Changing Cultures To Value Women

In February, Mexico’s president, Felipe Calderón, signed a law, passed by the country’s Senate in December, that requires local and federal authorities to curb violence against women, a problem that has reached critical proportions.Passage of the law is a good step. Like many countries (including the United States), Mexico needs to acknowledge and confront violence against women. But although the law is a critical step toward protecting women’s lives, it won’t have a significant impact unless it is systematically enforced and complemented by a wide range of local and community actions - and by a huge effort to change a culture in which women are not valued. In this, Mexico’s situation reflects the state of affairs in countries around the world.

Domestic violence is part of the wider issue of gender violence, which most of the time is violence against women. According to the Mexican Health Ministry, about one in three women suffers from domestic violence. About 6,000 women a year die from domestic violence (as compared with the U.S. figure of 1,000 women a year, which is still an awful number). And this culture of violence branches out in horrible directions: More than 400 women and girls have been killed in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua in the last 14 years. Rape and beating routinely precede the murder of women. In addition, thousands of women have become desaparecidas, or missing.

This is not an evil that affects only individual women. It’s actually something that is holding Mexico, and many other countries, back. As Noeleen Heyzer, executive director of the United Nations Development Fund for Women, puts it: “Violence against women devastates people’s lives, fragments communities, and prevents countries from developing.”

It’s woven so deeply into Mexican culture that most women don’t report it, or, if they do, do not carry it to the courts. In Mexico, and throughout the world, a range of cultural, economic and social factors - including shame and fear of retaliation from their partners, or their partner’s friends or family - contribute to women’s reluctance to report or denounce those acts.

UNICEF Mexico reports that four in 10 women report acts of spousal violence carried out against them, but only one in three commence legal proceedings. Women who do seek to prosecute or denounce domestic violence face serious obstacles. As in many other countries, violence is considered to be a “private matter,” part of the “normal” conduct of relationships, a fact reflected in many Mexican telenovelas or soap operas that show scenes of men slapping, striking or killing women.

The real nub here is that many men in Mexico consider themselves superior to women, who are rightly subject to their whims. South American machismo more or less depends on such ideas - but machismo of some sort exists almost everywhere in the world, with gender chauvinism deeply written into the culture of many countries. In India, for example, law-enforcement officials - despite growing efforts since the 1980s to bolster India’s laws - often ignore or minimize women’s reports of violence. If women succeed in getting a case to the courts, lawyers (even women’s lawyers) have been known to conspire with men being accused to subvert cases.

It’s probably unnecessary to mention the wide range of physical problems - organ damage, gynecological problems, miscarriage, and exacerbation of chronic illness - that can result from domestic violence, damage so terrible that suicide is not uncommon in the most extreme cases. Although some may sneer at the idea, it is crucial to realize that the notion of “violence against women” must include the psychological: name-calling, withholding money, forbidding the woman to work or see her family, ridiculing her or insulting her in front of family or friends. Studies make it clear that, in many cases, psychological violence can be as devastating, or even more devastating, than physical violence.

Because of these effects, and the extent of the problem, many experts and organizations - including the Pan American Health Organization and the Inter-American Commission of Women of the Organization of American States - are calling for domestic violence to be treated as a public-health issue. As Carmen Barroso, director of the Western Hemisphere region for the Planned Parenthood Federation, recently said: “Health systems should be the main door for detection, treatment and support for victims of violence against women.”

Several Latin American countries have made progress toward equality between the genders. But a profound change - forbiddingly profound - needs to take place regarding domestic violence. This includes the creation of a nonviolent culture. That will require education, starting at the lower grades, an education aimed at sensitizing both men and women about their rights and responsibilities, and of the dramatic consequences of not assuming them.

This cultural change must extend to the law - namely, to implementing the antiviolence laws and policies that exist in many countries. Biggest of all, the laws need to be enforced. Women need to know that, if they complain, they will have recourse and protection. Judges will not be reluctant to apply the laws. In this regard, programs are being implemented in Costa Rica to provide sensitivity training for judicial personnel from Supreme Court justices to social and judicial workers.

Domestic violence is obviously not limited to Latin American countries. In China, according to a national survey, it visits one-third of the country’s 270 million households. A survey by the China Law Institute in Gansu, Hunan and Zhejiang provinces found that one-third of surveyed families had witnessed family violence, and that 85 percent of victims were women. Because not only men but also many women consider violence as a normal part of family life, only 5 percent among those surveyed said that their marriage was unhappy.

There has been some recent progress. Some roadside and subway advertisements in China now decry the harm this scourge does to society. (You can see similar billboards in Mexico.) Special refuges and community support groups for victims are becoming more numerous. The All-China Women’s Federation has been playing a significant role in bringing the issue into legislation and policy. A range of organizations have allied in a project called “Domestic Violence in China: Research, Intervention and Prevention.”

