Lenton (1997) in her article compares the feminist theory with the interpersonal theory. Interpersonal power theorists emphasizes that the structure of society is the primary problem in violence against women. The theorists view family as “the product of a system of relation” (Lenton, p. 308). Straus (1980) observes that conflict in the family tends to increase violence. He also believes that there is an increase of violence in families that have high levels of stress, i.e., where people have difficulty coping with the many strains in their lives. Women are seen as being unequal to men in a nonegalitarian society. Power theorists believe that domestic violence against women is not only the result of a patriarchal society, but it is also due to class inequality, unemployment and early childhood abuse. Straus and Smith (1990) contend that “even if gender equality were achieved tomorrow, family violence would persist features of society unrelated to gender inequality, but specified by the power theory, such as an inegalitarian class structure, would continue to generate family violence”(Lenton, p. 308).
In a study conducted on women and men who have witness violence in their early childhood, Hotaling and Sugarman (1986) state that the studies report that that “abused women were more likely to have witnessed violence between their parents than women who were not abused and that 88% of the studies showed that abusive men were more likely to have witnessed violence between their parents than husbands who did not abuse their partners (p. 308).
Women in the traditional “sex-role socialization” are seen inferior to men. They also learn to submit to their husbands. Their husbands are the breadwinners, the source of income. Women feel obligated to their husbands because they are financially dependent on them. The many restrictions put on women in society, create conflict in the family. One analysis about gender role in society demonstrates that a high level of marital conflict is statistically associated with an increase in the likelihood of wife assault (Hotaling and Sugarman, 1990).
Lenton (1995) believes that marital conflict is due to a power structure in the family. When conflict occurs in an unbalanced way, there is much more risk for violence in the marriage as a result of power imbalance.
The feminist theorist holds that male dominance ideology “is the key factor underlying wife abuse” (Dobash and Dobash, 1979). The feminist theorists say that in a patriarchal society, a woman is expected to live up to her husband’s expectation, and that failing to do so results in marital conflict. The husbands in the same way have many expectations from society that pressure them to maintain dominance and control over their family. Dobash and Dobash (1988) believed that “men learn violent techniques and the appropriate contexts their use through a male culture that condones for their use violence (p.311).
Bowker (1983) observes “severity and frequency of beating increased in proportion of the amount of time that the batter spent with male friends… A Male patriarchal subculture of wife beaters socializes its members into the ideology of male dominance, including the prerogative to use force to keep wives in line” (p. 311).
In comparing interpersonal power theory with feminist theory, interpersonal theorists do not believe that sexual inequality alone is sufficient to explain female abuse. Instead, they believed that many factors contribute to female abuse such as power imbalance, occupational status and unemployment. Lenton (1995) did not say which theory better explains domestic violence against women. Rather, she explores both interpersonal theory and feminist theory. Interpersonal power theory provides a list of factors that can contribute to violence against women.
Tilly (1998) opines that “large, significant inequalities in advantages among human beings correspond mainly to categorical differences such as black/white, male/ female, rather to individual differences in attributes, propensities or performances” (p. 7). In the case of domestic violence, the durable inequality is within social class, gender and occupational status. Power imbalance is correlated to all factors noted before as predictors of violence against women. These issues should be analyzed in depth in order to understand domestic violence. Domestic violence is a social problem that should be studied in the social context rather at the individual level. Men behave violently as a response to society that pressures them to have power over their partners.
However, socioeconomic status plays a role in domestic violence. Hotaling and Surgarman (1986), in a review of over 400 empirical reports on husband to wife violence, found that higher educational level was associated with less violence in more than half of the studies that examined in their analyses. Straus (1980), for example, found that partner violence is most common among people who have high school diplomas or less. People who have more education are more likely to have a stable and well paying job, and less financial difficulty than low-paid or unemployed individuals. “ Households in which the husband is unemployed or employed only part time have increased rates of violence, particularly severe violence (Kantor and Jasinski, 1997, p.16). Domestic violence occurs at a greater rate in families that have incomes below $ 20,000.
Research conducted on occupational status suggests that it is related to partner violence. Violence is likely to occur in partners where the husband has a much higher status than his wife. Research suggests that wife beating is more common in households where the power is concentrated in the hands of the husband or male partner. Women are less likely to leave violent relationships because they depend on husbands to support them and their children.
Alcohol consumption is also related to domestic violence. Gelles (1972) reports that almost one half of batterers are under the influence of alcohol at the time of the incident. Alcohol is associated with violent behavior. Men who grow up in abusive alcoholic families are more likely to exhibit violence against their wives. “The relationship between alcohol consumption patterns and intra-family violence revealed a significant effect of a family history of violence and current family alcohol use on the incidence of wife abuse”(kantor and Jasinski, 1997, p. 13).
Race is a factor that affects domestic violence in different groups. However, due to differences in cultural belief and discrimination, African Americans are often stereotypes as being more violent than white Americans. Locke and Richman (1999) opine that stereotypes can direct the type of information perceivers seek about social targets and negatively influence their behaviors toward social targets. (p.229). African Americans as a result to the stereotyping, “black males who behave aggressively are judged more harshly than their whites counterparts are judged… And arrests of black domestic violence batterers are more common than arrests of whites domestic violence batterer” (Harrison, 2000, p. 1044). Negative stereotypes against black men influence the way they behave in society. According to the labeling theory, people who are labeled as deviant in society tend to act deviant in society.
However, there are many factors that contribute to violence against minority groups, such as low income, low education and stressful lifestyles. Women in minority groups tend to experience domestic violence more than white women. They are socially disadvantaged and they have low socioeconomic status. They also tend to have less education than white women. Domestic violence in minorities group tends to not be reported to the police. Krishman et al. (1997) find that “more Anglo study subjects reported the violence to law enforcement or sought medical attention than Hispanic and African American subjects… Among The Hispanic study subjects, issues of fear and distrust of the formal helping system, lack of knowledge about formal helping systems, concerns about immigration status, the barriers they experience, and the deep-routed social and cultural norms may all contribute to their perception of severity of violence and their preferred ways of seeking help” (p. 41).
