which, globally, women in non-conflict settings are at greatest risk of violence from their husband or intimate partner, rather than strangers or others known to them.66
Although DV is widespread, it is often poorly understood and therefore remains insufficiently addressed. Perhaps the ignorance surrounding DV renders it less harmful and less urgent than other social problems. Or perhaps the lack of urgency to remedy DV is indicative of an abusive patriarchal world where women's health and safety has rarely been a priority. Nonetheless, in a world where numerous women are emotionally and physically abused and men are perpetrating heinous acts of violence against their intimate partners and family members, sustainable peace cannot be possible. Though DV may bring up the image of a man beating his wife, the abuse is really much more complex than physical abuse alone and the various factors that cause and constitute DV must be addressed in order for this pervasive problem to be remedied, including, as discussed in the previous chapter, the batterer's internal suffering.
DV is frequently defined as a pattern of coercive and abusive behaviors used to gain power and control over an intimate partner or family member, and can include physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional and verbal abuse, and financial abuse.* DV has only until recently become recognized in international documents, providing a necessary framework for criminalizing and preventing this universal problem. Similar to the definition of DV, the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (DEVAW) defines violence against women as: any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life.67 One missing element to the above definition, and indeed to most material regarding DV and “violence against women,” is any mention of perpetrators, more specifically male perpetrators. This obvious absence makes it seem as if women are being abused in a vacuum, furthering the notion that women must be responsible for their own abuse.
Male-Pattern Violence: Focus on Males as Perpetrators of Violence
While violence has been recognized as a predominantly male phenomenon, the maleness or the masculinity of the perpetrator has not been a focus of research. While a range of social characteristics of violent offenders have been analyzed (their age, class, education, religion, race), their gender has be virtually ignored (Allan 1988, p.16)68
Traditionally, research, theory, and discourse have emphasized how victims are affected by DV, without thoroughly exploring the male beliefs and attitudes, which contribute to gender-based violence. One major consequence of this obvious oversight is that if male perpetrators are not addressed as male, the responsibility for (and the prevention of) violence will continue to rest with the victim. Since DV is a widespread social problem perpetrated predominantly by men, there has been a suggestion to replace gender-unspecified terms with terms that do not mask who is perpetrating the violence. Thus, vague terms such as “domestic violence,” “spouse abuse,” “intimate partner violence”, etc., would clearly indicate the sex, such as, “male-pattern violence,” or “male pattern violence in the home,” making sure to announce when “violence against women,” (VAW) is in fact, “male violence against women.” (MVAW)69
It seems that many societies suffer from a profound reluctance to name the problem of male violence, analogous to “the emperor has no clothes;;” as if naming male violence were “taboo.”70
Jennie Ruby asks why we avoid admitting the existence of male violence. Perhaps this is because males are not defined by their sex or gender, rather, they are thought of as the norm, and women are comparatively, the “other.” Therefore, male patterns are not viewed as distinctly “male,” but as “human.” Consequently, “male researchers and theorists often write about 'human' aggression, 'humanity's wars,”71 when they should really be specifying these phenomena as “male.” It is important to note that the group determining the definition of the word and concept is the group with power, that is, males, and more specifically to the United States, white males.
The reluctance to name male violence is indicative of a general sense of apathy towards holding perpetrators of MVAW accountable, maintaining the status-quo of placing blame for violent acts on the female victims by saying that they must have “asked for it.” Efforts are subsequently concentrated on “helping,” “teaching,” or “protecting,” the victim, yet this can also translate into acts that further restrict the woman's rights and freedoms, (i.e. curfews, etc.), or teaching women and girls self-defense along with the notion that they are responsible for provoking any male attention (wanted or unwanted); without simultaneously teaching boys not to choose violent behavior.
Female victims are overwhelmingly the group that society discusses, as the news media consistently highlights the victims “involvement” in a crime. Thus, instead of the headline reading, “a man raped a woman,” we commonly see, “a woman was raped.”72 Statistics are also manipulated to portray victims, such as, “every 15 seconds a woman is beaten by her husband,”73 instead of, “every 15 seconds a man beats his wife.” It is as if the act becomes less violent and more tolerable when used in the passive tense or if the perpetrator is left out of the picture, or, dare I say, when the crime identifies the vulnerability of women, reinforcing their subordination.
