Introduction
Violence against women takes place on many premises, however, in this paper the focus would be to understand that violence against women happens mostly on two fronts, at a family level and society level. This paper will seek to critically understand theories that explain the etiological factors on violence against women.
2) Defining abuse and violence.
The words abuse and violence are often used to mean “similar” issues and are often times used to mean one/or the same thing; however, as Gelles (1985: 350) indicates “the concepts “violence” and “Abuse” have frequently been used interchangeably by those who study violence. These concepts however are not conceptually equivalent. Moreover there are considerable variations in how each concept is nominally defined”.
Gelles and Straus (1979, in Gelles, 1985:353) have defined violence as an act carried out with the intention, or perceived intention of physically hurting another person” and Gelles (1985:353) adds that “this definition includes spankings and shovings as well as other forms of behavior; injury and/or death are also included in this broad definition”. On the other hand “abuse focused on acts of damaging physical violence directed towards women by their spouses or partners” (Gelles, 1974; Martin, 1976 cited in Gelles, 1985) “as wife abuse became recognized as a social problem, the definition was sometimes broadened to include sexual abuse, marital rape and even pornography” (London, 1978, in Gelles, 1985). In this paper the definitional complexity that these two words bring out would be deliberately neglected and these two words would be used interchangeably, for dwelling too much on ideological mishaps would be to miss the profound impact that consequences of actions that are inherently embedded in these two words bring out to the social world of women, after all, they are ‘knitly’ linked and inform each other.
3) Violence against women
At this far it is imperative to acknowledge that the post apartheid South Africa is facing numerous challenges which are a threat to the dreams of the freedom fighters, like Madiba and the others. Crime, poverty, HIV/ADS and violence have greatly become entrenched in the modern day South Africa. Looking at the later in particular, it is imperative to appreciate that violence against women has greatly become a major feature of the contemporary South African society. “In South Africa, violence has become normative and, to a large extent accepted rather than challenged” (Simpson, 1992; Wood, Maforah, and Jewkes, 1998 cited in Outwater, Abrahams, Campbell, 2005: 139). Families and the society at large are greatly impacted by this social ill, with women being the most impacted upon by this social phenomenon. “Two population prevalence studies have documented high levels of violence against women and that one in four women reported having been abused by a partner” (Jewkes, Levin and Penn-Kekana, 2001; South African Law Commission, 2002 in Outwater et al, 2005: 137). Thus women experience a lot of violence perpetrated against them by men and most of which come in the form of physical and sexual violence. “A prevalence study among working men in Cape Town found that 42% of them reported the use of physical violence and nearly 16% reported use of sexual violence against an intimate partner with whom they had a relationship in the past 10 years” (Abrahams, 2002, cited in Outwater et al, 2005:137,138). While it is difficult to tell emotional and psychological abuse that women experience at the hands of men, the experience of the former two forms of abuse, sexual and physical is an important pointer to their experience of the later two forms of abuse, emotional and psychological abuse and equally be a cause of emotional or psychological distress; as Sen (2006:220) indicates “rather they speak to each other and sometimes strongly encourage one another…may not only move together –be covariant- but they may be linked to each other through causal connections”.
The following part of the paper will now explore critically some of the theoretical perspectives underpinning the etiological/causation of violence against women.
3.0) Theories on violence against women
3.1) Social learning theory.