III- Domestic Violence Prevention and Education
However, to prevent domestic violence among abused women, shelters should be available to battered women. “The victims need should be the first priority in effort to fight violence against women”(Schuler, 1992). Women should be educated more about domestic violence. They need to educate themselves about safety issues so that they will not become involved in abusive relationships. Schuler (1992) argues that to eliminate violence against women in the house is to change the underlying cultural values of society, the structure supporting violence against women. Women should not accept their role in society as low status individuals. Instead, they need to be strong individuals. They need to get more education so they can achieve independence from their abusers.
The batterers as well need to be educated about domestic and they need to develop strategies to control their anger toward their wives. They should identify the cause of their anger and hatred toward women and they should look for ways to change their attitudes toward women in general. For low-income families, domestic violence is associated with poverty and an inability of the husband or partner to get good paying jobs to support their families. Before low income men can work on their domestic violence issues, they should at least consider acquiring job skills and more education in order to get stables jobs.
It is important to note that studies done on domestic violence have some limitations. For example, many studies have difficulty to explaining the cause of domestic violence in their studies. Many studies fail to explain the gender inequality in their research studies or do not find any correlation between gender differences and domestic violence. Interpersonal power theorists tend to be gender neutral. They are more focused on the influence of power imbalance in the society. Feminist theorists on the other hand, focus on gender inequality and they ignore other factors that can as well be the cause of violence. Lenton (1997) combines these two theories to explain her view about women violence. She concludes, “ It is necessary to include both individual and societal level variables in any full analysis of intrafamilial violence (p. 322).
Domestic violence is a serious worldwide problem. Women of all cultures and various backgrounds are battered by their partners. But women in minority groups are more victimized by domestic violence than women from high socioeconomic status. Domestic violence is a major result of homelessness among women. It is important to implement programs for women that are based on education, prevention and intervention strategies in abusive relationships. Although battering men should be reeducated about domestic violence and they should have better ways to treat women and they should also control their anger. Both the interpersonal power theory and the feminist theory address the primary points of influencing domestic violence against women over the years. The power imbalance dominates both theories in Lenton’s (1995) article. Interpersonal power theory considers inequality in the power that exists in the society such as class inequality and imbalance of power.
Men and women are treated differently in the society. Men are often seen as the power figure in society and in order for them to maintain power, they have to be in control at all times. The feminist theory blames female abuse on a patriarchal society that gives too much power to men and expects women to submit to them. Domestic violence is a problem of class inequality, gender inequality, and power imbalance in the society.
References
Adam, D. (1989). “Identifying the Assaultive Husband in Court: You be the
Judge.” Boston Bar Journal, p. 33-41..
Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. P. (1979). “Violence against Wives: A Case against the
Patriarchy.” New York: Free Press.
Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. (1988). “ Research as Social Action: The Struggle for
Battered Women.” In Kersti Yllo and Michelle Bograd (eds.). Feminist Perspectives
on Wife Abuse. Newbury Park. CA: Sage.
Gelles, R. J., & Straus, M. A. (1979). “ Determinants of Violence in the Family: Toward
a Theoretical integration.” Wesley, B. R., Rueben, H. F., Nye, I., & Reiss, I. T.
(eds.). Contemporary Theories about the Family: Research-Based Theories, Vol. (1).
New York: Free Press.
Hotaling, G. T., & Sugarman, D. B. (1986). “ An analysis of Risk Markers in Husband
to Wife Violence: The Current State of Knowledge.” Violence and Victims, 1 (2):
p.101-124.
Hornung, C. A., McCullough, B. C., Sugimoto, T. (1981). “ Status Relationships in
Marriage: Risk Factors in Spouse Abuse.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43:
675-692.
Hotaling, G. T., & Sugarman, D. B. (1990). “ A Risk Marker Analysis of Assaulted
Wives.” Journal of Family Violence, 5 (1): 1-13.
Kantor, G. T., & Jasinski, J. L. (1997). “ Dynamics of Partner Violence and Types of
Abuse and Abusers.” http:// www.agnr.umd.edu/nnfr/research/pv/pv_ch1.htm
Krishman, S. P., Hilbert, J. C., Vanleeuwen, D., Kolia, R,. (1997). “ Documenting
Domestic Violence among Ethically Diverse Population: Results from primary
Study.” Family and Community Health, Vol. (2). P.32-49.
Lenton. R. (1995a). “Power versus feminist theories of wife abuse.” Canadian Journal of
Criminology 37 (3): 305-330.
Lenton, R. (1995b). “ Feminist versus interpersonal power theories of wife abuse
revisited.” Canadian Journal of Criminology. 37: 567-573.
Locke, L. M., & Richman, C. L. (1999). “Attitude toward domestic violence: race and
gender issues.” A Journal of Research (Feb.): 40, P. 227-240.
Schuler, M. (1992).” Violence against women: An International Perspective. In Freedom
from Violence: Women Strategies from Around the World, edited by Margaret
Schuler.” New York: UNIFEM.
Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring Intrafamily Conflict and Violence: The Conflict Tactics
(CT) Scales.” Journal of Marriage and the Family (Feb.): 75-88.
Rybarik, M., Gilmore, G., & Krajewski, S. (1995). “ Violence in Relationshiips: A
seventh Grade Inventory in Knowledge and Attitudes.” Journal of Family Violence,
10 (2): 223-251.
Tilly, C. (1998). “Durable inequality.” University of California Press.