In Russia, estimates put the annual domestic-violence death toll at more than 14,000 women. Natalya Abubikirova, executive director of the Russian Association of Crisis Centers, drew a dramatic parallel: “The number of women dying every year at the hands of their husbands and partners in the Russian Federation is roughly equal to the total number of Soviet soldiers killed in the 10-year war in Afghanistan.” There are shelters, hotlines and crisis centers in a number of cities, but nothing close to an adequate, systematic approach. Truly stringent laws have yet to be enacted and enforced.

Domestic violence is also rife in most African countries - for example, Zimbabwe, where, according to a United Nations report, it accounts for more than six in 10 murder cases in court. In surveys, 42 percent of women in Kenya and 41 percent in Uganda reported having been beaten by their partners. Although some countries such as South Africa have passed legislation, the big test - full implementation, with teeth - has not been passed.

In case one thinks the United States is somehow immune, think again. According to the FBI, one out of every four women is a victim of domestic violence at least once in her life. The Office of the U.S. Surgeon General says that domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women between 15 and 44 - more than car accidents, muggings and rapes combined. As mentioned, about three women die each day from some form of domestic violence. And our culture, which is thought to be based on equality, still has not fully acknowledged the seriousness of the problem. In Senate Judiciary hearings that led to the 1990 Violence Against Women Act, it was famously reported that there are three times as many animal shelters as there are shelters for battered women and their children. While that ratio has changed, the animals still have more shelters.

Mexico’s new law is its first-ever federal measure to combat domestic violence and other abuses against women, although similar measures were already on the books in many cities and states. For Mexico, and for women’s rights, it is a crucial step forward. The question now, in Mexico and throughout the world, is whether the will exists to implement the law. That will be a measure of the Mexican government’s ability to end this tragic epidemic.

Contact César Chelala at cchelala@aol.com.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

23 Comments so far

immp April 29th, 2007 3:40 pm

Good article addressing an issue that affects the very fabric of our human existence.

In order to change cultural mores, all of us need to confront the violence in itself, be it in form of cultural norms, religious views, social pressure, or the letter of the law. These are a few things I consider important:

1. Domestic violence, a name that needs changing. The name in itself implies that this kind of violence against women is lesser than a “regular” type of violence. A recent example: The first two shootings at Virginia Tech were played down in importance since they were thought to have happened due to “domestic violence.” I am wondering had it been otherwise, say maybe the first two students had been at-random males, if the whole situation would have not taken a different turn - a shut down of the whole campus very early in the morning.

2. Gender superiority supported by practice. Changing this perspective in many cultures means attacking the religious, cultural and legal infrastructure that supports such point of view. While in theory, many religions as well as the Constitution of many a country admit that humans are equal, the practical interpretation favors males over females, to the point that in some areas cultural reaction was to inhibit the natural female to male births ratio (see China, Saudi Arabia, India, etc.). This kind of nonsense repeated ad nauseum sells women short on their true human potential instead inculcating in them the mentality that women are disposable humans produced as an afterthought to serve man as it was designed/predestined by a male god.
Of course, a lot more can be said about the early education of children, about early toys (dolls for girls and action figures/active games for boys) that indicate what society expects them to be when adults: nurturing, pliable women accepting their reproductive destiny/motherhood and tough, ready-to-get-things-done men responsible for moving society forward.

3. Respect for the female as a whole. Is she not a full human being, someone capable of independently making her own decisions? Let’s consider the abortion issue (there is no similar battle in any form over the male body): a woman who is being told, by law, what control she has over HER OWN BODY (the fetus develops INSIDE a woman and while it may be considered another life form, it still depends on the human “incubator” for support) is not treated as an autonomous human being but as a sub-human individual. Our own language in the US adds nothing to emphasize the equal genetic contribution a woman brings to the make-up of a child - aside from the practice of giving a child the father’s last name, the general consensus seems to be that “she’s carrying his child” - no wonder the underlying perception is that women’s roles should be passive revolving around their wombs.

A woman who gets paid less than a man for equal work and with equal educational qualifications is seen as a lesser human. When a woman’s hymen represents the value of “honor” for her family, she is a nothing more than a prized commodity. A woman who is kept uneducated, forbidden to work, forced under the protection of a male, and covered from head to toe is dehumanized as someone’s property. Depriving a woman of her sexuality by mutilating her genitals is nothing short of deeply ingrained hatred of female sexuality. Beating up a woman to teach her to submit, as is the case in many marriages around the world, is treating her not as an equal in a marriage but as a semi-slave, condition further proven by the very notion many women hold that such treatment at the hands of a husband is normal (recent statistics from Turkey, sorry no link available). Treating women’s accomplishments as secondary to men’s steals from our development as humans. Limiting women’s access to financial independence, political venues, leadership roles, cultural, religious and social recognition deprives ALL of us of our humanity - especially when one considers that women are not an afterthought, but constitute THE majority of humans on this planet.

