Differences in the Definition of Violence Between Men and Women - Research Paper Example

?Running Head: VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN Differences in the definition of violence between men and women The research forthis study was done in order to understand how men and women perceive violence and if there are any difference. The research was done through both an interview of three participants and a questionnaire survey of fifty participants. Through this mixed method of primary research, a framework about violence was created in order to explore the way in which men and women define physically aggressive acts. The disparity reveals that women define violence in broader terms than men, thus creating a gap between the genders in the way in which they perceive aggressive acts. This disparity can contribute to social study on the topic of violence between the genders, in particular, violence against women, in learning how best to inform and educate on the topic of violence. In addition, social policy can be framed according to an understanding of these gaps so that more effective results in ending violence against women in order to have a more satisfied population. Differences in the definition of violence between men and women Introduction This study was conducted with the purpose of understanding the ways in which differences are observed in defining violence between men and women. Men, typically seen as a more aggressive gender, provide a contrast to the way in which women see violence. Women typically are put on alert when any aggressive action is made by a man, while men often do not interpret an aggressively physical action as violence. This difference may be due to the way in which men engage in sports in comparison to women or through the wider space of vulnerability that women experience in comparison to men. Studying the ways in which men and women perceive violence will allow for a greater framework for society to determine how to respond to physically aggressive actions in society. A mixed method form of research was done in order to study the topic of the research. An interview was conducted with three participants who helped to discuss the importance of the intended research. In addition, a survey was conducted with 50participants in order to assess the way in which men define violence in comparison to women. Through examining the results of both the qualitative and quantitative study, a discussion was made about the issue of violence and the way in which it is perceived by both genders. Research questions help to narrow the way in which a study is approached. The following research questions will be used to frame the topic of study: 1. What is the definition of violence for men? 2. What is the definition of violence for women? 3. How does a man respond to violence? 4. How does a woman respond to violence? 5. What factors contribute to the differences about the perceptions of violence between men and women? Through exploring different aspects of these questions by creating a survey instrument that studies concepts that lead towards the answers of the research question, the research can become meaningful in regard to the hypotheses. The following hypotheses provide for a null hypothesis and its alternative for which the research will be conducted. Hypotheses Null Hypothesis: Men and women define violence differently and therefore experience physically aggressive behavior differently. Alternative Hypothesis: Men and women define violence the same and therefore experience physically aggressive behavior the same. Literature Review Anderson and Taylor (2008) suggest that the inequality between genders can be explained through frameworks of sociological theories which include functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interaction. Anderson and Taylor (2008) state that functionalists belief that male roles as instrumental and female roles as expressive. Functional theory supports static roles for the genders, thus creating conflict with feminists who believe that static roles are limiting to women. The organization of social roles contributes to the inequality as the choices of women place them in roles that create inequality, but adapt to the needs of family and work which results in this disparity. Conflict theory supports that “wage inequality is produced from the power that men have historically had to devalue women’s work” (p. 325). Symbolic interaction is a theory that suggests that role identity is an ongoing process in which continuing interaction produces gender. This allows for social change to affect the identity of a gender role within the social production of the concept (Anderson and Taylor 2008). Symbolic interaction theory provides for adaptation which is “based on the assumption that actor’s behavior is purposive, and that the general goal they seek is the maximization of their profits. They try to create a situation whose anticipated rewards will exceed the anticipated costs by as much as possible” (Bell, 2009, p. 157). In this theory, the maximum benefit to those who the shift effects provide the context in which change is implemented. In studying violence against women, symbolic interaction theorists study the way in which gender roles and violence is formed. Two examples that can provide context for the development of different perspectives, allow for an understanding of how males and females form their roles in the dominance/submissive nature of many heterosexual relationships. Brinkerhoff et al (2008) gives the example of the way in which boys are encouraged to be aggressive in sports, often pushed to violently defend their athletic position during games. This can be seen in soccer, hockey, and football specifically. Another example that is given