Violence within the couple

Violence within a couple. Evidences
from surveys to Central American men
Edith Alejandra Pantelides and Hernán Manzelli
Centro de Estudios de Población y Universidad de Buenos Aires
Abstract
Resumen
This article deals with the violence (including
control behavior) which occurs between the
members of a couple. The article is based on a
survey to men of 15-44 years of age, residents
of low income neighborhoods of the main cities
of each of six countries in Central America.
The results show low percentages of men
justifying violence against women «in general»,
but higher percentages when they are faced
with concrete situations; these higher
percentages are more in accordance with the
violence actually exercised as declared by the
men. In at least one third of all couples one of
the members has exercised violence against the
other, at least once. It is possible to identify
cities in which violent attitudes and behavior
are more frequent. Men declare themselves as
being more often victims than perpetrators of
violence, suggesting the need for qualitative
exploration and for more subtle measurement
instruments.
Violencia en la pareja. Evidencias a partir de
encuestas a hombres centroamericanos
Key words: domestic violence, gender
relationships, violence against women, Central
America.
Este artículo se ocupa de la violencia (incluidas
las conductas de control) que se ejerce entre los
miembros de una pareja. Está basado en una
encuesta realizada en seis países
centroamericanos a varones de 15 a 44 años,
residentes en barrios con población de escasos
recursos de la principal área urbana de cada
país. Se observan bajos porcentajes de hombres
con actitudes justificadoras de la violencia
hacia la mujer «en general», pero mayores
cuando se les plantean situaciones concretas, lo
que concuerda más con la violencia ejercida
declarada. En al menos una tercera parte de las
parejas uno de los miembros ha ejercido
violencia contra el otro alguna vez. Es posible
identificar ciudades en que actitudes y acciones
violentas son más frecuentes. Los hombres
declaran ser en mayor medida víctimas de las
mujeres que perpetradores, lo que sugiere la
necesidad de exploración cualitativa y de
instrumentos más sutiles de medición.
Palabras clave: violencia doméstica,
relaciones de género, violencia contra la mujer,
Centroamérica.
Introduction
f the multiple manifestations violence adopts, we will deal here with
that one that occurs within a couple, which we shall call couple or
domestic violence (although from the latter we will exclude
intergenerational violence).1 Despite the thematic clipping, there are still many
O
1
We would suppose that the couple is always a couple formed by a man and a woman, although from
the information of the same survey we know there are some exceptions.
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
problems to be solved before approaching the analysis. A first observation is
that there is not only one kind of violence within a couple. Leaving aside a
simple classification based on the practiced violence severity, for example,
Johnson (cited in Johnson and Ferraro, 2000: 949) establishes the following
distinctions: “common violence within a couple”, “intimate terrorism”, “violent
resistance” and “mutual violent control”.
The common violence within a couple is the one that
Is not connected to a general pattern of control [but that] emerges in the context of
an specific quarrel when one or the two members attack each other. According to
research led by Johnson, this kind of violence, which does not usually increase within
time and is not severe and probable mutual, is the one that is mentioned in researches
that use general population. Intimate terrorism is one of the tactics of a general pattern
of control over the couple; it is usually one-sided, includes emotional abuse and may
involve severe lesions. The control is maintained by the use of physical force and
emotional pressure (Gerber, 1988, cited by Gonzalez Tapia (1991: 110)).
Besides, “it should involve verbal and non-verbal behaviors (such as
coercion and threats, intimidation, isolation, minimization, negation and
guiltiness)” (Carcen, 1994, cited in Ramos, 1995). The violent resistance is
practiced almost exclusively by women (the extreme example is the murder of
the punisher partner) and the mutual violent control is given as a struggle for
control between the members of the couple.
Muehlenhard and Kimes are also worried for the definition of violence and
show that, despite the concept seems simple, there is not a perfect methodological
form of capture it and that different definitions reflect the interests of diverse
groups of people. The authors mention that
The definitions of terms such as sexual violence or domestic violence have the power
of labeling negatively some acts, whereas some others are ignored and, implicitly,
forgiven. The ways those terms are defined affects how people label, explain, assess
and assimilate their own [experience] (Muehlenhard and Kimes, 1999: 234-235).
For example, if the definition of violence is limited to those acts that involve
physical force, all the emotional abuse and behaviors of control are excluded.
If the definition is limited to the violence performed by men over women, other
situations are skipped over: men against men, women against women and
women against men.
232
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
But also, as Muehlenhard and Kimes (1999: 237) mention, those who define
what domestic violence is (legislators, social scientists, perpetrators, and
victims) present implications for the inclusion or exclusion of certain behaviors
as violent behaviors.