Siouxrose April 29th, 2007 4:43 pm

immp: thank you for raising all these issues. I wonder how many on commondreams are not aware of the use of clitorectomy as a means to inhibit female sexuality in N. Africa and parts of the Arab world? How many do not know about dowry murders, women thrown into the fire to get rid of them, in India? And I much appreciate your exposing the religious link. It was the church that sponsored the murder of probably several million women accused of “witchcraft.” The notion that GOD is a white guy is unbelievably primitive, that it’s lasted this long defies credulity. AS IF we humans can begin to imagine the qualities of the Divine, the Infinite, the great BEING on the basis of our deluded and limited senses. Because patriarchal religions promote GOD as a male being, it does send a strong subliminal message that women are not quite as “God-ly.” This has provided the false rationale (apart from males generally being larger and stronger than females, thus being able to over-power the female) that men deserve more power, privilege and benefits in any society. The very word NUN in the Catholic religion is a fascinating subliminal on this very concept (i.e. NONE). From the standpoint of myth, the ancients recognized a multiplicity of heavenly voices that shaped the destiny of human beings. Using their yardstick, Mars was the macho god of war and Divine consort, cosmic counterbalance to Venus, the god of love, sensuality and art. Just look at the emphasis on arming the world, the costs in lives and treasure squandered; when those things consistent with Venus have largely been degraded, under-funded and/or undervalued. A society’s enlightenment is shown in how it treats its female citizens! NEITHER is better, the pair was Divinely designed as natural counterbalances to one another, just as we have two sides of our brains. Left is more masculine and logical, and right is more feminine, intuitive and subjective. It takes TWO oars for a vessel to navigate on a progressive course. With only one oar (the prejudice to only the masculine side of reasoning or collective brain function) the boat is destined to circle… as in history repeats. Yep. HIS-story sure does. It’s time for VENUS and the Divine expression of the other side of mankind. Without a quest for equal divinity, for all of us to rise to our Divine potential, the human lot remains embedded in a redundant feedback loop that, like insanity, leads to the same outcome. Now with a truly unenlightened leader with his fingers all too close to those Mars bomb switches, it’s an apt time for humanity to take a look at this asymmetric equation.

Poet April 29th, 2007 7:12 pm

On a more positive note, President of Chile Dr. Michelle Bachelet has made it a policy that in her government half of the cabinet would be runb by women, since they make up half the population.

What a practical and novel idea. If half of all governments were run by those representing the other half of humanity I wonder how much less violence and suffering would occur. How could it be worse than what we already have?

Siouxrose April 29th, 2007 9:24 pm

Thanks, Poet… Chile will be interesting to watch. Seems like South America is one region flipping the dice and as it says no to the Washington consensus, reinventing government where more citizens win prizes, than a few corporations. Mwdaniel: patriarchal religions include Islam, Judaism and Christianity in all its varied sects. These are religions that emphasize a masculine version of God, and the treatment of women in all is less than equal. Old rituals from two thousand years ago held as sacrosanct by religions impede the progress of civilization.

Paul M April 29th, 2007 9:35 pm

I wonder if excessive macho-ism is a reaction to the way that mothers rear their children? Husband beats wife, wife takes it out on the kids, boys grow up and it’s payback time for mother/wife. And so it goes.

(identifying a cycle of violence is not the same thing as blaming the victim, please)

And all wonderfully sanctioned by the bible and the church. Ever wondered why the Old Testament contains not a word forbidding infanticide? Ever wondered why, when Jehovah told Abraham to human-sacrifice his grown son, Abraham did not reply “But Lord, Isaac’s life is not mine to give”?

Perhaps the message is not merely that husbands ought not beat wives, but that violence has no place in the family unit.

