Article 3 – Power Asymmetry, Paternalistic, and Situational Factors Resulting in Violence Against Women in Canada

by Alicia Stensgard

Abstract
This research paper defines violence against women as well as intimate partner violence and other terms related. Examples are provided to demonstrate why power struggle dynamics, male privilege and situational factors in unhealthy intimate partnerships result in violence against women. Also, described as a human rights violation and feminist issue, violence against women in the Canadian context is researched in depth in order for the reader to comprehend why this social issue is critical. Intervention and prevention are covered to help the stigma women face that are victimized. The purpose of this paper is to educate the readers on the impact of violence against women and the warning signs in order to help those impacted.
Keywords: violence against women, intimate partner violence, abuse

Introduction

Violence against women is a critical social issue that relates not only to feminism but also human rights. Authors Heise and Ellsberg (2005) state violence against women as an, “unrecognized human rights violation” (p. 9). In the 1980s, recognition for women victimized by men had began to change for women who had suffered through silence (Heise & Ellsberg, 2005, p. 5). In Canada, the statistics for violence against women are alarming. According to Statistics Canada, “about 173,600 women aged 15 years and older were victims of violent crime in 2011” (Measuring Violence Against Women: Statistical Trends, 2013, p. 8). This represents just 1.2% of the population in Canada. This statistic only includes police-reported violence against women. Thus, leaving out victims who go unreported. Of these statistics, Statistics Canada also reports, “men were responsible for 83% of police-reported violence…the accused was the woman’s intimate partner (includes both spousal and dating) (45%), followed by acquaintances or friends (27%), strangers (16%) and non-spousal family members (12%)” (Measuring Violence Against Women: Statistical Trends, 2013, p. 8).

A concern for verifying the true account of violence against women in Canada is distinguished by the definition of violence against women. Throughout various methods of research, the debate over narrow definitions and broad definitions is one carried through at length. According to Walter DeKeseredy (2000), “narrow definitions tend to create a hierarchy of abuse based on seriousness” (p. 734). In sum, narrow definitions confine victimized women’s occurrence and limit their ability to pursue support (DeKeseredy, 2000, p. 735). On the other spectrum, broad definitions are also viewed as too open-handed to correctly represent violence against women. An example from DeKeseredy (2000) is, “woman abuse is the misuse of power by a husband, intimate partner (whether male or female), ex-husband, or ex-partner against women, resulting in a loss of dignity, control and safety as well as a feeling of powerlessness and entrapment experienced by the women who are the direct victim of ongoing or repeated physical, psychological, economic, sexual, verbal, and/or spiritual abuse” (p. 12). What this definition leaves out is violence against women can also derive from strangers as well. An example of violence against women that is not covered in this definition is the many cases of missing and murdered Aboriginal women and girls. To elaborate, Johnson and Dawson (2011) reveal, “As of 2009, the Native Women’s Association of Canada (NWAC) documented 520 known cases of missing and murdered Aboriginal women. NWAC calculated that if the same number were applied proportionately to the rest of the female population, the rate of death and disappearance of Canadian women and girls would be equivalent to over 18,000” (p. 3). This statement represents the under-representation of Indigenous women and girls that have faced violence in not only the hands of close relationships, but in many cases strangers or perpetrators.

Another issue to introduce on this topic of violence against women is the many types of violence women face. The types of violence women face are rape and sexual coercion, childhood sexual abuse and partner violence which can include verbal and emotional abuse, threats of violence in order to subdue their victim, physical violence, and physical injury or assault. Statistics for these type of violence include, “of women who are abused, 25% suffer episodes of beatings, 20% of sexual assault; 40% suffer injury, and 15% receive medical care as a result of partner violence…19% of women suffer emotional abuse and controlling behavior, including financial abuse or control” (Wathen, MacMillan, & Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, 2003, p. 582). Unlike many undeveloped countries, Canada is at an advantage due to the ideals of freedom presented to its female citizens. However, the issue of violence against women still runs rampant in today’s society. In the Canadian context, factors such as power struggle dynamics, male privilege, and troubled domestic relationships traumatized by situational conflicts such as drug and alcohol abuse promote violence against women.

Power Asymmetry

Control for power in an intimate relationship can lead to victimization of women by a relation of social learning theories and social constructs. This transmission of violence is referred to in much of the research surrounding violence against women. In relation to the social learning theory and violence against women, Johnson and Dawson (2011) explain, “social learning theory portrays violence and aggression as behaviors that are learned through observing others who are influential, and that are maintained through rewards, reinforcements, and an absence of punishment or deterrence” (p. 16). Learned behaviours from children experiencing and watching violence afflicted upon their mother figure from their father figure results in imitating behaviors for children when they grow into adolescents. Another issue that can develop into the implementation of violence against women is the inconsistency of a father or father figure present during a child’s life (Heise L. L., 1998, p. 269).