The domestic violence issue has produced a debate over what Connell
(1997: 1) calls “the gender balance of violence”2 There is plenty evidence that
shows that domestic violence is performed by men (husbands, partners) against
women more often than on the other way around (Dobash, Dobash and Wilson,
1992, cited in Connell, 1997). However, there are also studies that show that
women accept having performed physical violence as frequent or more than
what men mention (Currie 1998, cited in Muehlenhard and Kimes, 1999: 240)
This apparently contradictory evidence shows the conceptual and methodological
difficulties research in the subject faces, from both a theoretical (what is it
understood by violence?) as well as methodological (how to measure violence?,
who defines what is violence?, who informs on violence happenings? (Alksins
et al., 2000; Johnson and Ferraro, 2000; Muehlenhard and Kimes, 1999).
Violence within the couple and reproductive health
Most of the researches that relate the issue of violence with the sexual and
reproductive health do it through the consequences the exercise of the former
over the latter. These consequences can be direct effect of a physical aggression,
of a forced sexual intercourse or the restrictions imposed by the women’s
autonomy which stops her from taking decisions over her own body. The most
cited are the sexual transmitting illnesses, gynecological disorders (for example;
pelvis inflammatory disorders), unwanted pregnancy, extreme sexual behavior
(unprotected sex) and maternal mortality (Bott and Jejeebhoy, 2003; Ellsberg,
2003, Heise, Moore y Toubia, 1995a y 1995b; Population Council, 2004;
Population Reports, 1999, Saucedo González, 1995; Unicef, 2000). Some
studies have show, for example, that an important proportion of women are
victims of violence during their pregnancy, with health consequences for her
and the product (Ramirez and Vargas, 1998) and that he prevalence of violence
does not change significantly during pregnancy, although the severity of
emotional violence increases in detriment of the physical abuse (Castro and
2
The translations are ours despite marked otherwise.
233
july/september 2005
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
Ruiz, 2004), on the other hand, there is a kind of violence within a couple that
is per ser sexual: rape within marriage or courtships (date rape).
Methodological Aspects
Most of the researches that have addressed the gender violence subject, have
asked women about their experiences as victims (Alksnis et al., 2000; Pantelides
and Geldstein, 1999; Moore, 2003; Ramírez and Vargas, 1998; Suárez and
Menkes, 2004). Researches that include men within their analysis universe, can
be classified as: a) those who process men as gender violence perpetrators
(Murray y Henjum, 1993; Reilly et al., 1992; Senn et al., 2000); b) those
comparative researches between men and women as perpetrators and victims,
(Bott and Jejeebhoy, 2003; Cáceres, 2000; Ellsberg, 2003; Forbes and Adams,
2001; Halpern and col., 2001; Haworth, 1998; O´Sullivan et al.,1998; Patel et
al., 2003; Rosenthal, 1997; Rotundo et al., 2001; Zimmerman et al., 1995); and
c) the researchers that analyze the exposition of men to violence experiences
and the meaning that these events have for them (Fiebert, 2000; O’Sullivan y
Byers,1993; Struckman et al., 1994).
In the research this work is based on, a sample of men from 15 to 44 years
of age, dwellers of low income neighbors was surveyed randomly in the cities3
of Belize, San Jose (Costa Rica), San Salvador (El Salvador), Tegucigalpa
(Honduras), Managua, Bluefields and Puerto Cabezas (Nicaragua) and Panama.
The sampling sizes were of 384 in Belize, 401 in Costa Rica, 291 in El Salvador,
400 in Honduras, 600 in Nicaragua and 463 in Panama. While the questions
relative to attitudes toward violence were asked to all interviewees, the ones
related to violent behaviors were asked to those who had had or currently had
a couple, being this within a marriage, consensual union or courtship.
It was not taken for granted that violence was performed only by men, but
obviously, hey were the ones who informed about their violent behaviors as
well as their partner’ behavior. There was not asked a general question about
violence but the interviewees were asked to mention the frequency of certain
behaviors (punches, slaps, kicks, pushes, jerks) from their partners to them and
3
Although for the general reader’s comfort, in the text we used the names of the countries and not the
specific localities were the surveys were performed, it must be clear that the findings of this research
can only be generalized to the population where the samples were taken and perhaps to other similar
localities of the same countries.
234
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
vice versa. Also the control behaviors that do not involve physical force were
researched. However, lacking of the research was that a definition of violence
or a classification of the types of violence that were intended to detect was not
proposed a priori, reason why the opportunity of a more complete and
systematic opportunity was lost.
Attitudes toward violence
In the first place we will analyze the attitudes toward violence from all the male
interviewees. Despite in reality there is a “come and go” between behaviors and
attitudes, through which both were modified within time, it seems logical that
certain behavior presumes the existence of a supporting attitude (which
motivates it and justifies it). However, behaviors and attitudes are not always
coherent.