is the way in which playground politics allows for boys to dominate the playground at school, often bullying the girls. Through these types of socialization males and females begin to form their role identities and become dominant and submissive in their interactions. While creating changes within individual families is difficult, public opinion has experienced great waves of change on a global level. The pressures that have erupted due to the efforts of women’s groups across the world to educate and promote change regarding violence against women has created a globally recognized movement. This is an example of how the adaptive nature of symbolic interaction recreates gender roles through changes that occur in a continuing process. Pressure has occurred because the movement has created a division between countries who do and countries who don’t act against violence against women. According to Weldon (2006), “the movement against gender violence has achieved cooperation through the development of norms of inclusivity” (p. 55). The idea is that to not be a part of the movement frames the identity of a social group, in this case exampled by a nation, as not being modern or enlightened. Thus, this type of pressure creates a change in the way in which gender is framed within countries with traditions that include violence against women in the domestic sphere. According to Ellsberg, Velzeboer, the Pan American Health Organization, and the World Health Organization (2003), there are many societies through the world, however, where the women themselves believe that violence is part of the life of a woman. An example that is given in regard to the sense of ‘normalcy’ that is viewed by women is through the disorientation that is often experienced as women come into the social system through event of domestic violence. Women express that they do not know how to exist where there are given rights that free them from violence, thus creating a crisis of identity. While this is easily seen in countries where violence is common, in a country like the United States, the ability to hide the effect of violence and to mimic ‘normalcy’ prevents many women from being able to achieve independence from violent households. The internalized nature of the existence of violence between men and women for battered women becomes structured through terms of feeling that it is ‘natural’. Two constraints that prevent women from leaving their husbands because of abuse are “femininity and the experience of victimization” (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). Emotional dependency and ideas about the proper place of women are framed within the idea of femininity. As well, the experience of victimization also provides a context for femininity as the dominance of a male figure, the attention through violence, can be misconstrued as authority and a figure that will provide for a woman. Because violence against women is not only a male issue in that women sometimes feel that they are more complete and more defined within these relationships as a woman, dealing with changing the social structure that allows for violence against women is a slow and difficult process. One specific issue that often defines for women how they view their status in comparison to men is through the event of the loss of virginity. According to Carpenter (2002), the event of the loss of virginity often is an experience the acts as a moment of disempowerment for a young woman. Young men report experiencing a feeling of empowerment through losing their virginity while young women report feeling as if something has been taken from them, the experience often taken out of their control. Young women often have sex for the first time because of peer pressure rather than through a rational decision. In addition, often the experience is forced by someone that the woman is involved with, while not exactly rape, not exactly an experience that is the result of making a decision. The confusion of this moment and the dependency that follows because of issues of reputation, vulnerability to reproduction, and other related issues, a woman is disempowered. Carpenter (2002) reports that young women who have their first experience of sexuality with other young women, even though they are heterosexual, report less of a feeling of disempowerment from the loss of their virginity. Summary Issues of female empowerment and femininity are entwined where the concept of how interactions with male figures are framed as ‘normal’. Through the theory of symbolic interaction, the way in which gender roles are created is an on-going process in which new ideas that are introduced to the social construct shift and effect the way in which role identity is experienced. For women who are battered, their belief in the way in which a man interacts with them through violence creates an ongoing identity of victimization. This can be supported through earlier experiences in elementary school where males dominate the play space, as well as through the disempowerment that might have occurred when they lost their virginity. Because of the social similarities of the lives of all women, the divide between those who are battered and normalize it for their experience may not be as wide a gap from those who are not battered. Because of socialization issues that are constant throughout society, the control of battering may reside within the male figure in the relationship, immaterial to the beliefs of the female on the subject because she become locked into a situation as it occurs. Methodology In studying the way in which violence is defined differently between men and women, two methods of research were used. Secondary research was done in order to create a framework of study from the work that was done for