A theory that summarizes violence against women is the developmental and attachment theories. The developmental theory relates how young individuals that are subjected to relationship violence or receive maltreatment themselves are inclined to be categorized as either a victim or victimizer (Johnson & Dawson, 2011, p. 18). In contrast, the attachment theory relates the bond a child has with his/her caregiver and the influence from the types of relationships, whether it be healthy or unhealthy, that impact their relationships in the future. Johnson and Dawson (2011) elaborate, “These early models influence the way in which the child subsequently responds to or sets in motion interactions with others” (p. 19). The way children witness behaviors can impact their perception and interactions with people later on in life.

Evolutionary psychology also plays into the factors of power struggles between men and women that can result in violence against women. Evolutionary psychology is described as the study of how certain psychological traits and behaviors which include violence are operative and familiar and develop species to persist (Johnson & Dawson, 2011, p. 22). Reiterated by authors Johnson and Dawson (2011), “the variability in rates of homicide cross-culturally, a consistent pattern emerges: men outnumber women as perpetrators of homicide regardless of whether they kill intimate partners, other family members, acquaintances, or strangers” (p. 22). Males’ capacity for violence against women has been argued to exist because of man’s evolution in past and present society.
Another issue within the realm of power struggles between men and women is expressed through the idea of power asymmetry. When people in a relationship are asymmetric, including all heterosexual, homosexual and un-defined gender relationships, there is a power struggle that partners face. For example, in a heterosexual relationship between man and women, the man may feel he deserves more power because he might make more money or have a higher title in his employment. This asymmetric view stems from one partner’s contradiction of the patriarchal ideals of Canadian society. An issue that many marital couples face is the idea of marital rape. Prior to 1996, in 33 American states, a husband would be freed of prosecution from forcefully raping his wife and causing distress to his wife (DeKeseredy, 2000, p. 734). Another factor is this power struggle dynamic in relationships stem from outlying issues such as employment. Macmillian and Gartner (1999) states, “yet employment provides more than just economic resources. It has crucial symbolic importance for identities, self-esteem, and mental health. For men, in particular, working is a critical means of constructing masculinity” (p. 2). Men who may neither work nor bring less money home than their counterpart may take a hit to their masculinity resulting in violence to obtain control in their intimate relationship.

Another representation from the power struggle between intimate partners is the perpetuation of violence by women. In the article, “Separating and Intersecting Realities,” the authors wrote, “women were about twice as likely as men to perpetuate violence against their intimate partners, two or three times more likely to perpetrated severe assaults, and more likely to initiate violence” (Dobash, Dobash, Cavanagh, & Lewis, 1998, p. 384). The idea of the perpetuation of violence by women comes from the struggle women present for power in their relationship and also in some case be retaliation towards prior violence. Understanding how society is made up of learned behaviors is critical in identifying violence against women and its motives. Heise and Ellsberg (2005) write, “increasingly, researchers are using an ecological framework to understand the interplay of personal situations and socio-cultural factors that combine to cause abuse” (p. 24). Relating theories and other ideas about power struggle dynamics express some of the reasons why violence in inflicted upon women in Canada’s society today.

Paternalism

Since Canada was constructed with patriarchal ideas from European settlers, male privilege is a broad factor of violence against women and pulls its evidence based on the societal norms from intergenerational effects. One idea that patriarch-dominated nations, such as Canada stimulate is the idea of femicide. DeKeseredy (2011) exposes the first use of the word femicide as, “the term femicide is two centuries old and was first used in John Corry’s book A Satirical View of London at the Commencement of the Nineteenth century to signify the killing of a women” (p. 22). Another reference to femicide in a hypothetical form is marriage. Marriage prior to laws protecting victimized spouses was seen as the female being gifted to the husband similar to an object. In comparison to women, husbands held more rights and were dominating over their wives. Lori Heise elaborates on the cross-cultural studies of male dominance in the family dynamic. Heise touches on the evidence formed from men that grow up with influence from patriarchal families have a greater chance of developing violent behaviors as adolescents, more viable to rape female colleagues, and to be involved in intimate partner violence than males who grew up in equal homes (1998, p. 270).