The attitudes were measured by means of three propositions on which the
interviewees had to manifest their agreement (total or partial) or their
disagreement (Table 1). Less than 20 percent of the interviewees, in all the
countries, justify violence under different circumstances, being the highest
percentages in Belize, Nicaragua and Panama. However, within these percentages
there are important variations between countries, this happens in relative terms.
For example, the justification of violence against women in the case of
infidelity gathers six times more adhesions in Belize than in Costa Rica; the
percentage in Belize that justifies the opposed violence (women against men)
is the double that the one in Costa Rica, El Salvador and Honduras; the
percentage of those who think women should bear violence with the objective
of having familiar unity in Nicaragua threefold those who think likewise in
Costa Rica and Honduras.
It is interesting to highlight that the percentage of those who justify the
exercise of violence from women towards men in case of infidelity doubles, in
almost all the countries, the percentage of those who justify the exercise of
violence from men towards women under the same conditions. These answers
are difficult to interpret since they seem to respond to an abstract condition that
men do not hit women, which is modified, as we will shortly see, when “closer”
questions are asked to the subjects.
235
july/september 2005
236
9.6
384
Women should bear the
violence from the men in
order to maintain a familiar
unity
N
3.7
491
7.5
2.0
* The answers «totally agree» and «partially agree» were added.
18.8
11.7
City of San José de
Belice Costa Rica
If the woman cheats on the
man, he can beat her.
If the man cheats on the
woman she can beat him
Situations of use
of violence
7.6
291
8.2
4.1
San
Salvador
3.8
400
8.3
2.3
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
13.3
600
13.8
7.8
Managua,
Bluefields
y Pto. Cabezas
(Nicaragua)
6.0
463
15.1
8.4
City of
Panamá
TABLE 1
PERCENTAGE OF INTERVIEWEES WHO JUSTIFY THE USE OF ACCEPTANCE OF VIOLENCE IN
DIFFERENT SITUATIONS
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
The percentages mentioned so far are in general lower than those obtained
when the proposals refer to physical aggression against their own couple (Table
2). The highest percentages according to the aggression in different situations
were gathered in Belize and Nicaragua in all the researched items, whereas the
lowest were generally in Honduras and Panama. In all the cities, physical
aggression against the couple is mainly justified when she does not take proper
care of the children (reaching the third part of the interviewees in the cities of
Belize and Nicaragua), when she cheats on him and when she drinks or presents
other vices (Table 2). But are much less those who justify when she visits her
friend without permission or when she refuses to have sexual relations with her
husband.
In Belize the percentage of those who justify the violence if the woman
dresses or behaves in a provocative manner is much higher; the same happens
in Nicaragua concerning the aggression when the couple does not do the house
work.
Note that in many of the situations the aggression cause needs of a definition
or delimitation: what is it understood by dressing or behaving in a “provocative
manner”? Or by “do” the house work, or take “proper” care of the children? The
opportunity for the discretion is large and facilitates the justification of violent
acts.
Also note that the questions about female infidelity (generic) and the
cheating on the interviewee’s couple are comparable; however, the answers
that manifest according the second proposal are several times higher to those
that are done with the first. Perhaps is easier to disagree with the violence
against “abstract” women than when it is about their own couple and when
concrete causes are specified.
It is also possible that the very statement by the interviewer of causes that
would justify aggression would have produced a sensation of “permission” to
recognize what under other circumstances would be difficult to declare.
237
july/september 2005
238
384
N
* The answers «totally agree» and «partially agree» were added.
401
9.0
12.5
23.2
37.8
6.2
22.4
16.7
16.7
16.4
37.5
20.0
11.5
30.5
31.0
291
12.4
12.4
24.1
24.5
17.2
20.6
13.7
Ciudad de San José de
Belice Costa Rica San Salvador
She does not want to have
sexual relations when her
couple wants
Ella traiciona a su pareja
She visits her friends
without permission
She behaves or dresses
provocatively
She drinks or has another
vices
She does not do the house
work
She does not take good
care of the children
Physical agression from a
man against his couple is
justified
400
3.0
2.3
12.5
15.8
9.3
14.3
7.5
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
600
15.8
11.8
32.5
34.2
24.7
29.8
15.5
463
6.7
6.0
23.8
16.6
11.4
13.4
8.4
Managua,
Bluefields y
Pto. Cabezas Ciudad de
(Nicaragua)
Panamá
TABLE 2
PRERCENTAGE OF INTERVIEWEES WHO JUSTIFY PHYSICAL AGGRESSION FROM MEN AGAINST THEIR
COUPLES IN DIFFERENT SITUATIONS
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
Men as violence perpetrator
In the first place let’s see the violent behaviors that this category of Johnson’s
“intimate terrorism” comprises (Johnson and Ferraro, 2000). The exercise of
control conducts and verbal violence by the interviewees against their couples
appears more frequently in Belize and Nicaragua than in the other countries
(Table 3). The most frequent control behavior among asked behaviors was the
one that refers to whom the couple goes out with. In the cities of Nicaragua, for
example, a third of the interviewees who had or have a couple declare having
controlled, at least once, whom their couple went pout with, and only in Panama
the frequency of this behavior descents under 20 percent. Among the verbal
aggressions, insults appear to be the most common in all the countries.
