Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Violence

Questions:
1. Based on Felson's article, explain the gender perspective and the violence perspective to understanding violence against women. What evidence does Felson use to make his argument? What is your position regarding these two perspectives?
2. What is Jones's answer to the question posed in the title of her article, "Why Doesn't She Leave?" What is your opinion? Relate Jones's views to the gender vs violence debate described by Felson.
3. According to Ptacek, what are the denials and justifications that men use to explain their abusive behavior? What kind of contradictions can we see in the explanations offered by men? Relate Ptacek's findings to the gender vs violence debate.

1. The gender perspective as defined by Felson is that men who abuse women get away with it because the victims do not report the incident to the police. In general, when they do report it they in turn get blamed and they offender gets off. This is a very common outlook held by sociologists and general people of society as well.

The violence perspective is a newer view. This theory focuses more on the crime and violence specifically, not the gender of the offender or offended. This is Felson’s stance on gender and violence. He explains that a criminal is a criminal. If a man were to commit a crime of rape, then chances are he would be likely to commit other crimes as well, regardless of gender. He calls these men “bad guys” not sexist. The two sides disagree on whether wives would hit their husbands in the same way as men hit their wives. He proves that both men and women use physical force a the same rates. Women are more likely to be victims, because men have more force. Homicide research however, shows that women are more likely to kill their husbands than vice versa. He also points out that husbands are no more domineering than wives, the abuse usually occurs in troubled marriages. Cases of rape were also examined, finding that in general the encounters were ambiguous, women were not classifying the incidents properly.

I am not sure which side I agree with. I see good points coming from both sides. I do understand his point about men that commit rape to be criminals of all sorts of crimes, but I have to wonder what the opposite side is. Are there women that rape men? I think that the double standard also comes into play here. I don’t think that the violence perspective is completely right, there are definitely women who are battered because of their gender. I am torn, but probably lean more toward the gender perspective. However, each case should be analyzed separately.

2. This article compiles many different studies and interviews as well as media pieces that look at stories and incidents of women’s abuse. It shows media reactions as well public views. Jones brings up a really important question, why doesn’t the victim leave? This seems to be one that many people ask themselves and wonder. She seems to chastise and correct those that have this same question. She takes this article to set the record straight on the issue of female abuse and the impossibility of escaping. To so many it seems like such an obvious and simple solution to problems- just leave the situation and all will be well. However, Jones explains that it is not close to being a simple issue. For women it is more than just leaving and then becoming “free.” Women are linked to these men on so many levels. First of all, they are struck by such a paralyzing fear, that it is impossible for them to get away. They fear their death, they fear for the death of their children and they fear for their financial security and future. In comparing this article to Felson’s arguments, I would say that this article falls in the category of the gender perspective. It definitely puts women in the light of being somewhat dependent and controlled by the male based on their gender. After reading this article I agree with Jones. As a woman I would hope that if anyone I knew were in a situation like this, I would be able to leave—however, since I have never experienced anything like this, I would have no idea how I would react. I agree with Jones in that fear is so strong that it can truly hold you back.

3. This article analyzes a number of interviews with men who had battered women. Platcek gets to the root of these men’s “reasons.” He writes, “They tend to excuse themselves of full responsibility, and at the same time, they offer justifications for their abusiveness.” The most common excuse it that men claim to have “lost control.” The blame this loss of control on either drugs or alcohol or frustration of some kind. He continues, “Other possible responses include dependency, achievement, withdrawal and resignation, psychosomatic illness, drug or alcohol use, and constructive problem-solving.” They claimed that their violence was not done by choice but just a reaction and an outburst of uncontrollable rage. They also often equate a woman’s verbal aggressiveness to physical aggression. They claim that these violent occurrences happened at times when they were “out of their minds.” They didn’t intentionally do it, they had no actual control over their bodies and minds, nearly at a point of “rage blackouts.” These claims lean on Felson’s side of “violence perspective.” Men explain that their violence is unrelated to the fact that they are reacting to women, but rather the fact that they act violently for violence’s sake. However, when men abused women out of reaction to their “disobedience” this seemed to be more of a gender violence issue, based on women not obeying their male counterparts. Overall, both "types" of violence were seen.

No comments: