The Sociological Perspective On The Structure Of Social Violence And The Complexity Of Violence

Domestic violence is something that happens every day around the world. Young, old, rich or poor, this is an issue that we must look at to better ourselves as a country. One of the things that we look at is how domestic violence relates to the different social classes of the country, this being upper, middle, and lower. Some would thing that it would be more common in lower classes, but the reality of it is domestic violence is a problem across all social classes. In this paper I will discuss different articles about domestic violence and its relation to social class. It is clear to see that many of the articles on this topic focus around women as victims and men get put into a category of the only ones committing violence. From different

However in many cases women even with some formal education stayed in the marriage because of fear of stigmatization, losing her children, and negative attitudes towards employing a female in the labour market. It was interesting to note that many women who had some formal education suffered from more intense violence. It could be because these women are more aware of their rights and are more likely to question their husbands’ behaviour. This could be seen as defiant and disrespectful to the husband which would result in abuse of greater intensity. This could also be confirmed by the fact that younger girls who are likely to have a higher level of education and awareness than the older generation face greater violence because they criticize this culture of violence instead of quietly accepting it as a norm.

Domestic violence (at a glance) is considered to be a private matter; it is something that occurs between couples in the privacy of their homes and affects the individuals involved personally (Knoblock, 2008). But if we look closer, domestic violence is largely driven by social forces and structures (Furze, Savy, Brym, Lie, 2008). Ideologies and social norms about men and women such as patriarchy and gender inequalities contribute greatly to the occurrence of domestic violence in society. Hence C. Wright Mills’s concept of the sociological imagination, “the quality of mind to see what is going on in the world and what may be happening within themselves,” (1959, as cited by Furze et al, 2008, p8) can be applied to domestic violence for it

The article constructs domestic violence as an issue of gender, race and socioeconomic status. Women are identified as the “majority” of victims (Taylor 2014). Consequently, the article conceptually represents domestic violence as events of intimate terrorism where one partner violently terrorizes the other partner to gain complete control over the relationship, which is entirely perpetrated by men (Johnson 2012). With that said, Johnson (2012) points out that majority of domestic violence is situational couple violence, where both the man and the

Violence against women has existed for centuries and women experience violence in many setting; however, domestic violence is the most prevalent. Abela and Walker (2014) explain that the women’s right movement took place because women were maltreated and oppressed (78). They state that the victimization of women was the reason why the second wave of the feminist movement arose. They also explain that during this time, laws in the Untied States allow men to hit their wives (Abela & Walker 79). Women from different cultures and different economic status have been victims of domestic violence. In this paper, I will focus on domestic violence against women from different cultures. I will present information about the history of domestic violence

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO,2010) a key element to preventing gendered violence is achieving gender equality. Similarly, the Senate report on Domestic Violence and Gender Inequality (Commonwealth of Australia, 2016) recognises that gender inequality in all aspects of life is a main contributor to the prevalence of domestic violence in Australia (p. 3). The United Nations’ (UN) likewise argues that Violence against women is rampant throughout history because of unequal power relations between men and women (UN,

Cindy L. Seaman, Linda J. Rubin, and Sally D. Stabb, all affiliated with Texas Woman’s University, composed the article: Women Domestic Violence Offenders: Lessons of Violence and Survival 2007. In result of the growing problem of women that are more frequently being arrested for assaulting their partners, the need for exploration and research to investigate this phenomenon, along with women’s motivations for current violence, was necessary. The author’s purpose and intent of the article was to highlight current intervention methods of domestic abuse and causation of why women choose to assault. By exploring this epidemic, perhaps treatment intervention methods could be discovered and implemented. In the introduction Seaman, Rubin, and Stabb brought necessary insight to the controversy over family conflict studies opposed to crime studies. The inconsistency with both reports is crucial when looking at women in relation to domestic abuse. This is because data conflicts. Family studies show an increase in both men and women abusers; claiming women abuse just as frequent as men. However, in crime studies and police statistics, reports indicate a much lower assault rate for women. Therefore, the authors chose a qualitative study, in hopes to discover why such data conflicts and to shed light on, perhaps, two different concepts altogether. The idea that couple-conflict is different from the idea of patriarchal terrorism, committed by

The model demonstrates the interaction ‘between individual, relationship, community and societal factors’ (CDC, 2015). The first level identifies individual factors which can increase the likelihood to become a victim or a perpetrator. Individual factors can be; the age, low level of education, but also violent childhood, sexual abuse in childhood as well as alcohol and drugs and personality disorders (CDC, 2015 and WHO ,2012, p.4).The second level of the model describes the relationship factors; this can be conflicts in the partnership such as displeasure or the women has a higher education as her partner which leads to /or increase low self-esteem by the male partner but also economic inequalities can be crucial ( CDC,2015 and WHO ,2012, p.4).The third and fourth level ( community and societal factors) developed through diverse studies with regard to intimidate partner violence and demonstrates the influences of environment such as poverty, social acceptance of violence, belief of gender role and misconstruction of norms, such as the man has the right to discipline the women or the women deserves punishment ,but also low social and economic status are determined ( CDC ,2015 and WHO ,2012, p.4).Studies occupy that intimate partner violence has massively physical and psychosomatically consequences to the victims. Moreover, other pathways such as chronic sicknesses such as depressions, phobias and other disease can arise. Accordingly, to the WHO (2012) and FRA (2012) survey, women who experienced domestic violence have a higher risk to commit suicide compared with women in a non-abusive relationship. In addition, violence can lead to reproductive health consequences such as abortion, unwanted pregnancies, miscarriages and negative sexual behaviour. Above all, evidence shows that also the

Only twenty years ago, domestic violence was seen as a private family matter rather than of public community concern. During the 1960’s and 70’s, second wave feminism and the Battered Women’s Movement highlighted the problem of family violence to the fore, where individuals assisted victims by providing shelter for women and children and taking political action to advocate the hidden societal causation of the violence; gender inequality. The social issue up until this stage had little to none empirical knowledge, theoretical explanations were not exposed and social workers were not effectively trained to assist with the problem. Family violence initially occurs at a micro level within the home, but is a much larger macro issue. Domestic violence

Over the past forty years, studies and research have constantly found that women and men engage in violence at similar rates. Family Violence Surveys suggest that “The phenomenon of husband battering” (1977) is as, if not more, common than wife abuse. However, despite the plentiful evidence and studies that support this fact, violence committed by females is largely ignored throughout the areas of literature and media. These areas, instead, choose to consistently suggest that domestic violence is only committed by males. Through this action, or inaction, to recognize the general topic within the discussion, the occurrence of female

Structural violence has become a frequently used instrument in the word of systemic oppression. This type of oppression and unfair limitations of civil, criminal and basic human rights can cause suffering and death to many innocent lives. Sociologist Johan Galtung was the one who developed this theory of structural violence. Indicated in one of his articles “Violence, Peace, and Peace Research”, structural violence is the “systematic constraint on human potential due to economic and political structures” (Galtung, 1969, p.177). Galtung is telling the readers that certain groups of people are systematically being limited to resources in society either directly or indirectly. Structural violence has been described as the “most basic of fundamental form of violence, as it is expressive of the conditions of society that reproduce mass violations of personhood twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week” (Barak, 2003, p.113). This demonstrates that structural violence is an on-going way to steal ones opportunities in society. Racism, sexism, classism and ageism are all examples of structural violence. It can be visible and invisible and can cause disadvantages for people who are considered poor or a minority within society. Structural violence is extremely important as it could lead to poverty, starvation, sicknesses and deaths. Although structural violence is a powerful and common method of ferocity, there are agents of change who locally and globally contribute to the

Domestic violence is an issue in almost every corner in the world. It is a public health and human rights issue. The accepted levels of violence have changed with history and varies between societies. Here in the United States, according to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, on average nearly 20 people per minute are physically abused. 1 in 3 women have been victims of physical violence from an intimate partner. The presence of a gun increases the risk of homicide by 500%. On average 3 women are killed each day by an intimate partner, Intimate partner violence is 15% of all violent crime. An analysis done by Every Town for Gun Safety found that 54% of mass shootings were related to domestic or family violence. This paper will be looking at the problem of domestic violence in the United States through the sociological conflict feminist theory.

Domestic Violence is a human tragedy, and has been a part of life for many individuals. It is not subjective to a particular group, race, or culture. Historically, the feminist movement preserved the theory that domestic violence is a growing matter because of the continuous power differential between the male gender and the female gender. Remarkably, this approach on domestic disputes unveiled the inner workings of barriers men, women, and children would face when in a domestic violence situation. The feminist theory emphasizes on studying “the gendered nature of all relationships…which aims at understanding how gender is related to social inequalities and oppression” (Marsigila & Kulis, 2015, p. 148). Disastrously, an ignorant notion that once dominated our culture was the belief that emotional agony was less painful than physical brutality. However,

The term violence brings to memory an image of physical or emotional assault on a person. In most circumstances, the person affected due to violence is aware that a violent action has been performed on that person. There is another form of violence where the affected individual, in most cases are unaware of the violence inflicted upon them. These types of violence are termed as structural violence. Structural violence is a form of invisible violence setup by a well-defined system, to limit an individual’s development to his full potential, by using legal, political, social or cultural traditions (Winter and Leighton, 1).

The purpose of this paper is to explore patriarchal values that reinforce violence towards women in intimate partner relationships. This paper argues that patriarchy and the social construction of masculinity reproduce male violence against women. The following sub-issues that that will be discussed are patriarchy, capitalism, the religion of Islam, and the construction of masculinity and femininity. All the sub-issues encompass patriarchy values which allows inmate partner violence.