If men are not named as the perpetrators, men as a group will not be studied to see what is causing the epidemic of MVAW, nor taught healthier ways of expressing their needs, thus MVAW will remain a norm. Also, without addressing male violence, men will not be encouraged to eradicate their internal suffering which causes them to use violence. In order to remedy the problem of male-pattern violence and put an end to all forms of MVAW, we must first name it for what it is. Additionally, a comprehensive understanding of the roots of MVAW is essential along with prevention and rehabilitation techniques and programs which are specifically geared towards males of all ages.
Since many men first learn gender roles from their family and their society, they may mirror the abuse that society inflicts upon women. DV is nothing out of the ordinary when considering how the patriarchal state and society have historically treated women. This suffering is so deeply ingrained in many men that they may not even realize that their behavior is abusive. Consequently, they will not become conscious of their own suffering and they will not take measures to change their behavior and attitudes.
Patriarchal states and societies have historically oppressed and controlled women by creating hyper-masculinized and aggressive men. DV and other forms of MVAW are embedded in unequal power relationships between men and women inherent in a male patriarchal society. In this respect, patriarchy is the mold for DV, creating, perpetuating, and condoning male control over women which manifests in the form of male discrimination against women, male objectification of women, and MVAW. Patriarchal societies establish and enforce firm opposing gender roles, giving males power and control and enabling them to abuse this power with little or no repercussions.
As long as society values aggressiveness and violence as manly traits and encourages men to beat each other up, we will not eradicate violence against women. In order for men to carry out atrocities against women, they need a psychological construct that reduces women to property and objectifies women as the ‘other’. It is this perception of ‘otherness’ that allows men to carry out the most heinous acts of violence.74
In this patriarchal context women are viewed as a separate social class,75 facilitating the systematic oppression of women further inflicts VAW. If men make the rules and punishments, women are forced to comply. Often times this force takes the form of actual laws or policies defining what a female or male can or cannot do, and can involve physical violence, structural violence, or the negation of equal rights and opportunities.
A consequence of imposed gender constructs is that males are encouraged to maintain their power by using violence, and women are ostracized or left out of the political sphere, thus perpetuating their real or perceived powerlessness. It follows that the male patriarchal state is the prime abuser, not only oppressing women but also coaching men to covet power and control. The following is a list of different types of abuse that patriarchal states and/or patriarchal societies inflict upon women worldwide:
Although the United States may seem like a relatively benign patriarchal state, we must still question certain policies, either existent or nonexistent, as well as challenge the patriarchal society which reflects the justification for gender inequalities. These lessons have been taught to nearly every person in the US society since birth and are consequently ingrained in individuals, the larger society, and all government factions. Also, due to globalization and the fact that the US is composed of individuals from all parts of the world, it is necessary to first understand and then work towards the elimination of diverse forms of VAW, as many types of VAW are culturally rooted, yet have no national boundaries. One example is the spread of female genital mutilation to areas traditionally unaccustomed to this form of VAW.
Every nation state and society today is inherently patriarchal; therefore gender-based violence has become prolific. Research has been conducted comparing the status of women to the respective countries' level of stability.76 Findings illustrated that countries with a low percentage of women in government had higher rates of DV and are more at risk to conflict and repression. These conclusions suggest that high rates of DV represent latent or overt male aggression and suffering, which is bound to manifest in other forms of violence, eventually threatening the overall security of the state. Studies have also shown that the rate of DV drastically increases in post-conflict societies. Please see the appendix for more details on post-conflict DV.
Reasons Why Some Men Abuse Women
Men may abuse women for various reasons: they have learned to be abusive, society has encouraged them to use aggression, they consider violence as an acceptable means of problem solving, they believe that they have the right to engage in violence, VAW is socially condoned, they have learned to objectify and dehumanize women, they lack empathy towards women, etc. It has also been estimated that as high as 80 percent of male batterers had fathers who abused their mothers.77 Although this is often the case it does not necessarily indicate that abused boy children will grow up to become batterers themselves.
Although many of the aforementioned reasons explain conditions or factors which may have prompted men to use violence, I argue that the root cause originates from a state of internal suffering. As discussed in the previous chapter, suffering is defined as generating cravings or aversions. These are felt as physical sensations in the body. A person may have a history of feeling a certain craving or aversion, thereby changing the responsiveness of cellular receptors in the brain which results in an addiction to the chemicals that are released during the respective emotion. One challenge is that batterers may be unaware of their own level of suffering, and consequently place blame for their internal suffering elsewhere, such as on the victim. However, with conscious intention, people can understand the root of their suffering and subsequently control their responses. The previous chapter provided scientific evidence that people have a choice in how they respond to stimuli. Ergo, suffering does not need to beget further suffering; rather, it can be acknowledged and eradicated. Committing abuse is ultimately a choice, and batterers can choose not to use violence.