This is a theory that was developed by one Albert Bandula around 1977; the major theoretical assumption in social learning theory is that children learn behaviors through observation and imitation of their models. Thus social learning theory advances the idea that parent and child interactions play a very key role in the child development and learning. “Observational learning was thus promoted to the role of prime mechanism whereby children acquire a behavioral repertoire that equips them for social living: a great deal of psychological development can be explained, Bandula believed, by the simple act of watching suitable models and subsequently reproducing their behavior, Freud too had stressed the role which identification with others plays in children development, and he too had singled the motive to be like parent as a significant force in their growth” (Schaffer, 1996: 23). Through this theoretical perspective it would be possible to explain that children’s exposure to violence in violent homes predisposes them to learning violence as an accepted norm. By extension, the influence that fathers have on the boy child as role models has got a profound impact the children’s capacity to replicate the violent behaviors that the fathers exhibit in the home. “Children in violent homes learn several lessons about conflict resolution. They are taught that violence is the appropriate way of resolving conflict in intimate relationships. These children learn that assaultive behavior and threats are very effective means to maintain power and control over other people” (Dhabicharan, 2004, cited in Mathe, 2007:139). It is thus imperative to affirm that fathers have got a profound impact on teaching the boy child what it takes to be a man and how to show love to women, it is through such modeling process that violent behaviors are maintained overtime, according to Thomas (1968, cited in Mathe, 2007:137), “the son directly internalizes the male role through his interaction with his father”. Thus the perceptions, the language used and the values that the fathers exhibit towards women in the house hold have equally got a profound impact on the knowledge formation about the perceptions that the male child has about women and how they should be treated. Thus when violence is used in relationships; ‘children learn that the victims of violence have brought this upon consequence upon themselves by their own behavior or by the fact that they are devalued by being a woman” (Dhabicharan, 2004, cited in Mathe, 2007:139). It is thus true to say that the family is a powerful tool through which knowledge and values are transmitted into the child systems from the parental system.
At this far it is also important to appreciate that although it is true that violent behaviors that fathers express to their women have got a profound impact as determinants of the behaviors that the boys in the family would exhibit, it is also equally true to say that children have the capacity to resist and “select what to imitate” (Schaffer, 1996:24). Although the children may look at the father in the house as a role model, they may equally look at the plight of the mother, her experience of violence and abuse as a point of critical reflection through which they would despise the father for subjecting their mother to such horrible experiences. Thus this may serve as a motivation to always treat women and others more respectfully and different to how the father treated their mother.
3.2) Social disorganization theory
“Social disorganization theory suggests that neighborhood poverty, residential instability, and ethnic heterogeneity attenuate the community level capacity to regulate local crime. Poverty diminishes the resources necessary to sustain basic institutions like the family, churches, schools, and voluntary organizations”, (Browning, 2002:834). It is important to indicate that concentrated disadvantage in a community has got a profound impact on the mental health of the community members. The stress levels in socio-economically deprived communities has the capacity to trigger violence against women, for women in most of these set ups in South Africa are economically dependent on the men, thus, the failure for the men to live a productive life in a socially disadvantaged community, threatens their very core understanding of who a man is, a provider for the home. “Consistent finding in domestic violence research is that violence is highly related to social stress. Life events research has indicated that negative life events, especially those threatening the status of the traditional male role, are highly related to spousal abuse” (Gelles, 1987, 1989; Steinmetz, 1987, cited in McKenry, Julian and Gavazzi, 1995:310).
A coherent working community, in which people’s contributive capacity is acknowledged, their freedoms and the socio-economic wellness guaranteed, has got as a profound impact on the wellness of its members and the quality of their behaviors. ‘the prevalence and density of kinship, friendship, and acquaintanceship networks and the level of participation in community based organizations contribute to the emergence of solidarity and mutual trust, or social cohesion among community residents, In turn social cohesion promotes effective social controls or a community capacity to monitor and manage criminogenic social situations” (Browning, 2002: 834). At same time such working communities provide a system through which the weak of its members are protected and cushioned against malfunctioning elements of its systems. The strength of such communities lies in its capacity to provide the social capital network through which women in particular can draw the strength. “They may be more likely to elicit the disclosure of conflict and violence in intimate partnership from women who are experiencing these things. Disclosure to potential sources of support is a critical mechanism by which women leverage the social control capacities of their environment” (Bowker, 1983; Fagan, 1992 in Browning, 2002:834)
Thus in many ways the rupture of the social system has got direct impact on the people within its fold, the socio-disorganization of the communities and increased levels of poverty and unemployment have a direct and un-indirect causal effect on the tensions and stress levels in relationships and in the reduction of the collective efficacy of the community.
