Download Gender and Victimization: Differential Responses and Grief Cycles and more Study notes Victimology in PDF only on Docsity!
Sociology 4099: Victimology
Lecture Notes Week 9:
Victims and Gender: Differential Responses to Victimization
Today we will be focusing on the topic of victims and gender. This has already come up several times in this class. For example, feminist theory was mentioned as one example of structural approaches when speaking of theoretical approaches to explain victimization (Fattah 2000; Schneider, 1999). Implicit to this is the conception that victimization reflects the power structure of society, and, since women have traditionally been denied power in patriarchial society, they have been more prone to experiencing victimization. Countless feminist writers have taken up this theme (D. Smith; K. McKinnon; etc.)
Relatedly, gender was discussed in relation to official crime statistics and victimization surveys. For example, of sexual assaults in 1997, 84% of victims were female. Unlike sexual assaults, victims of assault were as likely to be male as female. However, females accounted for more victims of common assault (53%), while males accounted for more victims of assault with a weapon and aggravated assault. Females had most often been assaulted by a spouse (43%) or an acquaintance (18%), while males were most often assaulted by strangers (39%) and acquaintances (34%). Similarly, in the 1981 Canadian Urban Victimization Survey, women were found 7 times more likely than men to be victims of sexual assault or personal theft. Men were almost twice as likely as women to be victims of robbery or assault. Of course, gender differences in reporting crimes may affect these figures even further.
Finally, gender frequently emerged as a theme throughout our prior discussion of specific findings and institutions. For example, it impacted the expression of various metaphors of loss, the various labels applied to victims, the composition of victim support and lobby groups, certain legal procedures, and the client profile of Victims= Services and the psychiatric profession.
Keeping all of these things in mind, today I want to focus on four specific aspects of gender and victimization:
(1) Physical violence and gender in the family; (2) Differential responses to victimization by gender; (3) How these are reflected in victims= coping strategies; (4) The consequences of these for their overall coming to terms with victimization.
(1) Physical Violence and Gender:
It is important to understand that violence is not confined to a few cruel or mentally ill individuals, but occurs in many Anormal@ families as well. So long as we continue to perpetuate this myth, and focus upon studies from shelters and other clinical sources, both our understanding of violence and our social policy responses will be inadequate.
Gender is a key factor in this regard. While studies from shelters indicate spousal assault is overwhelmingly an act of male violence, these sources obscure the fact that women initiate assaults just as often as men do (Stets and Straus, 1990). When men are assaulted, they are less likely than women to be injured, often have economic resources mitigating the need for shelters, and rarely report the crime out of gender prescriptions urging them to Ahandle the situation.@ Moreover, police tend to only record abuse where there has been an injury.
Considering the above, the question arises: how much violence takes place behind closed doors? Methodological difficulties abound. The family may be seen as a private, loving and supportive group, but these images obscure our ability to perceive its violent aspects (e.g. men and women are both far more likely to be assaulted by a family member: 20 and 200 times more likely than by a stranger, respectively). Difficulties also arise in defining and measuring violence (e.g. when defined simply in terms of physical injuries sustained underestimates by up to 95%, does not include psychological harm, and fails to differentiate unintended acts and other Alegitimate@ violence, such as mild spanking).
Thus, in this part, violence is defined as an act carried out with the intention or perceived intention of causing physical pain or injury to another person.
When attempting to discern just how violent families are, a National Family Violence Survey was conducted in the U.S. in both 1975 and 1985. Using the Conflict Tactics Scale to measure a variety of actions ranging from minor to severe violence, the more recent survey found that:
16 of every 100 partners in a married or cohabiting relationship reported a violent incident that year.
When measured over the course of the relationship/marriage, this figure climbs to 30%.
(Both of these statistics probably far underestimate the true incidence).
While women assault their partners as often as men do, they are the major victims of physical, economic and psychological injury.
Frequency of assaults vary by severity. The most severe assaults are rarer, but, when the entire range is considered, there was an average of 5 assaults a year (which is quite low, considering that the shelter average is about 60).
The substantial difference in violence between this survey and the shelter studies suggest a clinical fallacy at work: the Abattered women@ in this sample are not as frequently battered as the women in shelters, and it would skew the figures to generalize from the latter.