Siouxrose April 29th, 2007 9:52 pm

Paul I took a bike ride as I live by a state park and like the poets, allow my mind to open wide when I breathe with the trees. The Old Testament concept of “There will be no gods before me” has become in our human minds, the equivalent of an intolerant and angry god. Even if the Bible is correct in its metaphysical depiction that “God made man in his image and likeness,” the reverse does not hold true. Men and women have their flaws, of course, we are incapable of a broad enough understanding to image or imagine the nature of the Divine. The limited concept of an angry boss-man leads to authoritarianism, a lack of diversity, a sense that might makes right, who ever is most powerful is boss, etc. Christianity has a lot of blood on its hands by forcing this falacy on others, and using its distorted name and concept of God to murder an awful lot of people. Israel is doing its best to catch up. And the Arab world has a mortifying record against women. My history is not as strong as some on this site, but what I seem to remember is that the Arab world has not been quite so fond of imperialistic ventures (except among its own lands) as has been the Aryan Christians. Leon Uris examined this in his book Armageddon. Wilhelm Reich examined its psycho-sexual roots in The Function of Orgasm. People presume violence is inborn to the human experience, and now that we’ve all been part of it, like a disease, it becomes hard to cure. But I believe it emanates from faulty spiritual beliefs that turn person on person, build hierarchies, establish boundaries of privilege (race, religion, caste, class, gender, etc) and what does this do but maim people, build lasting resentments, etc. The US was the first model to break away from the stranglehold of religions… it allows each his beliefs, but does not allow for a state mandated religion. Amen to that. We can never agree on the nature of God, and none of us are positioned, Pope included, to speak for the Deity. We are flawed and cannot comprehend perfection, thus we cannot bear it witness. The few that have come to this world, advanced near-Divine beings, have tried to create models that mankind could follow. Instead, the idiots fight among themselves as to which most clearly depicts that one and only God, and in the process of supposedly glorifying “his” name do their utmost to tear Creation asunder. What god could such activity possibly favor but Mars, the bloodthirsty god of war, the slaying of the first born son, the avenging of the sins of the fathers visited generation after generation upon the sons. Can we all agree yet that this is insane and only of benefit to weapons manufacturers who obviously don’t believe in an afterlife, because the trauma their blood profits are setting up will follow them through TIME! If you can get your hands on the out of print (published by The Theosophical Society, Wheel of Rebirth) it explains this legacy. Edgar Cayce did likewise, as does Gordon Michael Scallion in his Notes from the Cosmos. When sources from different time periods and cultures share the same metaphysical point, it begins to hold gravity to my thinking process. Today, much of what is published is Christianity merged with new age merged with mercantilism. The materiality is equivalent to the messages of prophets for profit. The spirit is long gone from the material. “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and all else will be added unto you.” But the LOVE of money as first and primary motivational cause, it brings out the worst in persons and institutions. We are there.

tolerancenow April 29th, 2007 10:43 pm

Until America and Mexico become like the enlightened Middle East countries that truly respect woman’s choice to be mutilated by circumcision or to be gloriously sacrificed in honor killings because they made eye contact with another or were seen in public alone, or become a fourth wife and be proprietary whores, this is a hollow victory.
Should those of us enlightened by tolerance accept the middle eastern treatment of women as a matter of pride because the middle east refuses to abide by the rules of white christian males and encourage this treatment? OR Should we simply accept this as the enlightened alternative to our white christian male oppressors and encourage American women to submit to muslim men and wear the burka like the proud example set by Speaker Pelosi-
Too bad Mexico is not muslim like Saudi Arabia or Iran. Only then could we truly applaud their recognition of how women should be treated, especially if it is the woman’s choice as it is when they are stoned to death in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. How proud and happy those women are when they are burned alive, stoned to death, ritually raped or stabbed to death to know that they never lived under the American white christian male dominated society.
Oh, Pelosi’s message of submission to non- white christian males is so important to our tolerant society. Pelosi should wear the burka for Mexican women as well.

Paul M April 29th, 2007 10:45 pm

Wasn’t Edgar Cayce that guy who prescribed quack remedies for people over the radio? I don’t hold with this mumbo jumbo stuff at all. I read The Satanic Bible - it was rubbish.

Dividing the world into male and female is just a way of simplifying the real world. Why Venus and Mars? Why not Zeus and Hera? What about Apollo? Demeter? Eris? What about the titan Cronos, who ate his own children? The ancients knew that the world was a messy mish-mash, and had more gods than just the two.

And while I’m at it:

You know - all your posts mention that male and female are complementary, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen you write anything complimentary about the male pole. It’s all “man bad, woman good”.

Domestic violence is not about Mars and Venus. It’s about families, and culture, and the media, and the government. Leaving it at “Mars/Jehovah is bad” solves nothing.

thiswoman April 29th, 2007 11:18 pm

Violence against women is advocated in every religious male dominated religion. All the religious books be they christian, islam, or judiac instruct that women are below men and therefore are possessions of men as chattel as (were) their slaves and material goods. It has been thereafter, heartily observed and employed by those men who follow those religions and unfortunately, believed to be true by far too many women.

iwarrior April 29th, 2007 11:51 pm

I think educating women is the first step. If they are educated they will be empowered and will resist subjugation. However, I think also think that men all over the world need to be taught how to truly be men. Men who don’t have positive male influences in their youth often learn how to be men from the wrong people and sources. They end up thinking that Man is supposed to be cruel, mean, nasty, violent, crude, disrespectful, intolerant and lacking in decency, morality, thoughtfulness, and compassion.