Patriarchal families usually set importance on dominance and traditional culture that the man holds within his family. Furthermore, in relation to male privilege and paternalism, there is the factor of male control of wealth that can also result in violence against women. In relationships where husbands and male partners have control over the finances, the violence against the subordinate counterpart from the financially controlling partner is often termed as wife beating and marital rape. Heise refers to the three strongest predictors of violence against intimate partners in a family setting. Along with male dominance and divorce restriction, the male’s control of family wealth is an irrefutable predictor of violence against intimate partner violence (Heise, 1998, p. 270).

Another factor to prove the idea of paternalism as a risk factor to violence against women is male entitlement. This entitlement stems from several religious notions. Heise uses both Hinduism and Christianity to back this claim. Heise’s examples include “the Skandapurana, a sacred text of Hinduism, instructs that a wife should take her meals after her husband…sleep after he sleeps. If he assaults her, she should not lose her temper…She should never sit in an elevated place and never look angrily at her husband” (Heise L. L., 1998, p. 281) and “likewise, the Bible admonishes women to obey their husbands, ‘Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church’ (Ephesians 5:22-23)” (Heise L. L., 1998, p. 281). These examples in two great works considered in religion portray the idea of patriarchy and even tell women to not act in turn when violence is thrust upon them. These ideas from patriarchy help perpetuate violence against women in Canadian society today.

A theory that ties into an idea of patriarchy is the gender role theory. In society, until the immersion of feminism, both female and males have different assigned roles. According to Johnson and Dawson (2011), “gender roles reflect male-dominated perceptions and understandings of appropriate behavior for men and women, and the behaviors ascribed to males are more highly valued than those ascribed to females” (p. 17). The idea of higher value placed on male roles focuses societies power differentials of men compared to that of women, therefore, leading to (in some cases) violence directed at females. Also summarized is how the masculinity theories relate to violence against women. The authors state, “gender is a fluid activity that is constructed and reproduced in everyday interactions. Various forms of violence against women are resources available for ‘doing gender’ in everyday life” (Johnson & Dawson, 2011, p. 33). This masculinity theory conveys how men are assigned certain gender norms, violence can be considered because of these traditional gender norms. Although I have already touched on femicide, it relates to male privilege and paternalism as well. Johnson and Dawson (2011) speculate that because of the “gendered nature of homicides” (p. 124) that women are frequently murdered for the reason of being female.

The idea of patriarchal terrorism is touched on in Johnson’s article, “Patriarchal Terrorism and Common Couple Violence: Two Forms of Violence Against Women.” According to Johnson, patriarchal terrorism refers to the justification of control a husband holds over their partner and uses not only violence but also financial control, threats, isolation, and other tactics deemed necessary to remain dominant in the relationship (Johnson M. P., 1995, p. 284). Visually represented in Johnson’s article, the tactics a male may use on his wife or partner to obtain or maintain power and control include using coercion and threats, using intimidation, using emotional abuse, using isolation, minimalizing, denying and blaming, using children, using male privilege, and using economic abuse (Johnson M. P., 1995, p. 288). Using these tactics to obtain or maintain control increase the chance of violence in an intimate relationship. Elaborating more on control, author Macmillan and Gartner’s (1999) approach to patriarchal control are based on four items: “(1) whether the respondents partner is jealous and doesn’t want you to talk to other men, (2) tries to limit your contact with family or friends, (3) insists on knowing who you are with and where you are at all times, and (4) prevents you from knowing about or having access to the family income, even if you ask” (p. 14-15). These four behaviors are all risks to eventual physical violence and can be defined as mental and emotional abuse.

In Dr. Sevèr’s article, she asks the question, “How can women expect protection from a system that is afflicted with such archaic paternalism?” (1997, p. 579). Although because of feminist ideas this question is being answered more and more as time goes on, the equality of women needs to be improved still as well as the system. The system needs to shy away from these patriarchal ideas and views about egalitarian systems need to be considered. However, this patriarchal idea ingrained into society has promoted a social norm that men may use their physical power to have dominance over females, displaying their male privilege.

Situational Factors in Unhealthy Intimate Partnerships

Situational factors such as drug and alcohol abuse are also contributors in the violence against women, especially in unhealthy intimate relationships. Although the research is not substantial and still fairly new, relationships that endure conflicts from drug and alcohol abuse have the capabilities of turning violent and in most cases, females receive the physicality of the violence and injury. Marital conflict is a large issue in intimate partnerships especially with the divorce rates higher than decades ago. Described as a predictive precursor to violence against a subordinated spouse, author Lori Heise (1998) writes, “frequency of verbal disagreements was strongly related to the likelihood of physical aggression, with extremely high-conflict couples having a rate of violence 16 times greater than couples with the fewest arguments” (p. 271). As with any type of conflict between two people, violence is always a risk factor when tempers and emotions are involved.