2.3% of American children suffered Avery severe violence@ according to this survey, and 11%
partner on occasion. Of course, in any other context (e.g. the workplace), such behavior would not be so well tolerated.
Fourth, there is the issue of family training in violence. Over 90% of parents surveyed reported that they hit toddlers to punish them, 20% hit an infant, and 33% continued physical punishment even when their children were 15-17 years old. Most of this involved ordinary physical punishment carried out by a concerned parent. However, such actions also teach children, at a very young, formative age, that those who love you are also those who hit you. It may also be reversed to Athose you love are those you can hit,@ and this view becomes shrouded in an aura of moral rightness. It is important for us to realize that this principle extends itself into adult life. The survey shows that the more a man was physically punished as a child, the greater was the probability he or she would assault his wife as an adult (the same was true for women).
While it is important to consider a variety of other risk factors such as alcoholism, poverty, stress, and the level of violence in society at large, we must be aware that none of the risk factors we have discussed thus far are determinative in themselves. Most adults who suffered physical punishments as a child, for example, are not violent (89%), and most male- dominated marriages remain non-violent. Rather, it takes a combination of factors to produce a high probability of family violence. For example, if one takes a checklist of all of the factors discussed above and looks at cases in the survey data where all are present, about 70% of such couples reported a violent incident in the prior year (compared to almost 0% for respondents with none). The same thing could be done for factors associated with child physical abuse.
Many of these risk factors can be lowered if society - and individuals - are willing to change. In recent decades there has been a vast campaign against child abuse and wife-beating, a proliferation of child protection services and womens= shelters, and increased arrest and prosecution of offenders. Going hand in hand with these efforts, parent education programs have been expanded, gender inequality has been somewhat reduced, and increased family counselling has aided couples in resolving some of the inevitable conflicts of married life. Nevertheless, many of these services only reach a fraction of the population, and have the least penetration in those segments of society who need them the most. This has implications for violence reduction.
Considering that these treatment and prevention programs underwent a period of significant expansion in the period prior to the survey in question, it may be hypothesized that this would lead to a reduction in child abuse and spousal violence. In fact, that is what the data show: a 47% decrease in child abuse between 1975-85. This is exactly the opposite of what agencies showed: a threefold increase during the same period. These figures are not contradictory, but simply illustrates increased reporting and intervention over this time. Correspondingly, the survey showed that intra-family homicides declined by almost 30%, and severe assaults on wives by 20%. While none of the other forms of violence measured declined significantly, this is telling since none were subject to the intensive and sustained effort focused on child abuse and wife beating.
In the end, family violence remains a significant problem despite these improvements, and the task ahead remains formidable.
Now that we have reviewed gender in relation to the occurrence of violence, we must shift our attention to consider victims= reactions to it. In the sections that follow:
(i) I will critically outline the research literature on gender, victimization, and grief in relation to the dominant medical models;
(ii) I will present relevant data from my qualitative study of homicide survivors.
Specifically, after reviewing subjects= coping attempts, relative behavioral adherence to traditional gender roles, and subsequent health problems, I will argue that an observed set of gender-specific grief cycles, along with men and womens= methods of avoiding them, may be useful in correcting, expanding, and integrating current paradigms in ways that more effectively help victimized individuals.
(2) The Dominant Medical Models vs. The Research Literature:
When people are victimized by a violent crime, they often deal with mental health professionals. Sometimes this is solely their own decision, in others sought out through the urging of, or avoidance by, family and friends. In yet other cases, counselling is urged by Victims= Services, or medical reports are needed for civil litigation or Criminal Injuries Compensation, and individuals are required to satisfy the need for documentation by visiting a professional.
Whatever the source of their contact, however, it is most important to reiterate the current ideas which such individuals encounter, and which are generally applied to them - at a time in which they are extremely vulnerable to suggestion, and, in many cases, not very likely to be critical.
As noted last week, recent work regarding the emotional state of victims reflects three main themes:
(i) A focus on temporal "stage models" of the grieving process;
(ii) an emphasis on the therapist's role in helping the bereaved accomplish various tasks leading to recovery; and
(iii) attempts at differentiating the "symptoms" of "post traumatic stress disorder" from other "mental disorders."