3.3) State-centric theory
The organization of the state as a bureaucratic machinery has profound influence in the people’s total livelihood and it equally has a powerful influence on the sustenance and perpetuation of violence against women. State centric perspective argues for the premise that the hierarchical organization of the state is deeply acculturated to the patriarchal dominance. “The neutral nature of the liberal democratic state as a bureaucracy and the apparent objectivity of the law as it applies to the abstract, independent citizen with rights in the polity mask the ways in which state policy reinforces gender inequality. One way is by propping up the ideology of the family and personal life as private locations, thus neutralizing the family as a sphere of social life where power does not normally impinge" (Eisenstein,1984, 1988; Fraser, 1990; Gordon, 1990; Pateman,1989, cited in Bush, 1992: 590). At the same time, the implementation of neo-liberal capitalists informed policies puts families far removed from state responsibility and relegated into the periphery of social economic consumption, where experience of social ills like poverty, violence, unemployment and HIV/AIDS are blamed on the individuals and families inability to cope in the fast paced world. However, in this perspective “the individual versus society is seen as a false dichotomy as private troubles cannot be understood and dealt with outside their socio-economic and cultural dynamics that promote class systems” (Sewpaul, 2003:311)
So although the state may put across a lot of legislative frameworks through which inequality and violence against women can be managed but the structural arrangements in which these legislative processes are embedded in, are not conducive for unbiased application. With reference to the case in which one South African senior politician was being accused of raping a woman and a daughter of his comrade, the woman’s dressing and the fact that she had visited him at night as well as her sexual history that of being raped in the past and the politician’s construction of his behavior in his cultural realm were elevated by the judiciary beyond the plight of this woman; and any other victim of rape might perceive the state as being biased towards abusers. Again it is important to appreciate that such processes have got a profound impact on formation of wrong ideological perceptions in the public about women and how women should be treated. O’Neill (1998, cited in Bassadein and Hochfield, 2005:7) illustrates the power of discursive practices in the field of domestic violence by plainly foregrounding the link between how we think about a phenomena and how we act on what we ‘know’. In other words, the way we understand violence against women in the home, informs not just an overt theoretical perspective but also how we think about, respond to, allocate resources for and offer services for survivors and perpetrators of the violence”. Thus violence against women in South Africa is in many ways an indictment on the state and its policies that sustain and entrench patriarchal discourses. ‘‘These discourses tend to privatize domestic violence, obstruct violence from becoming the business of the state and reinforce a patriarchal status quo, all of which can be harmful to women”, (Bassadein and Hochfield, 2005:9)
3.4) Biopsychosocial perspective
“The biopsychosocial perspective is an attempt to understand health and illness through an appreciation of how biological, psychological, and social elements persist in affiliation with one another”(McKenry, Julian and Gavazzi, 1995: 307). This theoretical perspective argues for the premise that social, biological and psychological factors work in concert in influencing a person’s capacity to be potentially violent. “here biological systems factors are thought to exist in and interact with psychological systems factors, both of which are hypothesized to exist in and interact with family and other social systems factors” (McKenry, Julian and Gavazzi, 1995:308). Thus the interplay of these facets of a human being have in many ways the capacity to be predispositional factors to violent behaviors. “For example, Dabbs and Morris (1990, cited in McKenry et al, 1995:308) found that relationships between testosterone and antisocial tendencies in a sample of males were moderated by their socio-economic status”. At the same time Julian and McKenry (1993, cited in McKenry et al, 1995:308) reported that men’s intimate relationship quality and depression levels predicted male violence towards female partners” and in addition Leonard and Blane (1992, in McKenry et al, 1995:308) “in a national sample of young men, found that the relationship between alcohol use and marital aggression was moderated by both the males level of hostility and level of marital satisfaction”. Thus the complexity of a human being is that the hormonal system has got an important impact as a determinant of the behaviors, Meyer-Bahlburg (1981, in McKenry et al, 1995: 308, 309) “contended that to understand aggression, there is need to increase our understanding of the role of androgens. A recent comprehensive literature review has indicated that, in a majority of studies, high testosterone levels tend to co-vary with high probability of aggressive behaviors, dominance status, and pathological forms of aggression”. Finally, Booth and Dabbs (1993, cited in McKenry et al, 1995: 309) found in the in their sample of former servicemen that testosterone was positively and linearly related to every aspect of marital quality, including hitting or throwing things at spouses”. Violence towards women is as a result of these biological, social and psychological factors functioning in concert with each other.