previous literature. The internet was used as a medium of research in which Google Books was used to find relevant books and Jstor was used as a database from which to find journal articles. Key words were used to find relevant literature that would enrich the topic. Initially, a qualitative study was conducted through interviews that were conducted with one female and three male subjects. The purpose of this interview was to create a framework from which to focus the questions on the survey for the larger participant group. Therefore, the interview format as it relates to a qualitative method of research will be combined with the questionnaire which will be framed for qualitative study. A subsequent form of primary research was then conducted through a participant survey that asked questions that allowed for a progression of concepts that would lead to answers to the primary research questions. A total of 50participants were approached through a non-probability style selection where a specific location, which was the university campus. Non-probability sampling is accomplished when a population of people are targeted for their availability and criteria that is relevant to the study. One type of non-probability sampling called convenience sampling best describes the type of method used to find participants (Trochim, 2006). The population that was approached for this study became eligible as they were in the specific location at the time that the researcher was there to approach them for the survey. The secondary criteria was that an equal number of women and men were approached in order to successfully create a comparison. Therefore, only 25 men and 25 women were approached and after that quota was filled, no other participant was eligible for the study. The survey was constructed with a five point scale of possible answers which is based upon the Likert scale, but adjusted to create a positive and negative balance between perceptions of violence. The answers for each question can be determined through the following range of questions: not violent, somewhat aggressive, aggressive, somewhat violent, and violent. This allows for the participant to choose to frame a concept through a perception of levels of violence. Once the survey was compiled, the answers were calculated for medians and frequencies in order to assess the most common answers for the questions. These quantified calculations were then assessed for meaning which lead to the interpretations that were made during the discussion. Results Of the participants, 72% of the participants were non-Caucasian Americans. The answers from non-Caucasian Americans women were more often explicit in considering non-contact aggressions as violence, while the males routinely did not feel that most non-contact aggression was defined as violence. However, while the disparity between Caucasian and non-Caucasian Americans existed, it was not significant, making the disparity within this research so minor as to not be relevant. In a larger study, this disparity might widen, creating a resource for further investigation. The first question in the interview asked the participants; What is gender based violence? The primary definition that was used by the respondents concerned the domination of one gender over another through the use of physically violent action. In exploring the way in which violence is defined by men and women, the fifteen questions that were asked of the 50 participants revealed that women have a much narrower view of violence than men. Both men and women feel that an closed fist strike to the face or body is violent. There are some differences when an open handed strike is explored. Although all participants agreed that a slap to the face was violence, there was an average 4.46 overall score as it was associated with a slap to the body being only somewhat violent. Shoving was equally seen as somewhat violent by at 4.49, whether it resulted in a fall or merely being put off balance. An interesting shift began with question seven. The scores on hitting with a closed fist, an open hand, and with shoving were all very similar between men and women. When the question was asked to rate pulling back a fist aggressively, the divergence was startling with a 4.52 score of women feeling this was a somewhat violent act, where men felt at a rate of 2.68 that this was somewhat aggressive or aggressive. From this point forward, the numbers began to show differences. The rest of the questions concerned topics about hitting objects, yelling and chasing showed that women had a far lower level of tolerance for any type of aggressive act than did men. Men found that hitting objects, yelling and chasing were better termed aggressive, where women began to answer the remaining questions after question seven which portrayed an aggressive physical move without actual contact as violent. Discussion The interview asked the question: What are the forms of gender based violence against women? The answer reflects the way in which women view non-contact aggression. Gender based violence is termed through the interview as oppression through emotional abuse, gender role abuse, and verbal abuse as much as through physical contact. While women understand the violence of intent, which is reflected in these alternative forms of aggression, men do not appear to define violence in the same way. Men seem to be relatively specific in terming violence through physical contact, where women see the subtle nature of violence as it is framed within a threat. Women, as they are more often the victims of physical violence, have also come to understand that being struck is not the only way to dominate someone through violence. The interview provided context for how men may be affected in regard to violence. The