I’ve been called homophobic slurs by other men for reading…GASP…books and sections of the newspaper other than Sports! In America no less.

People should check out some dating sites if you want examples of this sort of thing. Young males are being taught that women prefer “jerks” and “bad boys” and don’t like “nice guys” and actually enjoy being treated poorly.

Before America throws stones at other nations for how their women fare, She needs to take a look at her own backyard.

lpenek April 30th, 2007 4:44 am

iwarrior:
“However, I think also think that men all over the world need to be taught how to truly be men.”

Huh? How’s that? A man being taught how to truly be a man will be a man beating a woman. You’re on your own, pal. Most of how I’ve lived I’ve learned from women. I don’t bully or beat women but you want to give me a good example? Yes, we need role models, but the shining examples are few and far between. If you want to be a “good man” you’ve got to be Da Vinci creative, becuase nobody’s going to show you the way.

BTW — you don’t need to go to the middle east to witness egregious misogynistic woman beating. We’ve got our own home grown variety: it’s called the state of Hawaii. On camping vacation there 15 years ago I nearly went head to head with a chum beating the living crap out of his companion. He desisted, but gee, I wonder if only temporarily…

Paul M:
Cool off baby! I don’t catch that vibe at all from Siouxrose.

hybridoma2001 April 30th, 2007 4:56 am

What always appears in my mind when reading or talking about how women are seen as objects unworthy of kindness or fair consideration is this: the picture we have all seen, on the Flintstones for example, of a caveman with a club dragging a woman from her cave. We men haven’t changed much since those times. I’m not including all men, but certainly many men view woman in this way.
That’s all I can add to what has already been posted above – is how primitive we still are.

edladysmith April 30th, 2007 7:36 am

Neither we nor the ancients fully comprehend the unknown God, who is of both — and neither — gender; complete in oneness. So within our human duality, unknowable. Yet wisdom is seeking understanding of the unknown, so we must try.

And we have, from nourshing mother earth constructs like most ancient Gia, to fractured archetypes like those on Olympus, to the patriachal construct, to some vengeful, to others loving.

Now we re-member those between the Mother and Father, and reconsider ourselves in light of such as Hestia, Apollo, Athena, Hermes, Aphrodite, Dionysus, Artemis, Zeus. As the gods are fixed in virtue and vice, humans are free to choose. “Timshel.”

The way is open, because the choice is ours. We, each of us, is free to experience the full range of humanity, evoking any and all constructs to enhance that one which might by at core. To understand. To love… To evolve.

Siouxrose April 30th, 2007 9:59 am

Tolerance now: It’s interesting how people perceive their own projection of what another states. I certainly was not advocating for the Muslim condition of women! My point was that the 3 major patriarchal religions ALL demean women in their own way. America’s record of domestic violence, rape and porn is its own example of egregious gender-based exploitation. I do not advocate that either gender is “better,” but that as God-given partners we learn to value each other. That cannot happen when religion undervalues one and sets up an asymmetric equation. Paul M: Cayce used unconventional cures, that is true, but he provided enormous insight into the way the mind-body-emotions work together to produce conditons; and also elucidated the karmic implications (as in past lifetime legacy) that often brings conditions into the present that don’t seem fair or logical. As always in these forums, we should show civility and challenge each other’s arguments with facts, not character assassination. When name calling gets into it, generally the person utilizing that strategy has no other weapons, like genuine points of intellect, at their disposal.

Siouxrose April 30th, 2007 10:05 am

Ipenek: thanks for the head’s up. Also Paul, for the sake of brevity, I am not going to explain the value and imprint of all Greek/Roman mythological entities. I fully recognize their importance, and often use the CIRCLE as a reference that does not pit side against side, for the circle HOLDS no sides. Discussions involving gender naturally distill to explanations of the quintessential dyad: he and she. Sun and moon can function as equally apt prototypes for Mars and Venus.

detectivediana April 30th, 2007 2:51 pm

I wish more people were aware of the staggering levels of violence against women throughout the world. If anyone is interested, have a look at Amnesty’s issues regarding violence against women at http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/issues-index-eng. Interesting and educational information.

detectivediana April 30th, 2007 2:51 pm

sorry about the link error:

http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/issues-index-eng

breehmichael April 30th, 2007 4:25 pm

I worked in a domestic violence shelter for three years and the idea that Muslims somehow beat their women more than men of other faiths is laughable. The domination of women by men is enshrined in the holy texts of all three monotheistic faiths, so let’s knock off the pretentiousness against Islam , shall we? (I mean really, do you Muslin-bashers ever find anything that Christians do worse than Muslims? Must every single issue get caught up in “Muslims are worse”??)