Humans function as a systems in systems which mediate on ones imbalances, thus although biological or social or psychological elements may predispose the person towards violence and aggression towards the opposite sex, the complimentarity of the systems prevents such from being the case. It is thus true that not all men have got into violent behaviors just because of a failure in one dimension of their lives, however for preventive understanding, the theoretical perspectives underpinning violence toward women as exemplified and illustrated in the biopsychosocial perspective should equally be seriously acknowledged.
3.5 Cultural perspective
The intersection between violence and culture is a phenomenon that manifests itself in most of the violence that women experience. This is particularly evident in patriarchal dominant set ups, in which women subjugation to the men is a norm. As Mathe (2007:137) indicates “violence against women is always embedded in patriarchy as an ideology and structure of domination. Fathers are viewed as kings and gods of their families….their fathers infected them from a very young age with the ‘power and control over women’ disease and the subject of ‘respect for women’s rights and dignity’ is an alien to them”. For the men power and control over women’s life is part fulfillment of the roles subscribed to their perceptions of who a man is and how a man is supposed to behave. Thus their identity and their world view as constructed in a patriarchal dominant culture, has acculturated and inculcated in them the perceptions that women are less equal to men and that they are socially and politically supposed to be managed and controlled by the men. “Like femininity, masculinity operates politically at different levels. At one level it is a form of identity, a means of self understanding that structures personal attitudes and behaviors. At another distinct but related level masculinity can be seen as a form of ideology in that it represents a set of cultural ideals that define appropriate roles, values and expectations for and of men” (Leach, 1994, cited in Khumalo, 2005:89).
The construction and understanding of violence against women by the men as constructed in the realm of cultural understandings is thus construed as an appropriate and justified behavior. At the same time women’s construction of their identity too, in this perspective become ‘complicit with oppression’ (Fook, 2002) of themselves. They equally perceive themselves as less equal to the men and that they deserve to be subjugated to the male authority. Thus patriarchal power plays its role on both the women and the men front.
4) Conclusion
Violence against women is a major problem that women in South Africa and across are experiencing, so although this paper has explored the theoretical explanations underpinning the behavior, it is imperative to again indicate that an understanding of these perspectives should be used as a guide to broader preventive strategies than an explanation to justify wrong behaviors which are detrimental to the women’s livelihood.
References
Bassadein, S and Hochfield, T (2005) Across the public/private boundary: contextualizing domestic violence in South Africa. In Agenda 66 (1) 4-15
Browning, C. R (2002) The span of collective efficacy: Extending disorganization theory to partner violence. In Journal of Marriage and the Family. 64 (4) 833-850. Accessed at http://www.jstor.org/stable/3599986%20on%2028/04/09%20at%2011.45%20a.%20m
Bush, D. M (1992) Women’s movement and the policy reform aimed at domestic violence against women: A comparison of the consequences of movement mobilization in the U.S. and India. In Gender and Society, 6(4) 587-608. Sage Publications. Accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/189727%20on%2001/05/2009 at 3.45pm.
Fook, J (2002) Social work: critical theory and practice. Sage Publication.
Gelles, R. J (1985) Family violence. In Annual Review of Sociology. 11, 347-367. accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083298%20on%2028/04/09 at 12:40p. m.
Khumalo, B(2005) The role of men in the struggle for gender equality: Possibilities for positive engagement. In Agenda Special Focus, 2005.
Mathe, S (2007) Juvenile sexual offenders: we are the sons of our fathers. In Agenda, 74, 2007.
McKenry, P. C, Julian, T. W and Gavazzi, S. M (1995) Towards a biopsychosocial model of domestic violence. In Journal of Marriage and the Family. 57(2) 307-320. Accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/353685%20on%2028/04/09%20at%2010:45 a.m.
Outwater, A, Abrahams, N and Campbell, J. C (2005) Women in South Africa: Intentional violence and HIV/IDS: intersections and prevention. In Journal of Black Studies. 35(4) 135-154. Sage Publications. Accessed on http://www.jstor.org/stable/40027215%20on%2001/05/09 at 4.05pm
Schaffer, H. R (1996) Social development. Blackwell Publishing. Oxford
The words abuse and violence are often used to mean “similar” issues and are often times used to mean one/or the same thing; however, as Gelles (1985: 350) indicates “the concepts “violence” and “Abuse” have frequently been used interchangeably by those who study violence. These concepts however are not conceptually equivalent. Moreover there are considerable variations in how each concept is nominally defined”.