A connection has been made with the overuse of alcohol in unhealthy relationships and intimate partner violence. Being a disinhibiting agent, alcohol also plays a role in sexual abuse whether it be young victims to adolescent victims (Heise L. L., 1998, p. 272). Heise (1998) displays alcohol as “situational factor, increasing the likelihood of violence by reducing inhibitions, clouding judgement, and impairing an individual’s ability to interpret cues” (p. 272). Mind-altering drugs can also influence violent behaviors towards intimate partners and female strangers. An example of this is the data collected in a study testing the relationship between drug use and intimate partner violence. The authors of this study published,

…women who frequently use crack may have impaired judgement, making it more difficult for them to detect when their partners’ words or actions are escalating to a threatening level; the low social status of women who use crack may give partners a greater sense of entitlement to abuse their women; and IPV (intimate partner violence) often occurs as an extension of a violent subculture associated with crack in economically disadvantaged urban communities. (El-Bassel, Gilbert, Wu, Go, & Hill, 2005, p. 469)

Another factor from unhealthy relationships that can trigger violence in an intimate partnership is low socio-economic status. Families that struggle with low income or no employment have an increased risk of intimate partner violence (Heise L. L., 1998, p. 274). Men display more violence when unemployed or not making enough income to stay above the poverty line because it is a hit to their masculinity. In relation to intimate partner violence and its situational factors, authors Johnson and Leone touch on situational couple violence. Defined as “intimate partner violence that is not embedded in such a general pattern of controlling behaviors” (Johnson & Leone, 2005, p. 324). In summary, the authors are trying to convey that couple violence is influenced by specific conflict situations such as alcohol, drugs, and social factors. Conflicts arise through all of human life and with relationships, conflicts involve emotions and tempers. Human emotions and tempers are usually fashioned after a learned behavior from childhood or recent experiences. Situational factors have a great influence on relationships and cause considerable risk factors such as intimate partner violence or violence against women.

Observation and Prevention

After learning about the many factors that can lead to violence against women and intimate partner violence, learning about prevention and tools to measure and treat violence against women is important to society in Canada. First off, violence has many effects on women’s lives. Many physical and psychological health risks are exposed to women victimized by violence. Many physical effects that women face result in suicide attempts, chronic pain, gastrointestinal problems, cardiovascular disease, substance abuse, unwanted pregnancy resulting from sexual violence. In contrast, the loss of a pregnancy from sexual violence or physical violence in areas around the uterus, long-term impairment resulting in lack of ability, vision problems, skin allergies, anemia, bronchitis or emphysema, and death (DeKeseredy, 2011, p. 94). There are many psychological effects of violence against women such as helplessness, anger, anxiety, depression, fear, and post-traumatic stress disorder (DeKeseredy, 2011, p. 95). Other risks DeKeseredy (2011) speaks about are financial consequences and the effects on children who witness or receive violent behavior (pp. 96-99).

After learning about some of the warning signs of violence against women, learning about common tools used to measure this violence is critical. Heise and Ellsberg (2005) name several great tools such as the Conflict Tactics Scale, the Index of Spouse Abuse, Abuse Assessment Screen, Women’s Experience with Battering Framework, Domestic Violence Module of the Demographic and Health Surveys, the Violence Against Women Instrument, the Sexual Experiences Survey, and the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (pp. 98-101). All these tools help measure and screen females to understand the violence or abuse those affected have experienced. After a health professional has been able to screen a victim and in dire cases, females have opportunities to go to shelters designed to keep them safe as well as their children in some cases. According to Statistics Canada, “there were 4,645 women residing in shelters across Canada on the snapshot day (April 1th, 2010), most of whom were escaping abuse (71%)” (Measuring Violence Against Women: Statistical Trends, 2013, p. 10). Restorative Justice is provided in a book with various authors to several different articles. In an article by J. Stubbs, the author names four principles that are common to restorative justice and the battered woman’s movement. The four principles include restoring victims of crime, preventing individual offenders from reoffending, engaging the community in mending harms caused by crime, and addressing the context of crime (Stubbs, 2010, pp. 40-45).

Another step in restorative justice for women victimized by violence is prevention. Wathen, MacMillan, and the Canadian Task Force (2003) on preventative health care list maneuvers such as screening of all women, including pregnant women, in the primary care setting to detect intimate partner violence, interventions for abused women, and treatment programs for men who abuse their partners (p. 582). With the collaboration of the mentioned tools and preventative tactics, violence against women in Canada could be reduced so that women and female children do not have to live with the pain and suffering caused by violence.