Does anybody here know that there are still laws on the books in California that allow a man to beat his wife as long as the strap/belt/instrument he beats her with is less than two inches wide? This is also the basis of the “rule of thumb”; as long as a strap wasn’t wider than a man’s thumb, it was perfectly acceptable to beat his wife with. This is the society in which we live, that glorifies hypermasculinity and machoism, treats women as whores and sex objects (anybody remember the “Hunting Bambi” idea from Nevada???). Domestic violence cuts across all religious and socioeconomic lines and to pretend that one group does it more misses the fact that it happens everywhere.

Last but not least, I agree with iwarrior that men need to be taught how to be REAL men, not wife-beating macho assholes. It’s possible, there are millions of examples all over the world (like my husband) who would never raise his hand to a woman and is fully aware of the fact that men don’t have the right to dominate women (full disclosure: he was indeed raised by his mother and aunt). When I worked at the shelter, many of us had the bumper sticker “Real Mean Don’t Hit” - Ipanek, it is indeed possible to raise real men, not violent, irrational men!

Paul M April 30th, 2007 8:18 pm

Ok, I will try to cool it a little.

I find myself agreeing with the “true manhood” thing happenning here, but it’s too much “true scotsman”.

“No true man beats his wife!”
“Jose over there does, and he is an adult human with a Y chromosome.”
“He may have a Y chromosome, but he’s nae *true* man!”

The fact remains that in all times and places men have punched, slapped, shouted at, and whipped the women in their lives.

There’s not a lot of mention of women behaving badly (google “white gringa”), or engaging in domestiv violence of their own (women tend to use weapons - knives, thrown objects, boiling water) but I have a sneaking suspicion that maybe it’s because women are generally opressed and have less scope to do it. Generally, people of all colours, ages and genders do wrong to the limit of their power to do it.

Which is not to say that domestic violence in someone else’s country is not a terrible thing that we all ought to get huffy over.

BTW: the Aus govt is running a campaign against vioence against women at the moment (or were very recently).

http://www.australiasaysno.gov.au/about/index.htm

iwarrior April 30th, 2007 8:56 pm

“Huh? How’s that? A man being taught how to truly be a man will be a man beating a woman. You’re on your own, pal.”

No, a real man will not physically harm a woman. Men that hit women are cowardly little boys.

“Most of how I’ve lived I’ve learned from women.”

I’ve learned a lot from women also. In fact, I think men and women can learn a great deal from one another. But women aren’t right about everything either. That’s why I think that young men also need good and decent men in their lives.

“I don’t bully or beat women but you want to give me a good example?”

Neither do I. I think my own father is a pretty good example.

It’s not just about beating women. It’s about how women are viewed in general. Part of the problem imo is that in our society women and men are often taught that they are supposed to use each other, which breeds contempt. We’re all encouraged to partake is what is basically a nasty little game.

“Yes, we need role models, but the shining examples are few and far between. If you want to be a “good man” you’ve got to be Da Vinci creative, becuase nobody’s going to show you the way.”

You don’t need to look towards the realms of fame and fortune. Look at your own life. Get to know some men, real men. They are out there. Not all men are brutes and jackals.

“BTW — you don’t need to go to the middle east to witness egregious misogynistic woman beating.”

No kidding.

lpenek May 1st, 2007 4:11 pm

Alright, maybe I was making a point by exaggeration. Yes, there are good men out there, nonviolent ones — the ones able, and most importantly willing, to nurture that side. But even in our so-called enlightened society dark regressivism flourishes, and it’s hidden for the most part. What was that recent report that said that 1/3 of military women are assaulted by their male companions? Aren’t those men our “honorable” troops?
Abuse hasn’t gone away, it’s just a cockroach that’s had a little light put on it and has scurried under the counter. Someone above mentioned that the true scope of abuse against women is staggering. I agree and would argue that it is, in fact, the single largest source of misery across the globe.

iwarrior: I’m glad you have specific examples, but we know that there are communities and societies where there are none, zippo. That’s why I say that for them, if they want to be good, it’s got to come from personal transcendence.
I stick to my statement: for the majority of societies “being a man” is not a good thing.

Smurfy May 2nd, 2007 12:19 pm

Oh my lordy…

The bit about not being restricted to Muslims is true enough but the thing about the rule of thumb is utter garbage.