Gelles and Straus (1979, in Gelles, 1985:353) have defined violence as an act carried out with the intention, or perceived intention of physically hurting another person” and Gelles (1985:353) adds that “this definition includes spankings and shovings as well as other forms of behavior; injury and/or death are also included in this broad definition”. On the other hand “abuse focused on acts of damaging physical violence directed towards women by their spouses or partners” (Gelles, 1974; Martin, 1976 cited in Gelles, 1985) “as wife abuse became recognized as a social problem, the definition was sometimes broadened to include sexual abuse, marital rape and even pornography” (London, 1978, in Gelles, 1985). In this paper the definitional complexity that these two words bring out would be deliberately neglected and these two words would be used interchangeably, for dwelling too much on ideological mishaps would be to miss the profound impact that consequences of actions that are inherently embedded in these two words bring out to the social world of women, after all, they are ‘knitly’ linked and inform each other.
3) Violence against women
At this far it is imperative to acknowledge that the post apartheid South Africa is facing numerous challenges which are a threat to the dreams of the freedom fighters, like Madiba and the others. Crime, poverty, HIV/ADS and violence have greatly become entrenched in the modern day South Africa. Looking at the later in particular, it is imperative to appreciate that violence against women has greatly become a major feature of the contemporary South African society. “In South Africa, violence has become normative and, to a large extent accepted rather than challenged” (Simpson, 1992; Wood, Maforah, and Jewkes, 1998 cited in Outwater, Abrahams, Campbell, 2005: 139). Families and the society at large are greatly impacted by this social ill, with women being the most impacted upon by this social phenomenon. “Two population prevalence studies have documented high levels of violence against women and that one in four women reported having been abused by a partner” (Jewkes, Levin and Penn-Kekana, 2001; South African Law Commission, 2002 in Outwater et al, 2005: 137). Thus women experience a lot of violence perpetrated against them by men and most of which come in the form of physical and sexual violence. “A prevalence study among working men in Cape Town found that 42% of them reported the use of physical violence and nearly 16% reported use of sexual violence against an intimate partner with whom they had a relationship in the past 10 years” (Abrahams, 2002, cited in Outwater et al, 2005:137,138). While it is difficult to tell emotional and psychological abuse that women experience at the hands of men, the experience of the former two forms of abuse, sexual and physical is an important pointer to their experience of the later two forms of abuse, emotional and psychological abuse and equally be a cause of emotional or psychological distress; as Sen (2006:220) indicates “rather they speak to each other and sometimes strongly encourage one another…may not only move together –be covariant- but they may be linked to each other through causal connections”.
The following part of the paper will now explore critically some of the theoretical perspectives underpinning the etiological/causation of violence against women.
3.0) Theories on violence against women
3.1) Social learning theory.
This is a theory that was developed by one Albert Bandula around 1977; the major theoretical assumption in social learning theory is that children learn behaviors through observation and imitation of their models. Thus social learning theory advances the idea that parent and child interactions play a very key role in the child development and learning. “Observational learning was thus promoted to the role of prime mechanism whereby children acquire a behavioral repertoire that equips them for social living: a great deal of psychological development can be explained, Bandula believed, by the simple act of watching suitable models and subsequently reproducing their behavior, Freud too had stressed the role which identification with others plays in children development, and he too had singled the motive to be like parent as a significant force in their growth” (Schaffer, 1996: 23). Through this theoretical perspective it would be possible to explain that children’s exposure to violence in violent homes predisposes them to learning violence as an accepted norm. By extension, the influence that fathers have on the boy child as role models has got a profound impact the children’s capacity to replicate the violent behaviors that the fathers exhibit in the home. “Children in violent homes learn several lessons about conflict resolution. They are taught that violence is the appropriate way of resolving conflict in intimate relationships. These children learn that assaultive behavior and threats are very effective means to maintain power and control over other people” (Dhabicharan, 2004, cited in Mathe, 2007:139). It is thus imperative to affirm that fathers have got a profound impact on teaching the boy child what it takes to be a man and how to show love to women, it is through such modeling process that violent behaviors are maintained overtime, according to Thomas (1968, cited in Mathe, 2007:137), “the son directly internalizes the male role through his interaction with his father”. Thus the perceptions, the language used and the values that the fathers exhibit towards women in the house hold have equally got a profound impact on the knowledge formation about the perceptions that the male child has about women and how they should be treated. Thus when violence is used in relationships; ‘children learn that the victims of violence have brought this upon consequence upon themselves by their own behavior or by the fact that they are devalued by being a woman” (Dhabicharan, 2004, cited in Mathe, 2007:139). It is thus true to say that the family is a powerful tool through which knowledge and values are transmitted into the child systems from the parental system.