Take into account that the labeling of actions as insulting, threatening or
humiliating depends, in this case, of the declarant perception, who is the real
or potential aggressor, which leads us to think that the percentages of these and
other kinds of aggressions we are analyzing underestimate the real frequency
of this kind of behavior.
In regards to the physical violence, again we find that Nicaragua and Belize
present the lowest (Table 4). In all the countries the most frequent violent
behavior is the pushing, followed by punching and slapping. It is not known if
these relative frequencies reflect the real world or if it is easier to recognize
those behaviors that appear as less violent among the violent.
A summary measure that shows the percentage of those who once committed
physical violence against their partners shows again that Nicaragua and Belize,
in that order present the highest frequencies, and Honduras and El Salvador the
lowest (inferior part of Table 4)
In tables 5 and 6 the exercise of violence according educational level and age
groups are shown. In the cases of Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador and Panama,
the low educational level (incomplete elementary education) is associated to
higher percentages of violence, but this relation is not observed in Honduras
and Nicaragua.
With the exception of Panama, where the highest percentages of men who
declare having exercised violence against their partners are in the age group of
25 to 34 years of age, in all the other countries, this exercise is more frequent
among older men.
239
july/september 2005
240
26.5
28.7
17.5
16.4
5.6
268
City of
Belice
21.2
11.8
4.4
6.1
0.8
363
San José de
Costa Rica
21.7
17.3
8.3
5.1
2.5
277
San
Salvador
19.5
19.8
8.6
7.7
0.0
349
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
* The categories «frequently», «more than once but not frequently» and «once» were added.
Controlling who she
goes out with
Insulting her
Humiliating her
Threatening her
Others
N
Kinas of behavior
31.8
22.0
8.7
6.4
1.3
519
Managua,
Bluefields
y Pto Cabezas
(Nicaragua)
TABLE 3
PERCENTAGES OF INTERVIEWEES WHO EXERCISED VERBAL VIOLENCE ACTS
AGAINST THEIR COUPLES
15.1
16.4
5.2
5.6
0.2
444
City of
Panamá
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
6.7
9.3
2.2
13.4
3.7
3.4
City of
Belice
5.5
4.4
1.4
11.3
2.5
0.8
San José de
Costa Rica
5.1
2.9
2.5
9.7
1.4
1.5
San
Salvador
241
.
** For the construction of this variable all those interviewees who had at least once practices violence.
* The categories «frequently», «more than once» and «once» were added.
12.3
349
5.2
3.4
2.6
8.6
2.6
0.3
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
Exercise of aggression of the interviewee against the couple (summary)**
Exercised violence
21.6
16.8
12.6
N
268
363
277
Punch
Slap
Kick
Push
Jerk
Other types of aggression
Kinds of aggression
27.4
519
13.7
7.3
3.5
15.8
3.9
2.9
Managua,
Bluefields y
Pto Cabezas
(Nicaragua)
16.9
444
5.4
9.0
2.9
10.1
2.5
0.5
City of
Panamá
TABLE 4
PERCENTAGE OF INTERVIEWEES WHO PHYSICALLY ATTACKED THEIR COUPLE (MULTIPLE ANSWER)
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
/
july/september 2005
11.2
363
22.1
268
10.8
277
20.0
12.4
San
Salvador
15.6
349
10.9
10.8
* For the construction of this variable all those interviewees who had at least once practices violence.
.
33.3
16.0
66.7
20.6
Incomplete elementary
Incomplete secondary
Complete secondary and
further
N
San José de
Costa Rica
City of
Belice
Educative level of the
interviewee
23.3
519
26.7
30.9
Managua,
Bluefields y
Tegucigalpa Pto. Cabezas
(Honduras) (Nicaragua)
18.1
425
30.0
16.2
City of
Panamá
TABLE 5
PRECENTAGE OF INTERNVIEWEES OF EAH EDUCATIONAL LEVEL WHO EXERCISED VIOLENCE
AGAINST THEIR COUPLES *
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
242
.
20.3
18.1
30.8
268
City of
Belice
13.9
15.2
21.8
363
San José de
Costa Rica
5.9
14.3
20.5
277
San Salvador
4.3
16.1
19.8
349
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
27.2
23.9
31.5
519
For the construction of the violence exercise variable, all the interviewees that at least once had practiced it.