Conclusion

In conclusion, learning about what is considered violence against women and what races of women are more represented throughout statistics is vital to understanding the social issues resulting from violence against women in Canada. Factors such as power struggle dynamics, male privilege and situational factors increase the risk of violence against women in intimate partnerships help the readers understand the impact violence against women has on society. Finally, and sometimes most importantly, learning tactics to combat and prevent violence directed at women will help our future generations not to feel the pain and suffering by those affected by violence against women in Canada.

References

DeKeseredy, W. S. (2000, July). Current Controversies on Defining Nonlethal Violence Against Women in Intimate
Heterosexual Relationships. Violence Against Women, 6(7), 728-746.
DeKeseredy, W. S. (2011). Violence Against Women: Myths, Facts, Controversies. North York, Ontario:
University of Toronto Press.
Dobash, R. P., Dobash, R. E., Cavanagh, K., & Lewis, R. (1998, August). Separate and Intersecting Realities:
A Comparison of Men’s and Women’s Accounts of Violence Against Women. Violence Against Women, 4(4), 382-414.
El-Bassel, N., Gilbert, L., Wu, E., Go, H., & Hill, J. (2005, March). Relationship Between Drug Abuse and
Intimate Partner Violence: A Longitudinal Study Among Women Receiving Methadone. American Journal of
Public Health, 95(3), 465-470.
Ellsberg, M., Heise, L., Pena, R., Agurto, S., & Winkvist , A. (2001, March). Researching Domestic Violence
Against Women: Methodological and Ethical Considerations. Studies in Family Planning, 32(1), 1-16.
Heise, L. L. (1998). Violence Against Women: An Integrated, Ecological Framework. Violence Against Women, 4, 262-290.
Heise, L., & Ellsberg, M. (2005). Researching Violence Against Women: A Practical Guide for Researchers
and Activists. Washington, D.C, United States: World Health Organization, PATH.
Johnson, H., & Dawson, M. (2011). Violence Against Women in Canada: Research and Policy Perspectives.
Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press.
Johnson, M. P. (1995, May). Patriarchal Terrorism and Common Couple Violence: Two Forms of Violence
Against Women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57(2), 283-294.
Johnson, M. P., & Leone, J. M. (2005, April). The Differential Effects of Intimate Terrorism and Situational Couple
Violence. Journal of Family Issues, 26(3), 322-349.
Macmillian, R., & Gartner, R. (1999, November). When She Brings Home the Bacon: Labor-Force Participation
and the Risk of Spousal Violence Against Women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61(4), 947-958.
Price, L. S. (2005). Feminist Frameworks: Building Theory on Violence Against Women. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.
Sev’er, A. (1997). Recent of Imminent Separation and Intimate Violence Against Women: A
Conceptual Overview and Some Canadian Examples. Violence Against Women: An International and
Interdisciplinary Journal, 3(6), 566-589.
Sinha, M. (Ed.). (2013, February 10). Measuring Violence Against Women: Statistical Trends. Retrieved from
Statistics Canada: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/85-002-x/2013001/article/11766-eng.pdf?st=Gp6CmRHO
Stubbs, J. (2010). Restorative Justice, Gendered Violence, and Indigenous Women. In J. Ptacek (Ed.),
Restorative Justice and Violence Against Women (pp. 103-122). New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
Wathen, C. N., & MacMillan, H. L. (2003, February 5). Interventions for Violence Against Women. American
Medical Association, 289(5), 589-600.
Wathen, C. N., MacMillan, H. L., & Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. (2003, September 16).
Prevention of Violence Against Women. Canadian Medical Association , 169(6), 582-584.

About the Author: Alicia Stensgard is a Aboriginal and Northern Studies major in the Bachelor of Arts-3 Year program here at University College of the North. She plans to continue into the after degree for a Bachelor of Education next year. As an Indigenous (Cree) woman, Alicia integrates cultural teachings and experiences of Indigenous people. Sadly, violence among women has an overrepresentation within the Indigenous population in Canada. During a second year course, Feminism and Social Justice, Alicia used her interests and awareness for issues that impact women, including Indigenous women, to reveal the violence women face either from strangers and/ or domestic relationships.

Instructor’s Remarks: I have instructed Alicia in several courses and she consistently demonstrates the ability to pursue research topics with passion. In the “Feminism and Social Justice” course, Alicia’s submission offers another valuable lens into a sadly relevant and consistent issue of violence against women. Her analysis isolates categories of influences effecting gender violence in Canada. The paper is well researched and utilizes several theories to facilitate the discussion. It is an insightful contribution to the scholarship. Alicia continues to be a dedicated student with a keen interest in learning and research – Professor Noreen Barlas