Men, Masculinity and Domestic Violence in India
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Domestic Violence in India: 4 Exploring Strategies, Promoting Dialogue Men, Masculinity and Domestic Violence in India Summary Report of Four Studies Copyright© 2002 International Center for Research on Women Domestic Violence in India: Exploring Strategies, Promoting Dialogue Men, Masculinity and Domestic Violence in India Summary Report of Four Studies Masculinity and Violence Against Women in Marriage: An Exploratory Study in Rajasthan Ch. Satish Kumar S.D. Gupta George Abraham Indian Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur Masculinity and Domestic Violence in a Tamil Nadu Village Anandhi. S. J. Jeyaranjan Institute for Development Alternatives (IDA), Chennai Gender Violence and Construction of Masculinities: An Exploratory Study in Punjab Rainuka Dagar Institute for Development Communication, Chandigarh Masculinity and Violence in the Domestic Domain: An Exploratory Study Among the MSM Community P.K. Abdul Rahman The Naz Foundation (I) Trust, New Delhi Links Between Masculinity and Violence: Aggregate Analysis Nata Duvvury Madhabika Nayak Keera Allendorf International Center for Research on Women, Washington, D.C. Preface he International Center for Research on Women, in collaboration with Indian researchers, is pleased to Tpresent the fourth in a series summarizing research studies undertaken in India on domestic violence against women. This particular volume brings together four studies exploring the links between masculinity and domestic violence as well as an aggregate analysis undertaken by ICRW on these linkages. The summary reports were prepared by the individual research teams and the introduction has been prepared by ICRW staff. The ICRW team assumes responsibility for any errors and omissions in this report. Both the research teams and the ICRW team wish to express gratitude for the excellent editorial support provided by Margo Young and the unstinting administrative support provided by Miriam Escobar and T. Venugopal in the production of this report. We also wish to acknowledge the overall support of Kathleen Barnett, Vice-President of ICRW, in the final phase of this project. Introduction Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1 Masculinity and Violence Against Women in Marriage: An Exploratory Study in Rajasthan ............................................................................. 6 Masculinity and Domestic Violence in a Tamil Nadu Village ................................. 16 Gender Violence and Construction of Masculinities: An Exploratory Study in Punjab ................................................................................ 27 Masculinity and Violence in the Domestic Domain: An Exploratory Study Among the MSM Community ............................................ 39 Links Between Masculinity and Violence: Aggregate Analysis ....................................................................................................... 52 Appendix ........................................................................................................................ 71 References Cited........................................................................................................... 83 This publication was made possible through support provided by the International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), under the terms of Cooperative Agreement No. 386-A-00-99-00311-00. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or ICRW. Introduction ith the work of activists, researchers, and Men, Masculinities, and Domestic Violence Wcountless others, as well as international docu- against Women Worldwide ments like the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action and One of the first, and ongoing, research tasks in do- CEDAW, violence against women has become a mestic violence work has been to examine the scope widely recognized human rights, health, and devel- and impact of domestic violence against women. opment issue. Given this recognition, research on Given this focus, both qualitative and quantitative women experiencing violence and services for these work on gender-based violence (eg. Odujinrin 1993; women have spread across the world. However, un- Australian Statistics Bureau 1996; WHO multi-coun- til recently, men were largely left out of this work. try study; and many more) has targeted women re- Men were recognized as perpetrators, but, for the most spondents almost exclusively. Recently, with the part, researchers did not interview them, funders did new emphasis on men’s roles in development (Greig not fund programs for them, and activists did not tar- et al. 2000), research on violence against women has get them. Indeed, for many, violence against women begun to focus more often and more clearly on men was a women’s issue that should be dealt with by and as well. This work is based, either explicitly or im- for women. plicitly, on broader concepts of masculinity or, more accurately, masculinities. The pluralization of mas- Recently, this focus on women has begun to broaden culinity highlights that there is not a single masculin- rapidly. Men are increasingly acknowledged as a criti- ity, but rather multiple masculinities, which vary cal part of addressing and ultimately preventing vio- within and across time, space, and cultures (Connell lence against women (Kaufman 2001). On one hand, 1995). Further, these masculinities are arranged in a it is recognized that any attempt to prevent this vio- hierarchy, with the culturally dominant masculinity, lence must address men as perpetrators. On the other or hegemonic masculinity, at the top. hand, it is also recognized that we must move beyond men as perpetrators only. Vast numbers of men do As in studies with women respondents, those with not engage in violence against women, and these men, male respondents substantiate the evidence of high as well as their more violent counterparts, are critical prevalence of domestic violence and men’s willing- resources and partners in ending violence against ness to talk about violence. Reports from diverse na- women. Additionally, men too suffer from violence tions such as Thailand, New Zealand and South Af- against women when their women friends and rela- rica indicate that 20-44 percent men report being vio- tives experience such violence, and even when they lent towards their wives or intimate partners (Hoffman themselves perpetrate violence against women. et al. 1994, Leibrich et al. 1995, Abrahams et al. 1 Domestic Violence in India: Exploring Strategies, Promoting Dialogue 1999). For example, in a survey of married men in narratives from male youth in South Africa, violence Bangkok, 20% reported physical abuse towards their usually occurred when youth thought that their girl- wives (Hoffman et al. 1994). In South Africa, 44% of friends were threatening their authority or otherwise working men surveyed in Cape Town reported physi- “stepping out of line” (Wood and Jewkes 2001). cal and/or sexual abuse towards their partners in the Honor killings, when women are killed by male fam- last 10 years (Abrahams et al. 1999). ily members for “dishonoring their families” through infidelity and other sexual transgressions, are perhaps Recent studies indicate that violence against women the most extreme examples of such behavior. in general, and domestic violence in particular, is in- tricately linked to real or perceived fulfillment of Violence, therefore, is at one level a sign of a struggle masculinities (Moore 1994). It appears that men are to maintain sense of identity and power. What then more likely to use violence against women if they are constitutes this identity and what is the interrelation- unable to fulfill a hegemonic masculinity. During ship between identity and power? As pointed out ear- the Gulf War, for example, Israeli men were not in- lier, masculinity is not a unitary construct. Ethno- volved in combat and rates of sexual offences and graphic research across various cultural settings in- violence against women increased in Israel (Klein dicates that identity is multiple and individuals often 1999). Klein suggests that men’s inability to fulfill embody contradictory attributes. For example, a ‘ma- their roles as protectors while their country was un- cho’ man be aggressive, virile, controlled, emotional, der threat undermined their male identity and made and/or generous (Cornwall and Lindiframe). Further them more likely to use violence against women. In experience of identity is intrinsically linked to the East Africa, socioeconomic change has increasingly exercise of power and challenges to the exercise of led to men’s inability to fulfill their role as breadwin- power are a threat to identity and vice versa (Moore ner while women are increasingly economically in- 1994). dependent (Silberschmidt 2001). Silberschmidt con- tends this situation has resulted in men exaggerating To identify strategies for addressing violence, it is or turning more often to other masculine behaviors imperative to have a deeper understanding of mas- in order to compensate for their economic culinities, norms of power and control and the link- disempowerment. Specifically, men use violence ages between the these norms and constructs of mas- against women in order to express their masculine culinity. dominance and have sex with multiple partners in order to express their masculine sexuality. Men, Masculinities, and Domestic