Other Domestic Violence Victims: Girl and Boy Children and Elders
A commonly accepted definition of child abuse includes all of the aforementioned types of abuse (physical, sexual, emotional, verbal, financial and neglect), as well as children witnessing their parents or guardians fight, physically or verbally. Therefore, children living in homes with DV, even if the children are never physically abused, are without a doubt affected. Nevertheless, it has been estimated that 50 to 70 percent of men who abuse their female partners also abuse their children.78 These children often live in a state of fear and self blame, experience low self-esteem, low levels of concentration which inhibits their performance in school and may jeopardize future employment opportunities, thereby sentencing them to a life of poverty. Since children primarily learn gender roles from their parents, boys are more prone to develop aggressive tendencies while girls learn to become submissive. Abusive interactions at home may teach boys that they have the right to control and abuse women. On the other hand, girls may internalize their oppression and become desensitized to recognizing abuse. Thus, DV can be a vicious cycle, perpetuating male control and female victimization.
Another group that is recognized as vulnerable to DV are elders, usually the parents or close relatives of the abuser, (such as grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc.). Numerous reports have indicated that abuse towards elders is alarmingly high in nursing home and other care facilities, with the abusers commonly working as part of the staff. Elder abuse also can involve physical, sexual, emotional, verbal, and financial abuse, as well as neglect.
Domestic Violence and the Social Construction of Gender
Introduction to Gender's Role
Before discussing gender further, it is necessary to distinguish gender from sex. Sex is a purely biological concept whereas, "gender is socially and culturally constructed."79 That is, males are generally trained by society to be masculine and females are brought up to be feminine. Biologically speaking it is easy to make clear distinctions between what constitutes a male and a female. Yet gender can be ambiguous, as it defines socially and culturally prescribed roles, values, and customs that men and women are to follow, which vary according to factors such as culture, socio-economic class, religion, age, race, etc. Since gender is created and interpreted by context and culture, it is impossible to state constant characteristics that set one gender apart from another. The question, therefore, should not necessarily be, 'What defines gender?,' but, 'What are the implications of set gender roles?'
“Robert Levant defines socially constructed gender roles, 'not as biological or even social givens, but rather as psychologically and socially constructed entities that bring certain advantages and disadvantages and, most importantly can change.'”80 Gender is not static, it is constantly changing and evolving and re-defining masculinities and femininities across various spectrums such as those of race, ethnicity, ability, class, sexual orientation, etc. Patriarchal institutions and the larger society (such as the media) influence interpersonal interactions and relationships by shaping, monitoring, and enforcing gender roles, including harsh consequences if someone steps out of their respective “gender-role box.”
Understanding that gender construction is the result of a widespread institutional system, as opposed to random interpersonal interactions, we can clearly see how creating gender divisions serve the patriarchal purpose of regulating power that men have over women and over other men.81 This power-regulation is carried out through force and coercion. In, “The Roots of Male Violence,” Laura L. O'Toole and Jessica R. Schiffman describe that, “The use of force to maintain privilege is a significant characteristic of male behavior in patriarchal societies. It contributes to the development of elaborate systems of economic and social inequality within and across gender.”82 Thus, male dominance is solidified socially, economically, politically and institutionally through the perpetuation and creation of gender differences.