While we have already outlined many of the problems with these models, they all share a key
(i) Men exhibit a desire to get on with life while women remain depressed and obsessed with thoughts of their dead child (Clyman et. al., 1980); (ii) Fathers utilize activity-based coping styles after the loss of a child (Mandell et. al, 1980); (iii) Many fathers note the buffering effect of the social support they receive from their employment activities (Littlewood et. al, 1990); (iv) Fathers revert more quickly to "normal" patterns of coping than mothers (i.e. suffering a less general reduction in coping capabilities than mothers, with a tendency to keep busy and take on additional workloads in order to cope with their loss) (Littlewood et. al, 1991).
Yet, it is important to stress that such apparent differences in coping strategies do not necessarily mean that there are differences in the intensity of men's grief. It is equally possible that men mask their pain through these coping patterns in order to conform to male gender roles and be quietly supportive of other family members (Schatz., 1986). Indeed, it has been noted that such conformity may result in:
(i) Unwillingness to seek out help; (ii) Inappropriate anger stemming from using most of their energy to keep busy and control the emotions evoked by grief; (iii) Drinking and drug use, especially because of guilt after angry outbursts; (iii) Resentment over the need to be strong and postpone their grief; all of which (iv) Impede the successful resolution of grief.
Similarly, it has been argued that men in our culture are taught to protect their families. Since they are responsible for fulfilling their family's needs, they must be in control, strong, and able to fix things. As such, showing emotions is labelled as weak or pitiful. Hence, men often see death as a challenge, even a test of masculinity ( Sobieski, 1994). Thus, they tend to remain silent, engage in solitary or secret mourning, focus on physical or legal action, become immersed in activity, and develop addictive behaviors. In contrast to women’s more visible grief, these coping behaviors may actually prolong and deepen men’s grief.
Finally, since individuals are socialized , directly or indirectly, to perceive and experience death and loss, as well as to express their grief about it in particular ways (Lister, 1991), it may be inappropriate to judge one gender from the perspective of the other. Some have asserted, for example, that men's emotional lives have to be understood on their own terms rather than in comparison to an implicit female model of affect (Cook, 1988). Using concepts originally developed in studies of women may have an implicit bias when used to study men (e.g. is fathers' grief really less intense, or does it only appear that way because we are conceptualizing and measuring it from a female perspective?)
Indeed, it has been argued that men experience a set of double binds as they attempt to cope with the death of a child. These involve two dynamics: (1) men’s unexpressive style conflicting with their partners= needs for emotional openness; and (2) conflict between culturally and medically idealized notions of how to cope with grief through emotional expressiveness and
men’s personal and societal needs to strictly control such expressions. Insofar as men's emotional life consists of the tension between the need for expressing unhappy feelings and fear of the consequences of doing so, then each of these two binds is likely to be encountered.
Cook (1988) observed that these gender restrictions generally result in coping strategies that involve ways of handling upsetting feelings without disclosing them to other people (e.g. cognitive strategies such as thinking about something else, and reason/reflection vs. active approaches such as doing something else and engaging in solitary expressiveness).
Summing up, it is evident from a review of the literature that the implicit gender-neutral universality of subjects= experiences advanced by the psychological models is untenable. Rather, attention must be paid to how male and female experiences are both similar to and differ from one another in the wake of victimization.
(3) My Homicide Research:
My homicide study involved the collection, transcription, and analysis of:
(i) 32 interviews; (ii) 22 surveys; and (iii) 108 Criminal Injuries Compensation files.
Each of these contained detailed information on the experiences of those who had suffered the murder of a loved one, the majority of whom were parents of the deceased.
A major focus was on gender and on how survivors felt that it had impacted on their experiences, choices, and coping.
These data, which were relatively balanced by gender, were analyzed utilizing Q.S.R. NUD*IST over a two year period ending in 1998.
I will briefly discuss my findings in three parts:
(a) Coping attempts; (b) Grief cycles; (c) Impact on subjects' health.