15-24 years
25-34 years
35-44 years
N
Interviewees’ age
Managua,
Bluefields y
Pto. Cabezas
(Nicaragua)
14.1
20.6
18.6
425
City of
Panamá
TABLE 6
PERCENTAGE OF INTERVIEWEES PF EACH AGE GROUP WHO EXERCISED VIOLENCE
AGAINST THEIR COUPLES *
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
/
243
july/september 2005
244
City of
Belice**
14.0
25.6
11.6
16.3
25.6
6.9
100.0
43
32.8
6.6
50.8
3.3
100.0
61
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
1.6
4.9
San José de
San
Costa Rica Salvador**
14.1
23.9
21.0
4.2
100.0
142
12.0
24.8
20.0
13.3
18.7
13.3
100.0
75
10.7
24.0
City of
Panamá
*In Panama was added to the category «does not know» some cases of interviewees who had to answer but the question was not made (equivalent
to 10.7 percent).
** The data from Belize and El Salvador are not comparable with the data from other countries due to the high percentage of lack of answer,
which also affects to a certain extent in Panama
Desmoralization
disrespect
Jealousy
Response to women’s
aggression
She was complaining
Others
N.S/N.R *
Total
N
Reasons for the violence
exercise
Managua,
Bluefields y
Pto. Cabezas
(Nicaragua)
TABLE 7
DISTRIBUTION OF THE INTERVIEWEES WHO EXERCISED VIOLENCE AGAINST THEIR COUPLES
ACCORDING TO THE REASON WHY THEY DID IT
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
The reasons why the interviewees justify having exercised violence against
their couples (previous or current) are varied. In Tegucigalpa, the cities of
Nicaragua and the city of Panama, jealousy seems to be the more mentioned
category for physical violence, whereas in Costa Rica it would be an answer to
women’s aggression.
The “others” category is especially high in Costa Rica, El Salvador, and
Honduras. We found gathered there the violence due to discussions and
quarrels for different reasons (which in the case of Costa Rica is mentioned by
10 percent of the interviewees that exercised violence), as alcohol or drug
consumption by him or due to problems with the children.
The presence of haematomas was the most mentioned consequence of
physical aggressions against women (26.4 percent in Nicaragua, 20.9 in
Honduras, 20 in Panama, 15.5 in Belize, 14.8 in Costa Rica and 14.3 percent
in El Salvador). Bruises only exceed the five percent in Panama and Nicaragua;
whereas in El Salvador we found that 5.7 percent of the cases were burns.
The declared cases of violence when the woman is pregnant were of 11.5 in
Nicaragua, 9.32 in Honduras, 8.6 un El Salvador, 5.3 in Panama, 5.3 in Belize
and 4.9 percent un Costa Rica, always over the total of interviewees that
exercised any kind of violence against their couple.
As we have already mentioned, and as Baumeister states (1996, cited in
Muehlenhard and Kimes, 1999: 237) people resist to see themselves as violent
people, the aforementioned percentages (always originated in the aggressors)
would be an overestimation of violence’s real extension and severity.
Men as violence victims
As Valenzuela, among others, mention “…it is important to evaluate if the
violence is performed unidirectionally from men against women or
biderectionally between the two members of the couple…”, although “…taking
into account that the lie, hiding, minimization and distortion of the facts
constitute present characteristics in many of the men who exercise violence;
and the power inequities that there still exist between men and women”.
(Valenzuela, 2001: 161).
245
july/september 2005
246
24.3
519
7.9
11.8
2.1
14.3
6.0
3.1
24.1
444
7.0
8.6
1.8
12.2
0.9
4.7
City of
Panamá
* The categories «frequenlty», «more than once» and «once» were added.
** For the construction of this variable all the interviewees who had responded affirmatively were taken into account, although it was only
to one of the violence types, at least once.
18.3
349
Exercise of violence by the couple against interviewee (summary)**
Man victim of violence
28.4
19.6
14.1
N
268
363
277
8.5
11.0
1.7
13.5
2.8
2.2
6.6
9.7
1.7
9.7
4.3
1.7
15.7
15.3
8.2
16.8
7.1
4.9
City of
Belice
4.7
5.4
1.8
8.3
2.2
2.9
Punch
Slap
Kick
Push
Jerk
Other kina of aggression
Types of aggression
Managua,
Bluefields y
San José de
Tegucigalpa Pto Cabeza
Costa Rica San Salvador (Honduras) (Nicaragua)
TABLE 8
PERCENTAGE OF COUPLES WHO EXERCISED EACH KIND OF PHYSICAL AGGRESSION
AGAINST THE INTERVIEWEE
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
When comparing the prevalence of violence exercise by women against
men (Table 8) with the prevalence of violence exercise of men against women
(Table 4) always according of what was declared by men, it is observed that,
with the exception of Nicaragua, in all the countries there is a higher percentage
who declare having suffered from violence by their partners than those who
declare having exercised violence against their partners.4 A hypothesis to
interpret this finding is that feminine violence seems overestimated and male
violence underestimated due to the already mentioned reasons. However, this
interpretation does not take into account some constitutive elements of the
hegemonic masculinity construction (Conell, 1995) according to which men
should be the one in control and power of the situation, which would inhibit him
to appear being the victim of a woman. Another hypothesis, which we consider
of a stronger explanatory power and that shades this finding, states that when
the violent situations are defined from the actors themselves, it is not always
easy to establish who the victim is and who is the aggressor (Muehlenhard and
Kimes, 1999: 237).