high dosage of violence through the media was suggested as a reason for why the definition of violence was so limited for men. As well, the passing of violent and dominating tendencies from parents to children is often the cause of violence between men and women. The participants in the interview suggested that the consequences of gender based violence is that the well-being of the woman is affected in relationship to self-esteem, psychological trauma, as well as the obvious effects of injury and death. The primary reason or studying this issue and putting into place public policies that can help to end violence against women is because it will help to increase the overall success and happiness within society. In understanding how the definition of violence differs between men and women, society can provide a better informed structure for making policies that help to end the cycles of violence between the genders. Putting this in context with the symbolic interaction theory, social changes can be made by creating an understanding within the male population of how violence is framed by women (Bell, 2009: Anderson & Taylor, 2008). As women are the victims of violence, refocusing the definitions of males will help to provide context for their actions towards women. In creating a benefit to ending violence and violence related behaviors, men will be inspired to make changes. Initially, those who do not recognize that their behaviors are perceived as violent may choose to change their behaviors in order to salvage their marriage and create a safer environment for their families. Those who do not willingly choose to make changes may have to be addressed through a cost/benefit social policy that is yet beyond the scope of this research paper to determine. Regardless, understanding of the disparities between men and women in their perception of violence is a beginning in trying to find solutions from which to create safer homes within the community. Conclusion One of the most interesting aspects of this research is that men and women do see violence differently. Violence is framed in different ways by men and associated with levels of aggressive interaction, where women more often view violence as an absolute where all concepts of physical aggression fall within that category. The most significant difference, however, is through the realization that how a woman sees violence from a significant other in relationship to blame is different still from her absolutism in regard to the definition of violence. Men, on the other hand, see violence against women as not permissible, where women admit to some levels of available forgiveness. This research has provided me with awareness about violence that I had not understood before studying the subject. Women perceive all physically aggressive acts toward them as a threat, while men believe that pushing a woman, even if she falls, does not qualify as physical threat. In looking at how women see their lowered physical power in comparison to the threat level that assessed when confronted by men, creates a whole new perspective on how men behave towards women. Even when violence was committed around them, via a hit to a wall or through a man throwing something, heightened feelings of threat are expressed by women. The issue falls short of the level of threat that is perceived, thus the argument is no longer the central point of the encounter. This is beneficial to understanding how to learn more effective communication between men and women. If men understand that any aggressive act has the same perceived threat to a woman, it might cause a change in the way in which they interact with women. However, this might also lead other to believe that through violent actions, even when not focused on a woman, he gains control of a situation. My belief, however, is that the minute a man loses his temper and expresses himself through a physical act of violence, whether it be by punching a wall or throwing a vase, he has lost his argument because all a woman will want at that point is to retreat to safety. In ending or winning the argument through physical violence, he loses something of her feelings of affection. She loses respect and gains fear. Appendix 1 Project Interview The respondents interviewed for this project comprised of 1 female and 2 male subjects. The date of interview was on February 14th, 2011 and phone interview was used for one of the male subjects while the rest I conducted a face to face interview. The respondents were informed on the subject matter which was centered on gender based violence and their willingness to participate prior to engaging them in the interview. There were seven open ended questions presented to the respondents. The respondents provided answers in their own words; and for each question there was no limit to the number of answers that a respondent could give. The questions and responses are provided below: Question 1: What is gender based violence? The definition provided ranges to a variety of features. The respondents described gender based violence as crimes that male commit versus crime that female commit, being biased to any sex with intentions of inflicting pain and the domination of other sex i.e., since man thinks other sex is weaker and that they can take advantage of that by be attacking them that they and won’t fight back. . Question 2: What is violence against women? Violence against women was described as physical abuse (e.g., beating/hitting) or manipulation of women by men. It was also described as any action that leads to women degradation and imposing to them a sense of inferiority. Question 3: What are the forms of gender based violence against women? There were numerous examples provided to explain the forms of gender based violence