NCJ Number
205985
Journal
Violence Against Women Volume: 10 Issue: 6 Dated: June 2004 Pages: 652-675
Editor(s)
Aysan Sev'er,
Myrna Dawson,
Holly Johnson
Date Published
June 2004
Length
24 pages
Annotation
Through an examination of comparative research and previous theoretical arguments, this article argues that domestic violence endures in large part because the social structure of interpersonal relations within societies continues to provide the fertile conditions that generate and perpetuate the use of violence with a more integrative theoretical approach recommended.
Abstract
The problem of violence against women continues across a range of different societies in the world. This article examines the social structure of violence against women or the features of social life that promote violence. By drawing on comparative research and prior theoretical approaches, several structural characteristics of interpersonal relations are highlighted that have implications for future analytic work regarding violence against women, as well as the conditions under which conflicts turn violent more generally. These identified characteristics or key factors, creating a more integrative theoretical approach include: (1) the degree of social isolation; (2) interdependence of support networks; (3) inequality; (4) relational distance; (5) centralization of authority; and (6) exposure to violent networks. The argument developed in this article suggests that insufficient attention has been paid to key explanatory factors deduced from comparative literature, creating weak explanatory models for predicting the presence or extent of violent encounters between intimate partners. Several important structural features need to be investigated to answer more fully the questions of why rates of intimate partner violence may change over time: (1) the need to develop a broader range of structural measures to evaluate the key dimensions of partners’ relationships with each other and their relative access to extended networks and community locations; (2) the need for more systematic measures of intimacy or relational distance between partners and their social networks are needed; (3) the relevance of the degree of centralization of authority to domestic violence; and (4) the need for access to alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to reduce the likelihood of violence. This integrative theory represents predominantly a synthesis of previous work rather than a completely new theory. This theory can be tested across a range of different societies with rigorous measures. References