(a) Coping Attempts:
The data revealed that survivors' experiences were generally shaped by the sort of coping strategies that they chose. Broadly speaking, survivors, who chose: (1) strategies that enabled them to balance their focus between their own pain and that of others; and (2) activities that enabled them to compartmentalize their thoughts and deal with them a bit at a time, felt that they
Significantly, survivors' views on coping were borne out by the data. For example, those survivors who did not continuously attempt to avoid or repress thoughts and feelings about the murder, on the one hand, or to continually focus on them, on the other, were those who were both observed , and who stated that they were coping better over time (i.e. relative to others). Indeed, those survivors who fared the best appeared to integrate time for "grief work" into their daily routines, but also engaged in a significant amount of activity that kept them busy and distracted their thoughts from their immediate source of upset (e.g. men and women who did their daily crying in the car on the way to and from work). Learning about their emotions from experience, they were "gentle" with themselves, and did not push either their "grief work" or their other activities too hard. Instead, they learned to balance these in a flexible way that enabled them to work through their grief a bit at a time in more easily digestible "chunks."
As well, coping survivors did not exhibit so exclusive a focus on themselves, balanced giving and accepting support, and often picked up cues from others. Indeed, it appeared that, unlike those individualistic subjects who focused on their own issues, or on how others upset them, these subjects often were part of a familial group that operated to focus support where it was most needed. (b) Gender and Grief Cycles:
In concert with the above, data analysis also revealed that some survivors experienced gender specific "grief cycles." Inextricably related to traditional gender roles , these reflected the ways that survivors responded to their grief such that the same painful patterns were repeated again and again. Survivors whose circumstances, reactions, and coping choices lead them into these "traps" invariably felt that they fared worse in the end; those who managed to avoid such cycles tended to report that they were faring better.
(i) The Male Grief Cycle:
Men who felt they were not coping well talked about being dominated by guilt over what they could have done. This guilt appeared to be initially rooted in a feeling of Afailure@ in the traditional male "protector" role.
Coupled with this, these men found it necessary to repress their upset in order to "be strong" for others.
Many men dealt with this need to repress by becoming very busy, throwing themselves into their work or other activities. However, this frenetic activity could only take them so far, as they could not avoid their upsetting thoughts completely.
Essentially, these men appeared to become dominated by the situational dissonance between the male gender prescriptions "to protect" and to "be strong." Inability to protect the deceased led to disproportionate guilt and upset flowing from this gender prescription, yet expressing this upset, and possibly upsetting others, represented further failure on the gender prescription to be
strong.
In order to deal with this guilt flowing from their failure in the "protector" role, and the repression of grief required of men being "strong" for others, men reported feeling overwhelming anger: one emotion traditionally regarded as appropriate for men. This anger appeared to have a dynamic nature, where men reported experiencing a "vicious cycle" where they fluctuated between "hate and grief."
Last, these factors of guilt, repression, and anger led many men to recurring depression.
This leads to a consideration of ongoing factors that feed back into men=s guilt and begin the process over again, which were intimately related to men=s traditional gender roles. For example, not only did the inability to remain Astrong@ represent a personal failure for many, inability to work and provide economic support often represented a failure in relation to the traditional Aprovider@ role as well, and reportedly added to their guilt and depression. Many men also found their initial guilt, anger, and depression exacerbated as the result of their ongoing inability to "help" (i.e. protect/fix) their suffering families. Still other men found that their guilt and depression was exacerbated when they were no longer able to repress their feelings, leading to their angry outbursts that upset loved ones (i.e. not protecting them).
Essentially, men adhering to strict gender roles reported that they got caught in the nexus between guilt over not being able to protect the deceased, repressed grief over their loss, anger over what had happened, and depression over finding it hard to remain strong, protect and provide for their families - which simply fed back into their guilt to begin the whole process all over again. This guilt-repression-anger-depression dynamic typically became cyclical in these men, and a block to developing other coping skills.
The ultimate response of these men to this frustrating emotional deadlock was either to turn their anger outward at the offender and/or others, or inward , and to consider suicide.
In either case men experiencing this dynamic appeared to fare worse, and remained stuck in this mode for extended periods of time. Moreover, not only did this holding pattern act as an obvious block to their resolution of grief, it frequently resulted in physical health problems, which are discussed below.