The more common kind of violent behavior men are victims of is the
pushing, the same that was mentioned when women were the victims of the
physical aggressions from men (Table 8 and Table 6). Nonetheless, we found
that in the case of the violence exercise by women there is a higher mention of
violent behaviors that include slapping, punching and jerking.
The cities where there is a stronger divergence among the declarations of
violence exercised by women and that exercised by men are Panama (where the
declaration of violence exercised by women exceed in seven percentage points
the male violence), Belize (6.8 percentage points of difference) and Honduras
(6.0 percentage points of difference). As we mentioned before, the only country
where the percentage of citations of violence exercised by men exceeds the
violence exercised by women is Nicaragua. However, in this case, the violent
behavior percentages are the highest no matter who is the perpetrator, with a
slight difference in favor of the violence exercised by men; this is of three
percentage points. Tables 4 and 8).
4
It is worth saying that for some feminist thinkers a posture that contemplates that both men and women
can be aggressors and victims of aggression would give a conservative thinking that maintains
fundaments of the kind «if everybody is violent, there is no case we defend victimized women from
domestic violence or rapes» (phrase cited in Muehlenhard and Kimes, 1998 to which the authors do no
stick to). In this work we coincide with the feminist thinking that the violent risks are differential by
gender (Morrison et al.,2004: 1), but we consider that the definition of violence would have to bear in
mind the differential risks of women and people who are not generically identified from their biological
sex, in participating or being victim of violent behaviors based on their sexuality, but not forgetting the
violence exercised against men.
247
july/september 2005
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
Violence environment and bidirectional violence
In order to try to reflect in a more complex way the situations when violence
within a couple is produced, we devised an indicator which we denominated
“violence environment” calculated as the sum of the physical violence behaviors
when women are the perpetrators and the violent behaviors when men are the
perpetrators (without doubling the ones that mention one kind or another of
violence). This indicator shows the frequency when at least one of the members
of the couple exercised any kind of violence, at least once. Note that violent
episodes took place in between 22 and 37 percent of the couples when the male
member was the interviewee (Table 9)
The cities that register higher violence percentages in any sense are the same
that appeared when the exercise by men was analyzed: Belize and Nicaragua.
In Belize, Costa Rica and Panama are among the highest frequencies of violent
environments at the low education level (to incomplete elementary studies)
whereas El Salvador and Nicaragua the highest percentages are in the medium
levels (to incomplete secondary education) (Table 9). The city of Honduras is
the only place where there is a higher percentage of violent environment among
men of higher education level (complete secondary education and higher).
When previously the exercise of violence according to the male perpetrator’s
age was analyzed (Table 6) it was found that in almost all the countries the
highest percentages of exercise of violence took place in the group of more age.
In the case of men, who are in violent environments (Table 10) the situation is
different, since in Costa Rica and El Salvador the frequency of violent
environments increases as the interviewees’ age increases, whereas in the other
countries there is no clear relation between the violent environment and the age.
To conclude, let’s observe to what extent - always according to men’s
declaration - there is two-way violence. Estimating the square chi it is observed
that when there is one-way violence, there is also on the other way; in all the
countries (p= 0.000) The possible interpretations of this evidence are three: a)
that, indeed violence is frequently mutual; b) that men perceive an non-existent
violence against them which they use (at an unconscious level) as a justification
of their own violence, or c) that in their declarations men lie on purpose to
justify their violence. We prefer a combination of the first two interpretations,
despite the fact that surely there are cases in which the third apply.
248
249
22.5
25.3
363
268
24.5
38.9
36.8
36.9
36.8
66.7
City of San José de
Belice Costa Rica
277
19.4
22.0
25.8
22.5
San
Salvador
349
25.7
22.6
21.6
19.6
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
519
30.0
35.8
40.6
36.7
425
27.8
28.0
27.5
40.0
City of
Panamá
* For the construction of this variable were taken into account all the interviewees who had participated in at least one of the violence types
(whoever the perpetrator was), at least in one occasion.
.