“Although some may sneer at the idea, it is crucial to realize that the notion of “violence against women” must include the psychological: name-calling, withholding money, forbidding the woman to work or see her family, ridiculing her or insulting her in front of family or friends. Studies make it clear that, in many cases, psychological violence can be as devastating, or even more devastating, than physical violence.”

Yeah and men have a monopoly on such behavior right?

*sigh*

So much ignorance, so little time…

communitarian May 2nd, 2007 3:40 pm

Instead of analysing macho psychology, why not discuss the solution to the basic problem - overpopulation which creates the tensions that lead to war and male oppression?

Give women their right to decide if and when to birth how many or how few children. Then the human population will soon drop down into balance with the Earth’s ability to support us, and we will be better able to live in peace with each other.

immp April 29th, 2007 3:40 pm

Good article addressing an issue that affects the very fabric of our human existence.

In order to change cultural mores, all of us need to confront the violence in itself, be it in form of cultural norms, religious views, social pressure, or the letter of the law. These are a few things I consider important:

1. Domestic violence, a name that needs changing. The name in itself implies that this kind of violence against women is lesser than a “regular” type of violence. A recent example: The first two shootings at Virginia Tech were played down in importance since they were thought to have happened due to “domestic violence.” I am wondering had it been otherwise, say maybe the first two students had been at-random males, if the whole situation would have not taken a different turn - a shut down of the whole campus very early in the morning.

2. Gender superiority supported by practice. Changing this perspective in many cultures means attacking the religious, cultural and legal infrastructure that supports such point of view. While in theory, many religions as well as the Constitution of many a country admit that humans are equal, the practical interpretation favors males over females, to the point that in some areas cultural reaction was to inhibit the natural female to male births ratio (see China, Saudi Arabia, India, etc.). This kind of nonsense repeated ad nauseum sells women short on their true human potential instead inculcating in them the mentality that women are disposable humans produced as an afterthought to serve man as it was designed/predestined by a male god.
Of course, a lot more can be said about the early education of children, about early toys (dolls for girls and action figures/active games for boys) that indicate what society expects them to be when adults: nurturing, pliable women accepting their reproductive destiny/motherhood and tough, ready-to-get-things-done men responsible for moving society forward.

3. Respect for the female as a whole. Is she not a full human being, someone capable of independently making her own decisions? Let’s consider the abortion issue (there is no similar battle in any form over the male body): a woman who is being told, by law, what control she has over HER OWN BODY (the fetus develops INSIDE a woman and while it may be considered another life form, it still depends on the human “incubator” for support) is not treated as an autonomous human being but as a sub-human individual. Our own language in the US adds nothing to emphasize the equal genetic contribution a woman brings to the make-up of a child - aside from the practice of giving a child the father’s last name, the general consensus seems to be that “she’s carrying his child” - no wonder the underlying perception is that women’s roles should be passive revolving around their wombs.

A woman who gets paid less than a man for equal work and with equal educational qualifications is seen as a lesser human. When a woman’s hymen represents the value of “honor” for her family, she is a nothing more than a prized commodity. A woman who is kept uneducated, forbidden to work, forced under the protection of a male, and covered from head to toe is dehumanized as someone’s property. Depriving a woman of her sexuality by mutilating her genitals is nothing short of deeply ingrained hatred of female sexuality. Beating up a woman to teach her to submit, as is the case in many marriages around the world, is treating her not as an equal in a marriage but as a semi-slave, condition further proven by the very notion many women hold that such treatment at the hands of a husband is normal (recent statistics from Turkey, sorry no link available). Treating women’s accomplishments as secondary to men’s steals from our development as humans. Limiting women’s access to financial independence, political venues, leadership roles, cultural, religious and social recognition deprives ALL of us of our humanity - especially when one considers that women are not an afterthought, but constitute THE majority of humans on this planet.
Siouxrose April 29th, 2007 4:43 pm

