2.1 Cultural Factors in Understanding Violence in the Home

Human relationships do not exist outside of a social context, and family violence has not developed apart from social custom and institutions. (n1) Unfortunately and despite its high costs, almost every society in the world has social institutions that legitimize, obscure, and deny abuse. The same acts that would be punished if directed at an employer, a neighbor, or an acquaintance often go unchallenged when men direct them at women, especially within the family. (Heise 1999: 3)

Ultimately, the social structure and institutions determine what services and resources are available to prevent, intervene, and heal members caught in the cycle of family violence.
Walker (1999) identified factors that interact to determine the social context of family violence:

(1) gender [roles and stereotypes]
(2) political structure
(3) religious beliefs
(4) attitudes toward violence in general
(5) [attitudes toward] violence toward women
(6) state-sponsored violence, such as civil conflicts and wars, and
(7) the migration within and between countries (21)

These institutions and customs have the potential to protect and aid its most vulnerable members, or to expose them to abuse and cruelty. And it is precisely within the home that children first experience most of these factors. (Pinheiro 2006: 48) For instance, in cultures where men are thought to have the right to control women and/or children, violence is too easily and too often employed as an expression of that right. (n2) The transgression of gender stereotypes is often the 'trigger' for male violence. These transgressions can be as simple as a husband's real or perceived judgment of 'failure' that a wife or child has disobeyed, talked back, spoiled a meal, made a mess, left without permission, refused sexual demands, or suspected his infidelity. (Heise 1999: 6)

Heise developed an "Ecological Model" to conceptualize the levels and interactions of these factors, from individual perpetrator to relationship to community to society. Each person experiences these factors in a different way, which in part accounts for the differing levels of violence in individuals at the same time as recognizing larger trends and patterns in abuse and perpetrator typologies. (Heise 1999: 8) (n3)

***Notes

1) “Widespread ignorance of the intimate relationships between cultural belief systems, childrearing practices and the development of violent behaviors will doom any attempts to truly understand, and prevent, violence...” (Perry 1997).

2) "In countries as different as Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe, studies find that violence is frequently viewed as physical chastisement,the husband's right to “correct” an erring wife." (Heise 1999: 6)

3) It’s limitation of focusing on male battery against women should be taken into consideration, even in cultures that are considered patriarchal, within the context of the gender controversy. See section 1.1 for a discussion on expanding the definition of domestic violence beyond male battery and typology theories that differentiate between "patriarchal/intimate terrorism" and "common/situational couple violence."