O'Toole and Schiffman point out that women were the first slaves (Lerner 1986), and that “Over time, overt and covert forms of violence come to characterize 'normal' gender relations, institutionally and interpersonally.”83 The authors also explain “that patriarchy – the system of male control over women – is a human invention, not the inevitable outcome of biological characteristics,”84 and state that the recognition of patriarchy as a social construction implicates that “the violence that results from it becomes...less easy to dismiss as 'human nature.'”85 Feminist anthropologist, Marilyn French agrees, and asserts that, “In no animal species but our own does one sex have authority or rights over the other sex.”86
What else could explain why the gross amount of MVAW that occurs on a global scale? Therefore, as feminist sociologists claim, “issues of gender and power are the ultimate root of intimate violence (Dobash & Dobash 1979),”87 and add that “violence is a part of a system of coercive controls through which men maintain societal dominance over women.”88 MVAW, therefore, both physically and theoretically demonstrates, “the clearest, most straightforward expression of relative male and female power.”89
Gender distinctions separate males from females by labeling each sex as either superior/inferior, strong/weak, powerful/powerless, active/passive, aggressive/nurturing, independent/dependent, intelligent/naive, etc. Due to the dichotomous relationship between masculinity and femininity, “neither can exist without the other,”90 and because masculinity was created to encompass the dominant traits, “masculinity can only exist as distinguished from femininity,”91 or, in opposition to all that is considered feminine, i.e. emotional, nurturing, passive and weak. Therefore, masculinity and all who strive to embody masculine traits must, at the same time denounce and devalue characteristics deemed feminine. Thus, men and women are set up for a power imbalance that, “will likely produce violence in men, against women, in certain situations.”92
Moreover, since masculinity defines itself by what it is not, (femininity), men find themselves having to prove that they are not feminine. Michael Kimmel explains, “In the flight from femininity, boys constantly fear that they are not living up to the image and ideals of manliness.”93 Michael Kaufman concurs that men and boys, “harbor great insecurity about their male credentials,” and asserts that,” masculinity needs constant nurturing and affirmation.”94 He goes on to explain that, “This insecurity exists because maleness is equated with masculinity;; but the latter is a figment of our collective, patriarchal, surplus-repressive imaginations.”95 Thus, masculinity becomes an unattainable quest born out of fear and poor self-image of manliness.”96
Kimmel also describes how masculinity, once proved, will be questioned and thus must be proved again; resulting in a constant, relentless, and unachievable quest.97 Men will go to great lengths to prove their masculinity and Kimmel argues that one way of achieving masculinity is by “defeating others on the battlefield,”98 In his new book, Violence: Reflections on a National Epidemic, James Gilligan, a psychiatrist who has worked extensively with violent criminals, “unveils the motives of men who commit horrifying crimes, men who will not only kill others but destroy themselves rather than suffer a loss of self-respect.”99 Hence, if aggression and violence are deemed masculine, men choose to become violent not because they are violent by nature, but because they are trying to prove their masculinity. Furthermore, masculinity and femininity are “unconsciously rooted” in boys and girls before the age 6, constantly reinforced throughout development by family, the media, friends, school, the church, etc., and then “explode” at adolescence.100 It is no coincidence that, “All over the world, regardless of culture or background, the same biological group is responsible for the bulk of the violence: young males from puberty through the prime age of reproductive potency.”101
What defines masculinities is subject to change regarding differences such as culture and class. “Resource theory” suggests that men in the lower socio-economic classes emphasize aggression and toughness and are more prone to committing DV because they are trying to make up for a loss of power educationally and occupationally with control in the home.102 This is not to say that wealthy men do not commit DV. “One way for men to differentiate from women is by obtaining higher levels of income, more education, and greater occupational prestige.”103 When the male partner establishes himself as the breadwinner, it legitimizes his male power within the family, and the male may believe it is his right to control the happenings and people in the home.
Wife beaters (regardless of class and race position) presume they have the patriarchal right— because it is part of their 'essential nature' to dominate and control their wives, and wife beating serves both to ensure continued compliance with their commands and as a resource for constructing a “damaged” patriarchal masculinity. Thus, wife beating increases (or is intended to do so) their control over women and, therefore, over housework, child care, and sexual activity.104
There are traditional patriarchal expectations that men are the authority figures in a relationship and that therefore men have the right to control those relationships how they see fit, “A man beats his wife to remind her that he has the power.”105
Jealousy and possessiveness have also been noted as prominent factors prompting men to engage in MVAW. Jealousy can be linked back to the perceived notion of “manliness,” as it is ultimately fear of not being considered “manly enough.” Therefore, behind the tough, jealous exterior lies man's gender insecurity and “his very real fear that his wife will choose another man and, thereby, judge him less 'manly' than his 'competitor'...wife beating reassures him that his wife is his to possess sexually.”106
Femininity traditionally encompasses traits such as nurturance and caring. Consequently, many women are taught to put others needs before their own, even if it compromises their own health, safety, or survival. Women have been socially conditioned to believe that they are inferior, and their internalized oppression can manifest in ways that greatly endanger them. In particular, many women who have been abused tend to believe that their love, patience and understanding will heal their abusive partner.107 This notion adds to their own self-blame, and may further inhibit them from seeki