In order to explore violence against women in the context of
family, it is important to examine some theories on it. The family's everyday
settings about GBV in its form of domestic violence, have taken many different
paths. Therefore, I will attempt to sample and outline the theories below as
they pertain to domestic violence and are relevant to this research.
The theory of the culture of domestic violence
conveys the idea that in big and pluralistic societies, some
subcultures develop norms that permit the use of physical violence to a greater
degree than the dominant culture (Arias and Pape, 1993:24). Thus domestic
violence will occur more frequently in violent societies than in harmonious
ones. Peer-relationships that nurture patriarchal authority in the family and
use of violence to support it are typical of this subculture. For this reason,
this `theory has also produced the theories that examples from pornography and
violent images on television can back a culture of domestic violence' (Adams
and Fortune, 1995:15).
The theory of ecological attempts links
violence in the family to the broader social environment. This includes the
culture, the formal and informal social networks of the family, the closer
family setting, circumstances and history (Krug et al., 2002:332). This type of
context sets up a starting point for a model of domestic assault based on the
given principle.
The theory of feminist stipulates the
existence of many different ideas within feminist
theory of domestic
violence. However, Bograd quoted in Adams and Fortune (1995:39), has
identified four common strains that are the dominant class
where men have differential access to material and symbolic resources and women
are devalued as secondary and inferior. The second class is where intimate
partner abuse is a predictable and common dimension of normal family life. The
third stipulates that women's experiences are often defined as inferior because
male domination influences all aspects of life and finally, the feminist
perspective that is dedicated to advocacy for women.
There is also the bio psychosocial theory.
According to Adams and Fortune (1995:39), this concept ties together
biological (testosterone levels, alcohol abuse) factors and social factors that
move an abuser toward violence in the home. These comprise the level of social
stress, quality of the relationship, the income and extent of social support
available. The above writer shows that these factors are also psychological as
they are concerned with antisocial preferences, aggression, egocentrism and
need for gratification or attention.
The theory of resource posits that the
decision making power within a given family derives from the value of the
resources that each person brings to the relationship. This may indicate
financial, social and organizational resources. Since these means are mostly
supplied by man, they consequently give him additional power over family
members.
The marital power theory is the assumption
that shows how power can be classified into three categories that are power
bases, power processes and power outcomes (Olson and DeFrain, 2000:254). Power
bases consist of the assets and resources that provide the sources for one
partner's domination over another. The same writers confirm that power
processes also include the interactional techniques that an individual applies
to gain control, such as negotiation, assertiveness and problem-solving. Power
outcome refers to who actually makes the decision in the home. Based on this
theory, the partner who lacks power will be more likely to physically be
abused; and in most cases, the man will abuse the woman but on few occasions
the opposite proves possible.
And finally, there is the traumatic bonding theory.
This concept seeks to explain why
women remain with men who beat
them. To Olson and DeFrain (2000:259), two features
have been recognized: the existence of a power imbalance
within the relationship, so that the domestic abuser perceives him or herself
as dominating the other, and the sporadic nature of the mistreatment or
exploitation. This theory postulates that as these power relationships polarize
over time, the powerless individual in the relationship becomes increasingly
dependent on the dominator. In addition, moments in between abuse are times
when positive displays of love and affection cement the legitimacy of the
relationship. Vuningoma (2003:66) lists a series of widespread experiences: the
domestic abuse victim, here the woman, is deeply pleasant for small sympathy
the abuser shows to her; the victim rationalizes acts of domestic violence,
victim denies her own anger; the victim feels the need to get inside the
abuser's head in order to know how to please him; the victim often sees the
world from the abuser's perspective and last but not least the victim shows
signs of post-traumatic stress disorder.
All the above theories are related to violence and the category
of violence this research discusses is domestic violence.