against women. The responses provided were as follows: expecting the woman to cook and take care of the kids without help from the husband regardless both of having jobs, engaging young girls in under aged marriages, forced marriages and women genital mutilation still practiced in some parts of the world, . the use of language that degrades women, sexual and physical assault, physical, working environment hierarchy that discourages the promotion of women and segregation. Question 4: What are the causes of gender based violence against women? The causes of gender based violence was attributed to various factors, this includes childhood upbringing e.g., influences by bad role models in the family where the women are treated in unfairly manner which forms a cycle in that the young kids equate such situations as normal. Cultures where women are perceived to be inferior and religions that permit inferiority against women. The media, music and certain television shows are contributed factor to gender based violence. Other responses provided were society permissiveness, abuse of drugs and alcohol and illiteracy. Question 5: What are the consequences of gender based violence? The consequences of gender based violence were described as leading to low self esteem; trauma and that violence can lead to death, loss of freedom by being incarcerated depression, isolation and bodily injuries. Question 6: Why is combating gender based violence important? The respondents explained that combating violence leads healthier lives, reduction in the number of assaults, provide security , increase self esteem, happiness and productivity because if a woman is being abused success is hindered by poor performance in school or caring for her children, overall, it will promote a health society which is based on equal rights for everyone. Question 7: What should health services do to assist women experiencing violence? The health service contribution was discussed as being vital and can help by providing shelter, support groups and counsel services to the victims of violence and assist them in regaining their lives and overcoming their fears .. The information gathered during the interview revealed the diverse views about individual perceptions on the subject of gender based violence. This provides a challenging task and research opportunity to examine in-depth issues relating to gender based violence in terms of identifying what it is, its causes, consequences, importance of combating it and some aid that can be provided by the health care services there by eliminating or lessening these challenges. These information will help in the construction of questionnaire to presented later to 50 participants. Appendix 2 Survey The following questionnaire is intended for the study of the differences between men and women in perceptions about physically aggressive behavior. The study allows for a five point scale from which to gauge your own feelings about each question. The questionnaire is completely confidential and the only personal information that is required is to reveal gender. Male______ Female ______ Please determine how you define the following situations if they occurred during an argument: 1. Hitting someone with a closed fist in the face Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 2. Hitting someone on below the neck with a closed fist Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 3. Slapping someone across the face with an open hand Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 4. Slapping someone’s body with an open hand Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 5. Shoving someone so that they fall down Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 6. Shoving someone so that the are put momentarily off balance Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 7. Pulling back your fist with an aggressively angry action Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 8. Punching a wall Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 9. Punching a pillow Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 10. Screaming at the top of your lungs Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 11. Stepping toward someone with an aggressive attitude Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 12 Chasing someone Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 13. Yelling at someone while within inches of their space Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 14. Yelling at someone in the same room Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent 15. Yelling at someone from another room. Non-Violent Somewhat Aggressive Aggressive Somewhat Violent Violent References Andersen, M. L., & Taylor, H. F. (2008). Sociology: Understanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Bell, D. C. (2009). Constructing social theory. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Brinkerhoff, D. B. et al (2008). Essentials of sociology. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. Carpenter, L. M. (June 2002). Gender and the meaning and experience of virginity loss in the contemporary United States. Gender and Society. 16(3), pp. 345-365. Ellsberg, M., Velzeboer, M., Pan American Health Organization, & World Health Organization. (2003). Violence against women: The health sector responds. Washington, D.C: PAHO. Renzetti, C. M., & Bergen, R. K. (2005). Violence against women. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Trochim, W. M. K. (2006) Probability sampling. Research Methods Knowledge Base. Accessed on 10 April 2011, from http://www.socialresearchmethod s.net/kb/sampprob.php Weldon, S. L. (March 2006). Inclusion, solidarity and social movements: The global movement against gender violence. Perspectives on Politics. 4(1), pp. 55-74. Read More