Major Causes Of Intimate Partner Violence And Way Out, By ChiNna Okoroafor

Intimate partner violence (IPV) or domestic violence as it is also called, is abuse or aggression that occurs in a close relationship or marriage. It is a significant public health issue that has many individual and societal costs. About 41% of female survivors and 14% of male survivors experience some form of physical injury. IPV can also extend beyond physical injury and result in death. The term “Intimate Partner Violence” often includes sexual violence and can also include psychological abuse; These forms of abuse often, but not always, accompany physical violence. Risk of intimate partner violence varies between societies and cultures.

U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) lists some risk factors of IPV as follows;: Low self-esteem, Low income, Low academic achievement/low verbal IQ, Lack of nonviolent social problem-solving skills, Hostility towards women or men, Unhealthy family relationships and interactions, Social isolation/lack of social support supports, Cultural norms that support aggression toward others, as well as religious extremism. While the CDC’s studies focused mainly on the United States and most developed societies, they also have global applicability, regardless of race.

A man who is living in poverty and aware of it, will often feel defeated due to his inability to measure up to the idea of success status, resulting in a struggle with his masculine identity and depleted self-esteem. For this reason, such a man may subconsciously start living in a perceived world of threatened masculinity, which then gives him reasons to violently attack any person or circumstance that reinforces his already mentality defeated status as a man. This situation in the Mental Health Profession is referred to as Masculinity Anxiety Disorder (MAD). Often, the victims are women within such a negatively charged environment. These types of men are often infused with ideas about honour, respect and submission. They resort to violence, because physical strength becomes the only readily available tool. They feel that

violence against women is a social norm. This socio-economic motivated violence against women is thus seen not just as an expression of male powerfulness and dominance over women, but also as deeply rooted in male vulnerability due to social expectations of men that are in some cases unattainable. Also, the inability to meet such social expectations of success for a man can trigger a crisis. Apart from socio-economic factors, causes of IPV could also include alcohol addiction and in some cases, undiagnosed mental illness.

Male identity is associated with experiences of power, and any challenge to the exercise of that power can be perceived as a threat to the masculine identity. In this circumstance sadly, violence against women becomes a means of resolving this crisis because it allows the expression of power that otherwise seems denied. But this is unacceptable and totally wrong.

Understanding the causes of intimate partner violence is substantially more difficult than studying a disease. For example, diseases usually have a biological basis and occur within a social context, but intimate partner violence is entirely a product of its social context. Consequently, understanding the causes of such violence requires research in many social contexts. Most diseases can be investigated with various objective measures, but measurement of intimate partner violence has posed a challenge. Furthermore, measurement of social conditions thought to be risk factors, such as the status of women, gender norms, and socioeconomic status poses difficulties, especially across cultures. Cross Cultural research suggests that societies with stronger ideologies of male dominance have more intimate partner violence. These ideologies usually have effects at many levels within a society. At a societal level they affect, for example, female autonomy, access to political systems, influence in the economy, and participation in academic life and the arts. Such ideologies also affect laws, police, criminal justice systems, whether violence against women is criminalised, and the seriousness with which complaints from women about abuse are treated by law enforcers. At an individual level, men who hold conservative ideas about the social status of women are more likely to abuse them.

Men are abused by their wives or partners a lot more than one may think.

The cases of men abused by women go unreported often because they once again affect the abused man;s ego and reputation among his family and friends, they bring shame, embarrassment or fear of ridicule to the abused man and there are no support services to the victim. Most importantly, it is the abused men that feel the need not to report the cases because men who report domestic violence can face social stigma regarding their machismo and other denegrations of their masculinity. IPV against men could be a controversial subject in many societies, which makes it difficult to obtain accurate data, supporting the case. It is a significant but underreported problem. Part of the reason is that in high patriarchal societies, portraying IPV against men could result in watering down of male power as well as escalate the cases of IPV against women. It could also incur the rot of feminist groups, who may see it as the projection of balance in IPV between men and women, thereby lowering the human cost of IPV against women. Apart from the above mentioned reasons for low reporting of IPV against men, there is a wide acceptance of women IPV against men because in most cases, women who perpetrate violence against men do so as a means of self defense and retaliation. Most of such women have been victims of IPV at some point in their lives or currently battered. For men, it is usually unexpected and more intense. This is why most women go for an outright elimination of their victim.

Solutions:

A factor for consideration in the analysis of IPV is the effects of poverty and unemployment on men in prevention of intimate partner violence. High levels of female empowerment, which could be derived from many sources such as education, income, and community roles could be a strong protective tool against intimate partner violence. Men should be aware that not all women are passive, which means that attempts to subjugate some women could quickly create tensions. In many studies, high educational attainment of women was associated with low levels of violence. Education confers social empowerment via social networks, self confidence, and an ability to use information and resources available in society, and may also translate into wealth.

Ethnographic research suggests that protective effects of social empowerment extend outside the home. Women who have respect and power outside the home through community activities, including participation in microcredit schemes, are less likely to be abused than those who do not. Men who are less pressured financially and feel the availability of spousal support systems are more likely to worry less in times of financial challenges. Keeping a positive social network and alcohol avoidance especially in challenging times, are all effective coping mechanisms.

– Okoroafor, a Licensed Psychotherapist and Certified Telemental Health Provider, writes from Colorado Springs, Colorado, U.S.A

Disclaimer: This article is entirely the opinion of the writer and does not represent the views of The Whistler.