At this far it is also important to appreciate that although it is true that violent behaviors that fathers express to their women have got a profound impact as determinants of the behaviors that the boys in the family would exhibit, it is also equally true to say that children have the capacity to resist and “select what to imitate” (Schaffer, 1996:24). Although the children may look at the father in the house as a role model, they may equally look at the plight of the mother, her experience of violence and abuse as a point of critical reflection through which they would despise the father for subjecting their mother to such horrible experiences. Thus this may serve as a motivation to always treat women and others more respectfully and different to how the father treated their mother.
3.2) Social disorganization theory
“Social disorganization theory suggests that neighborhood poverty, residential instability, and ethnic heterogeneity attenuate the community level capacity to regulate local crime. Poverty diminishes the resources necessary to sustain basic institutions like the family, churches, schools, and voluntary organizations”, (Browning, 2002:834). It is important to indicate that concentrated disadvantage in a community has got a profound impact on the mental health of the community members. The stress levels in socio-economically deprived communities has the capacity to trigger violence against women, for women in most of these set ups in South Africa are economically dependent on the men, thus, the failure for the men to live a productive life in a socially disadvantaged community, threatens their very core understanding of who a man is, a provider for the home. “Consistent finding in domestic violence research is that violence is highly related to social stress. Life events research has indicated that negative life events, especially those threatening the status of the traditional male role, are highly related to spousal abuse” (Gelles, 1987, 1989; Steinmetz, 1987, cited in McKenry, Julian and Gavazzi, 1995:310).
A coherent working community, in which people’s contributive capacity is acknowledged, their freedoms and the socio-economic wellness guaranteed, has got as a profound impact on the wellness of its members and the quality of their behaviors. ‘the prevalence and density of kinship, friendship, and acquaintanceship networks and the level of participation in community based organizations contribute to the emergence of solidarity and mutual trust, or social cohesion among community residents, In turn social cohesion promotes effective social controls or a community capacity to monitor and manage criminogenic social situations” (Browning, 2002: 834). At same time such working communities provide a system through which the weak of its members are protected and cushioned against malfunctioning elements of its systems. The strength of such communities lies in its capacity to provide the social capital network through which women in particular can draw the strength. “They may be more likely to elicit the disclosure of conflict and violence in intimate partnership from women who are experiencing these things. Disclosure to potential sources of support is a critical mechanism by which women leverage the social control capacities of their environment” (Bowker, 1983; Fagan, 1992 in Browning, 2002:834)
Thus in many ways the rupture of the social system has got direct impact on the people within its fold, the socio-disorganization of the communities and increased levels of poverty and unemployment have a direct and un-indirect causal effect on the tensions and stress levels in relationships and in the reduction of the collective efficacy of the community.