Complete elementary,
incomplete secondary
Complete secondary and
further
Total violence
environment
N
Incomplete elementary
Interviewees’ educative
level
Managua,
Bluefields y
Pto. Cabezas
(Nicaragua)
TABLE 9
PRECENTAGE OF INTERVIEWEES WHO DECLARED VIOLENCE ENVIRONMENT BY EDUCATIVE LEVEL
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
/
july/september 2005
35.3
38.6
38.5
36.9
268
20.4
24.0
33.7
25.3
363
City of San José de
Belice Costa Rica
16.8
20.0
30.7
22.0
277
San
Salvador
12.9
29.7
28.6
22.6
349
Tegucigalpa
(Honduras)
35.0
34.6
38.5
35.8
519
27.6
29.4
26.5
28.0
425
City of
Panamá
* For the construction of this variable were taken into account all the interviewees who had participated in at least one of the violence types
(whoever the perpetrator was), at least in one occasion.
15-24 years
25-34 years
35-44 years
Total violence environment
N
Age groups
Managua,
Bluefields y
Pto. Cabezas
(Nicaragua)
TABLE 10
PERCENTAGE OF INTERVIEWEES WHO ARE WITHIN VIOLENT ENVIROMENTS BY AGE GROUPS
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
250
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
Conclusions
To sum up, the low percentages of violence against women justifying attitudes
“in general” do not fully demonstrate the degree of violence acceptance when
the questions are about the interviewees’ couples and the specific reasons that,
for them, would be justifying. Also, they do not show the predisposition of the
interviewed men to exercise it. Indeed, it is in the questions that put the
interviewees in concrete situations where there are more frequencies of
permissive attitudes to violence against women, which are in agreement with
the violent behaviors later declared. The highest percentages of violence
exercise (both when the man is the perpetrator as well as when the woman is
the perpetrator) were found in Belize and Nicaragua. The educational level
seems to play an important role only in some of the countries (Belize, Costa
Rica, El Salvador and Panama), whereas age seems positively associated to the
violence exercise in almost all the countries.
The concept of violence environment in the couple allows having a clearer
view of violent situations, further of who is the perpetrator and who is the
victim, still taking into account that most of the cases women are the victims.
The percentage of affected couples is between more than a fifth part to
something more than a third.
We also found that interviewed men declare more often to be victims of their
partners than being them the perpetrators. These findings point the need of
continuing the research on this subject, looking for better forms of gathering
information and using qualitative instruments to try to understand this kind of
findings.
Bibliography
ALKSINS, Ch., S. Desmarais, Ch. Senn y N. Hunter, 2000, “Methodological concerns
regarding estimates of physical violence in sexual coercion: overstatement or
understatement”, in Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29 (4).
BOTT, S. and S. Jejeebhoy, 2003, “Adolescent sexual and reproductive health in South
Asia: an overview of findings from the 2000 Mumbai Conference”, in Progress in
Reporductive Health, núm. 64.
CÁCERES, C., 2000, La (re)configuración del universo sexual. Cultura(s) sexual(es)
y salud sexual entre los jóvenes de Lima a vuelta de milenio, Universidad Peruana
Cayetano Heredia/ Redess Jóvenes, Lima.
251
july/september 2005
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
CASTRO, R. and A. Ruíz, 2004, “Prevalencia y severidad de la violencia contra mujeres
embarazadas, México”, in Revista de Saúde Pública, 38 (1).
CONNELL, R. W., 1995, Masculinities, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.
CONNELL, R. W., 1997, Arms and the man. Using the new research on masculinity to
understand violence and promote peace in the contemporary world, Work presented at
the Meeting on Male Roles and Masculinities in the Perspective of a Culture of Peace,
September, Unesco, Oslo.
ELLSBERG, M., 2003, Corced sex among adolescents: recent findings from Latin
America, work presented at the Consultive Meeting on Non-consensual Sexual
Experiences of Young People in Developing Countries, September 22-25, New Delhi.
FIEBERT, M., 2000, “References examining men as victims of women´s sexual
coercion”, in Sexuality and Culture, 4 (3).
FORBES, G. and L. Adams-Curtis, 2001, “Experiences with sexual coercion in college
males and females —Role of family conflict, sexist attitudes, acceptance of rape myths,
self—esteem, and big-five personality factors”, in Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16
(9).
GONZÁLEZ Tapia, N., 1991, “Violación doméstica al amparo del derecho. La agresión
a la mujer por el cónyuge o conviviente” en M. del C. Feijoó (comp.), Mujer y sociedad
en América Latina, Clacso, Buenos Aires.
HALPERN, C., P. Bouvier, P. Jaffe, R. Mounoud, C. Pawlak, J. Laederach, H. Wicky
y F. Astie, 2001, “ Partner violence among adolescents in opposite-sex romantic
relationship: findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health”, in
American Journal of Public Health, 91(10).
HAWORTH Hoeppner, S., 1998, “What´s gender got to do with it: Perceptions of sexual
coertion in a university community”, in Sex Roles, 38 (9-10).
HEISE, L., K. Moore and N. Toubia, 1995a, Sexual coercion and reproductive health.
A focus on research, Population Council, New York.
