The hidden epidemic:femal-male violence
...of wife abuse was ignored as a legal problem (Minaker, 76). During this time period, several social movements strived for social solidarity. Emile Durkheim, one of the founding fathers of sociology, defined social solidarity as “social groups working together towards agreed upon goals”. He argued that these “agreed-upon goals” would lead to a shared set of norms. Norms were essential in a society because it helped society function and set boundaries for people to abide by. Durkheim believed such “anomie”, which is described in the Linden textbook, as an absence of clear societal norms, occurs when there is rapid change in society (Linden, 293). This was the case during the 1960’s, when the Battered Women Movement (BMW) started to warrant attention towards abuse against women. Their main goal was to transform society’s idea of spousal abuse as a private affair to a social phenomenon. Feminist movements brought about radical changes which were viewed as a huge improvement towards achieving equality for women (Minaker, 77). For example, in Winnipeg Manitoba, the zero-tolerance policy for family violence has been in place since 1993. This policy allows police officers to lay charges in all domestic violence cases. It is estimated that Manitoba has a population of 600,000 and over 3,000 women turn to police for assistant in domestic violence (Saunderson, 10). Furthermore, in the 1960’s society did not have social order therefore, the feminist movements were given the chance to bring the issue of wife abuse into the public eye. The flip side of the issue, female-male violence does not have an exact date to when it was identified. Just recently, the issue of male victims has prompted researchers to study this area. Although husband abuse may have been prevalent in the 1960’s, I believe it was not recognized as a problem because of the traditional stereotypes which existed regarding men and wife abuse had become a social phenomenon. I believe that feminist women helped warrant attention towards wife abuse but it did not achieve equality as they hoped. Instead these reforms had a political agenda, which was to reduce sexism within the justice system (Parfett, 78). The justice system wanted to create an illusion in society which promoted equality among men and women and they used feminist movements to accomplish their goal. Also, the attention was shifted away from the violence which took place and the focus was centered on the gender of the aggressor. Feminist movements have created their theories surrounding a patriarchal society. Patriarchy refers to “male domination that includes both a structure and ideology that privileges men over women (Linden, 176). It is argued by many feminists that men who abuse hold patriarchal and sex-stereotypes values in order to control women. These values have been learned and taught by western society throughout history. From this argument, I conclude that abuse against women has been learned through society and in a structural context. The above theory can be characterized as a liberal approach which states that the difference which exists between men and women are not innate, rather it is learned through the process of socialization (Linden, 168). In 1994, Statistics Canada did a telephone survey among 12,300 women. The results of the survey showed that 29% of the women reported physical abuse from their partner. This survey provided researchers with a comprehensive report on wife abuse but I believe the results may not have been accurate or reliable. I wonder how many women were honest about their response and what their definition was regarding spousal abuse. Also, the survey did not interview men to get the flip side of this issue (female-male violence); rather it ignored it (Bala, 224). However a study which was done at the University of Calgary revealed 14% of men admitted to physically abusing their partner compared to 23% of women. Although the severity of the violence may differ in the above cases (women are more likely to endure severe physical damage than men), the fact that men get abused cannot be ignored. Note, the severity of the violence causes women to seek medical services and not get paid for lost wages. Feminist argue that the consequences of the abuse affects women more than men (Bala, 231). These statistics contradict the radical feminist perspective which argues that men tend to dominate women by holding powerful position and privileges in society (Linden, 323). Many scholars, such as Steinmetz argue that female-male violence is on the rise and there are various amounts of statistics which demonstrated that women are as violent as men. In 1999, Statistics Canada conducted a social survey based on victimization. This survey was the first attempt in Canada to compare male-female violence to female-male violence. The survey focused on different year periods of violence. For the one year period, the survey revealed that 2.8% of women and 2.3% of men reported being victims of spousal abuse (Johnson and Bunge, 50). These results prove that there are more female victims of spousal abuse than men, but the percentage between them is not drastically different. This report is a strong indication that female-male violence should warrant attention. If the radical feminist perspective is reliable then we should be able to apply the theory to female criminality. In utilizing the perspective, I am assuming that the cause for rise in female offenders can be attributed to more women holding powerful and privileged position in society. However, this is not the case in western society. Many of the powerful positions are still held by men and there is inequality in the professional world. This is demonstrated through the low wages which a woman receives compared to a man in the same profession (Tiff, 25). One of the major problems with theories which exist today to explain crime, is that they are male oriented, therefore it becomes difficult to apply it towards female offenders. In 1998, Alberta approved the “Protection against Family Violence Act”. In April, the MERGE (Movement for the Establishment of Real Gender Equality) filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, stating that the social service agency in Edmonton “discriminated on the basis of gender, exposing a class of persons to hatred or contempt”. The MERGE provided Canadian and American statistics which indicated that spousal abuse is usually mutual or caused only by women than men (Joe, 1). The intent of this report was to point out that social agency’s help women believe that their conduct is acceptable and it lets male victims assume that there is no public support for them. There are many resources which help women deal with the issue of spousal abuse but critiques argue that these social agencies are perpetuating woman abuse against men by using the “get tough approach”. One of the ways in which the justice system tried to reduce sexism is by allowing women to claim self-defense by using the battered syndrome theory. In 1977, an American psychologist, Leonare Walker brought the concept of battered woman syndrome in to the public eye. The theory of battered woman syndrome was based on experiments of dogs, which Martin Seilgman conducted in the 1960’s (Parfett, 61). Given that there is no scientific evidence to support this theory, it is evident that Walker’s theory, which argues that women learn helplessness in abusive relationship, is flawed. So the question becomes why courts are eagerly allowing women to use this defense? One theory states that during the 1970’s, when the syndrome wa...