3.3) State-centric theory
The organization of the state as a bureaucratic machinery has profound influence in the people’s total livelihood and it equally has a powerful influence on the sustenance and perpetuation of violence against women. State centric perspective argues for the premise that the hierarchical organization of the state is deeply acculturated to the patriarchal dominance. “The neutral nature of the liberal democratic state as a bureaucracy and the apparent objectivity of the law as it applies to the abstract, independent citizen with rights in the polity mask the ways in which state policy reinforces gender inequality. One way is by propping up the ideology of the family and personal life as private locations, thus neutralizing the family as a sphere of social life where power does not normally impinge" (Eisenstein,1984, 1988; Fraser, 1990; Gordon, 1990; Pateman,1989, cited in Bush, 1992: 590). At the same time, the implementation of neo-liberal capitalists informed policies puts families far removed from state responsibility and relegated into the periphery of social economic consumption, where experience of social ills like poverty, violence, unemployment and HIV/AIDS are blamed on the individuals and families inability to cope in the fast paced world. However, in this perspective “the individual versus society is seen as a false dichotomy as private troubles cannot be understood and dealt with outside their socio-economic and cultural dynamics that promote class systems” (Sewpaul, 2003:311)
So although the state may put across a lot of legislative frameworks through which inequality and violence against women can be managed but the structural arrangements in which these legislative processes are embedded in, are not conducive for unbiased application. With reference to the case in which one South African senior politician was being accused of raping a woman and a daughter of his comrade, the woman’s dressing and the fact that she had visited him at night as well as her sexual history that of being raped in the past and the politician’s construction of his behavior in his cultural realm were elevated by the judiciary beyond the plight of this woman; and any other victim of rape might perceive the state as being biased towards abusers. Again it is important to appreciate that such processes have got a profound impact on formation of wrong ideological perceptions in the public about women and how women should be treated. O’Neill (1998, cited in Bassadein and Hochfield, 2005:7) illustrates the power of discursive practices in the field of domestic violence by plainly foregrounding the link between how we think about a phenomena and how we act on what we ‘know’. In other words, the way we understand violence against women in the home, informs not just an overt theoretical perspective but also how we think about, respond to, allocate resources for and offer services for survivors and perpetrators of the violence”. Thus violence against women in South Africa is in many ways an indictment on the state and its policies that sustain and entrench patriarchal discourses. ‘‘These discourses tend to privatize domestic violence, obstruct violence from becoming the business of the state and reinforce a patriarchal status quo, all of which can be harmful to women”, (Bassadein and Hochfield, 2005:9)
3.4) Biopsychosocial perspective
“The biopsychosocial perspective is an attempt to understand health and illness through an appreciation of how biological, psychological, and social elements persist in affiliation with one another”(McKenry, Julian and Gavazzi, 1995: 307). This theoretical perspective argues for the premise that social, biological and psychological factors work in concert in influencing a person’s capacity to be potentially violent. “here biological systems factors are thought to exist in and interact with psychological systems factors, both of which are hypothesized to exist in and interact with family and other social systems factors” (McKenry, Julian and Gavazzi, 1995:308). Thus the interplay of these facets of a human being have in many ways the capacity to be predispositional factors to violent behaviors. “For example, Dabbs and Morris (1990, cited in McKenry et al, 1995:308) found that relationships between testosterone and antisocial tendencies in a sample of males were moderated by their socio-economic status”. At the same time Julian and McKenry (1993, cited in McKenry et al, 1995:308) reported that men’s intimate relationship quality and depression levels predicted male violence towards female partners” and in addition Leonard and Blane (1992, in McKenry et al, 1995:308) “in a national sample of young men, found that the relationship between alcohol use and marital aggression was moderated by both the males level of hostility and level of marital satisfaction”. Thus the complexity of a human being is that the hormonal system has got an important impact as a determinant of the behaviors, Meyer-Bahlburg (1981, in McKenry et al, 1995: 308, 309) “contended that to understand aggression, there is need to increase our understanding of the role of androgens. A recent comprehensive literature review has indicated that, in a majority of studies, high testosterone levels tend to co-vary with high probability of aggressive behaviors, dominance status, and pathological forms of aggression”. Finally, Booth and Dabbs (1993, cited in McKenry et al, 1995: 309) found in the in their sample of former servicemen that testosterone was positively and linearly related to every aspect of marital quality, including hitting or throwing things at spouses”. Violence towards women is as a result of these biological, social and psychological factors functioning in concert with each other.
Humans function as a systems in systems which mediate on ones imbalances, thus although biological or social or psychological elements may predispose the person towards violence and aggression towards the opposite sex, the complimentarity of the systems prevents such from being the case. It is thus true that not all men have got into violent behaviors just because of a failure in one dimension of their lives, however for preventive understanding, the theoretical perspectives underpinning violence toward women as exemplified and illustrated in the biopsychosocial perspective should equally be seriously acknowledged.