This male grief cycle is implied in literature written by survivors suggesting that men=s traditional roles require many men to use much of their energy to control the emotions evoked by grief (Schatz, 1986). One of its components is seen in the literature suggesting that men see controlling their emotions as a test of masculinity (Sobieski, 1994). It is also implied, but never elaborated, either theoretically or empirically, in the double binds outlined by Cook (1988). The grief cycle elaborated here goes well beyond these earlier works, identifying the dynamic, central mechanism that illustrates why and how men=s grief is blocked in the bereavement process.
grief. (iii) Avoiding the Cycles:
Now that the grief cycles have been elaborated, it is important to consider the relative flexibility or rigidity of respondents' gender roles, as this made a difference in the incidence of both of these cycles.^1
Through adherence to more flexible gender roles, men who felt they fared better did not appear to become dominated by the dissonance between the male gender prescription to "be strong" and "to protect," largely because they were able to express their upset, either more openly to others, or privately when alone. Indeed, instead of the guilt-driven grief, repression and anger cycle typical of men reportedly faring worse, these men lacked the element of continual repression necessary for such a cycle to continue.
Moreover, men faring better appeared to learn consistent ways to understand their guilt, and to control the hatred and anger flowing from it (e.g. there's only 1 person responsible here..."). By doing so, and "channelling" their emotions into what they felt were worthwhile activities, they ceased to be eaten up by their alleged "failure" to protect, and eventually moved on to actively work their way through the grief process.
Like men, women who reportedly fared better, did not adhere to rigid gender roles. For example, they did not let themselves become dominated by the helpless victim role and refused to be altercast as such.
(^1) "Adherence@ to traditional gender roles was determined by the presence of behavioral patterns
previously identified in the literature on gender and bereavement as indicative of conformity to either typical male or female gender roles (e.g. men repressing upset and remaining strong; women expressing upset openly). Conversely, Aflexibility@ in gender roles was determined by the absence of behavioral patterns previously so identified, coupled with behaviors noted in this literature as traditionally indicative of the opposite gender (e.g. men expressing upset openly and publicly; women Ataking charge@ and remaining strong for others).
Instead, choosing a proactive orientation towards their experience, these women, at least part of the time, utilized the energy in their anger for various activities. To give just one example, some women directed this into what they saw as a worthwhile end: changing the justice system.
Finally, before closing, the concept of balance must again be considered. While it was certainly the case that survivors avoiding these grief cycles tended not to adhere to strict, traditional gender roles, it must be noted that there were also survivors who went so far in the opposite direction as to harm themselves in the same way as those of the opposite gender. For example, there were women who repressed their grief and tried to get on with their lives until their anger exploded, or who threw themselves into activity to the point of physical and emotional exhaustion. Similarly, there were "sensitive" men who openly focused on their grief to such an extent that they collapsed into depression. Thus, it was those survivors who flexibly blended gender roles in a balanced way who were most successful.
(c) Impact on Health:
The culmination of the grief cycles discussed above was often manifested in survivors experiencing health problems. Indeed, relationships were suggested between gender, grief cycles, and the types of illnesses experienced.
Men were generally observed to experience heart problems and sudden deaths. These were related by professional observers to the repression of grief implicit in traditional male gender roles.
On the other hand, women faring worse more typically reported mental health problems. These mental health problems were corroborated by professionals and noted to be the ultimate reflection of women=s emphasizing their upset, frequently by engaging in activities which continually reinforced the horror of what happened.^2
Neither pattern was as apparent among survivors adhering to more flexible gender roles and adopting a balanced approach to coping with their grief.
These preliminary results suggest further epidemiological research.
(4) Discussion and Conclusion: (^2) Of course, this probably reflects the greater involvement of women with mental health professionals, as
well as the predominance of heart disease and sudden heart attacks among men. Given these caveats, however, this is in line with the literature.
study of homicide survivors, are apparent in other types of bereavement. Are they found in all types of bereavement, or merely in those where death is sudden and violent? Or is some element of intention also necessary, such as in suicide? It would also be interesting to conduct a study comparing the bereaved on the basis of their relationship to the deceased, and examine where these grief cycles are most likely to be found. In addition, since different cultures have different gender roles, cross cultural study seems to be warranted to examine the degree to which these grief cycles are confined to our culture, or how they may vary with respect to gender role socialization.
These are merely a few of the avenues for further research in this area. Whatever route it takes however, the grief cycles revealed in this study not only reveal a new dimension cutting across existing models of grief, they help provide an integrating foundation upon which they may be both coordinated and built for the practical benefit of the bereaved.