HEISE, L., K. Moore and N. Toubia, 1995b, “Defining coercion and consent crossculturally”, in SIECUS Report, 24 (2).
JOHNSON, M. P. and K. J. Ferraro, 2000, “Research on domestic violence in the 1990s:
making distinctions”, in Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62.
MOORE, A., 2003, Female control over first sexual intercourse in Brazil: case studies
of Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais and Recife, Pernambuco, The University of Texas at
Austin, doctoral thesis, Austin.
MORRISON, A., M. Ellsberg y S. Bott, 2004, Addressing gender-based violence in the
Latin American and Caribbean region: a critical review of interventions, World Bank
Policy Research Working Paper 3438, World Bank, en http://econ.worldbank.org .
MUEHLENHARD, C. y L. Kimes, 1999, The social construction of violence: the case
of sexual and domestic violence, in Personality and Social Psycholgy Review, 3 (3).
MURRAY, J. y R. Henjum, R., 1993, “Analysis of sexual abuse in dating”, in Guiadance
and Counselling, 8 (4).
252
/
Violence within a couple. Evidences from surveys to... E. Pantelides & H. Manzelli
O’SULLIVAN, L. and E. Byers, 1993, “Eroding stereotypes: college women’s attempts
to influence reluctant male sexual partner”, en Journal of Sex Research, 30.
O’SULLIVAN, L., E. Byers y L. Finkelman, 1998, “A comparison of male and female
college students’ experiences of sexual coercion”, in Psychology of Women Quarterly,
22.
PANTELIDES, E. and R. Geldstein, 1999, “Encantadas, convencidas o forzadas:
iniciación sexual en adolescentes de bajos recursos”, en AEPA, CEDES, CENEP,
Avances en investigación social en salud reproductiva y sexualidad, Buenos Aires.
PATEL, V., G. Andrews, T. Pierre and N. Kamat, 2003, “Gender, sexual abuse and risk
behaviours in adolescents: a cross-sectional survey in schools in Goa, India”, in
Progress in Reproductive Health, 64.
POPULATION COUNCIL, 2004, The adverse health and social outcomes of social
coercion: experiences of young in developing countries, in www.popcouncil.org.
POPULATION REPORTS, 1999, “Impact on women’s reproductive health”, en
Population Reports, 27 (4).
RAMÍREZ Rodríguez, J. and P. Vargas Becerra, 1998, “Una espada de doble filo: la
salud reproductiva y la violencia doméstica contra la mujer”, en E. Bilac y M. Baltar da
Rocha, Saúde reprodutiva na América Latina e no Caribe: temas e problemas, Editora
34, Rio de Janeiro.
RAMOS Lira, L., M. Romero Mendoza and E Jiménez, 1995, “Violencia doméstica y
maltrato emocional. Consideraciones sobre el daño psicológico”, in Salud Reproductiva
y Sociedad, II (6-7).
REILLY, M., B. Lott, D. Caldwell and L. DeLuca, 1992, “Tolerance for sexual
harassment related to self-reported sexual victimization”, in Gender & Society, 6 (1).
ROSENTHAL, D., 1997, “Understanding sexual coercion among young adolescents:
communicative clarity, pressure, and acceptance”, in Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26
(5).
ROTUNDO, M., D. Nguyen, y P. Sackett, 2001, “A meta-analytic review of gender
differences in perceptions of sexual harassment”, in Journal of Applied Psychology, 86
(5).
SAUCEDO González, I., 1995, “La relación violencia-salud reproductiva: un nuevo
campo de investigación”, in Salud Reproductiva y Sociedad, II (6-7).
SENN, C., S. Desmarais, N. Verberg y E. Wood, E., 2000, “Predicting coercive sexual
behavior across the lifespan in a random sample of Canadian men”, in Journal of Social
and Personal Relationships, 17 (1).
STRUCKMAN Johnson, C. and D. Struckman-Johnson, 1994, “Men pressured and
forced into sexual experience”, in Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23 (1).
SUÁREZ, L. and C. Menkes, 2004, La percepción de los estudiantes adolescentes de
la violencia familiar. El caso de Chiapas y San Luis Potosí, México, trabajo presentado
en la XXV International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, October
7-9, Las Vegas.
253
july/september 2005
Papeles de POBLACIÓN No. 45
CIEAP/UAEM
UNICEF, 2000, La violencia doméstica contra mujeres y niñas, UNICEF. Florence.
VALENZUELA, V., 2001, “Hombres que viven relaciones de violencia conyugal”, in
J. Olavarría, Hombres: identidad/es y violencia, Flacso, Red Masculinidad/es Chile y
Universidad Academia de Humanismo Cristiano, Santiago de Chile.
ZIMMERMAN, R., S. Sprecher, L. Langer, and C. Holloway, 1995, “Adolescents’
perceived ability to say ‘no’ to unwanted sex”, in Journal of Adolescence Research, 10
(3).
254