3.5 Cultural perspective
The intersection between violence and culture is a phenomenon that manifests itself in most of the violence that women experience. This is particularly evident in patriarchal dominant set ups, in which women subjugation to the men is a norm. As Mathe (2007:137) indicates “violence against women is always embedded in patriarchy as an ideology and structure of domination. Fathers are viewed as kings and gods of their families….their fathers infected them from a very young age with the ‘power and control over women’ disease and the subject of ‘respect for women’s rights and dignity’ is an alien to them”. For the men power and control over women’s life is part fulfillment of the roles subscribed to their perceptions of who a man is and how a man is supposed to behave. Thus their identity and their world view as constructed in a patriarchal dominant culture, has acculturated and inculcated in them the perceptions that women are less equal to men and that they are socially and politically supposed to be managed and controlled by the men. “Like femininity, masculinity operates politically at different levels. At one level it is a form of identity, a means of self understanding that structures personal attitudes and behaviors. At another distinct but related level masculinity can be seen as a form of ideology in that it represents a set of cultural ideals that define appropriate roles, values and expectations for and of men” (Leach, 1994, cited in Khumalo, 2005:89).
The construction and understanding of violence against women by the men as constructed in the realm of cultural understandings is thus construed as an appropriate and justified behavior. At the same time women’s construction of their identity too, in this perspective become ‘complicit with oppression’ (Fook, 2002) of themselves. They equally perceive themselves as less equal to the men and that they deserve to be subjugated to the male authority. Thus patriarchal power plays its role on both the women and the men front.
4) Conclusion
Violence against women is a major problem that women in South Africa and across are experiencing, so although this paper has explored the theoretical explanations underpinning the behavior, it is imperative to again indicate that an understanding of these perspectives should be used as a guide to broader preventive strategies than an explanation to justify wrong behaviors which are detrimental to the women’s livelihood.
References
Bassadein, S and Hochfield, T (2005) Across the public/private boundary: contextualizing domestic violence in South Africa. In Agenda 66 (1) 4-15
Browning, C. R (2002) The span of collective efficacy: Extending disorganization theory to partner violence. In Journal of Marriage and the Family. 64 (4) 833-850. Accessed at http://www.jstor.org/stable/3599986%20on%2028/04/09%20at%2011.45%20a.%20m
Bush, D. M (1992) Women’s movement and the policy reform aimed at domestic violence against women: A comparison of the consequences of movement mobilization in the U.S. and India. In Gender and Society, 6(4) 587-608. Sage Publications. Accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/189727%20on%2001/05/2009 at 3.45pm.
Fook, J (2002) Social work: critical theory and practice. Sage Publication.
Gelles, R. J (1985) Family violence. In Annual Review of Sociology. 11, 347-367. accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2083298%20on%2028/04/09 at 12:40p. m.
Khumalo, B(2005) The role of men in the struggle for gender equality: Possibilities for positive engagement. In Agenda Special Focus, 2005.
Mathe, S (2007) Juvenile sexual offenders: we are the sons of our fathers. In Agenda, 74, 2007.
McKenry, P. C, Julian, T. W and Gavazzi, S. M (1995) Towards a biopsychosocial model of domestic violence. In Journal of Marriage and the Family. 57(2) 307-320. Accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/353685%20on%2028/04/09%20at%2010:45 a.m.
Outwater, A, Abrahams, N and Campbell, J. C (2005) Women in South Africa: Intentional violence and HIV/IDS: intersections and prevention. In Journal of Black Studies. 35(4) 135-154. Sage Publications. Accessed on http://www.jstor.org/stable/40027215%20on%2001/05/09 at 4.05pm
Schaffer, H. R (1996) Social development. Blackwell Publishing. Oxford
Picture by Riccardo la Valle on http://www.flickr.com/photos/21463954@N08/3327339071/
Sen, A (2005) The argumentative Indian: writings on Indian Culture, History and Identity. Penguin Books. London.
Sewpaul, V1993, The family as a focus for intervention for the prevention of mental disorder: An empowerment approach in the Journal of social work/Maatskaplike Werk: 1993:29(3)