immp: thank you for raising all these issues. I wonder how many on commondreams are not aware of the use of clitorectomy as a means to inhibit female sexuality in N. Africa and parts of the Arab world? How many do not know about dowry murders, women thrown into the fire to get rid of them, in India? And I much appreciate your exposing the religious link. It was the church that sponsored the murder of probably several million women accused of “witchcraft.” The notion that GOD is a white guy is unbelievably primitive, that it’s lasted this long defies credulity. AS IF we humans can begin to imagine the qualities of the Divine, the Infinite, the great BEING on the basis of our deluded and limited senses. Because patriarchal religions promote GOD as a male being, it does send a strong subliminal message that women are not quite as “God-ly.” This has provided the false rationale (apart from males generally being larger and stronger than females, thus being able to over-power the female) that men deserve more power, privilege and benefits in any society. The very word NUN in the Catholic religion is a fascinating subliminal on this very concept (i.e. NONE). From the standpoint of myth, the ancients recognized a multiplicity of heavenly voices that shaped the destiny of human beings. Using their yardstick, Mars was the macho god of war and Divine consort, cosmic counterbalance to Venus, the god of love, sensuality and art. Just look at the emphasis on arming the world, the costs in lives and treasure squandered; when those things consistent with Venus have largely been degraded, under-funded and/or undervalued. A society’s enlightenment is shown in how it treats its female citizens! NEITHER is better, the pair was Divinely designed as natural counterbalances to one another, just as we have two sides of our brains. Left is more masculine and logical, and right is more feminine, intuitive and subjective. It takes TWO oars for a vessel to navigate on a progressive course. With only one oar (the prejudice to only the masculine side of reasoning or collective brain function) the boat is destined to circle… as in history repeats. Yep. HIS-story sure does. It’s time for VENUS and the Divine expression of the other side of mankind. Without a quest for equal divinity, for all of us to rise to our Divine potential, the human lot remains embedded in a redundant feedback loop that, like insanity, leads to the same outcome. Now with a truly unenlightened leader with his fingers all too close to those Mars bomb switches, it’s an apt time for humanity to take a look at this asymmetric equation.
Poet April 29th, 2007 7:12 pm

On a more positive note, President of Chile Dr. Michelle Bachelet has made it a policy that in her government half of the cabinet would be runb by women, since they make up half the population.

What a practical and novel idea. If half of all governments were run by those representing the other half of humanity I wonder how much less violence and suffering would occur. How could it be worse than what we already have?
Siouxrose April 29th, 2007 9:24 pm

Thanks, Poet… Chile will be interesting to watch. Seems like South America is one region flipping the dice and as it says no to the Washington consensus, reinventing government where more citizens win prizes, than a few corporations. Mwdaniel: patriarchal religions include Islam, Judaism and Christianity in all its varied sects. These are religions that emphasize a masculine version of God, and the treatment of women in all is less than equal. Old rituals from two thousand years ago held as sacrosanct by religions impede the progress of civilization.
Paul M April 29th, 2007 9:35 pm

I wonder if excessive macho-ism is a reaction to the way that mothers rear their children? Husband beats wife, wife takes it out on the kids, boys grow up and it’s payback time for mother/wife. And so it goes.

(identifying a cycle of violence is not the same thing as blaming the victim, please)

And all wonderfully sanctioned by the bible and the church. Ever wondered why the Old Testament contains not a word forbidding infanticide? Ever wondered why, when Jehovah told Abraham to human-sacrifice his grown son, Abraham did not reply “But Lord, Isaac’s life is not mine to give”?

Perhaps the message is not merely that husbands ought not beat wives, but that violence has no place in the family unit.
Siouxrose April 29th, 2007 9:52 pm

Paul I took a bike ride as I live by a state park and like the poets, allow my mind to open wide when I breathe with the trees. The Old Testament concept of “There will be no gods before me” has become in our human minds, the equivalent of an intolerant and angry god. Even if the Bible is correct in its metaphysical depiction that “God made man in his image and likeness,” the reverse does not hold true. Men and women have their flaws, of course, we are incapable of a broad enough understanding to image or imagine the nature of the Divine. The limited concept of an angry boss-man leads to authoritarianism, a lack of diversity, a sense that might makes right, who ever is most powerful is boss, etc. Christianity has a lot of blood on its hands by forcing this falacy on others, and using its distorted name and concept of God to murder an awful lot of people. Israel is doing its best to catch up. And the Arab world has a mortifying record against women. My history is not as strong as some on this site, but what I seem to remember is that the Arab world has not been quite so fond of imperialistic ventures (except among its own lands) as has been the Aryan Christians. Leon Uris examined this in his book Armageddon. Wilhelm Reich examined its psycho-sexual roots in The Function of Orgasm. People presume violence is inborn to the human experience, and now that we’ve all been part of it, like a disease, it becomes hard to cure. But I believe it emanates from faulty spiritual beliefs that turn person on person, build hierarchies, establish boundaries of privilege (race, religion, caste, class, gender, etc) and what does this do but maim people, build lasting resentments, etc. The US was the first model to break away from the stranglehold of religions… it allows each his beliefs, but does not allow for a state mandated religion. Amen to that. We can never agree on the nature of God, and none of us are positioned, Pope included, to speak for the Deity. We are flawed and cannot comprehend perfection, thus we cannot bear it witness. The few that have come to this world, advanced near-Divine beings, have tried to create models that mankind could follow. Instead, the idiots fight among themselves as to which most clearly depicts that one and only God, and in the process of supposedly glorifying “his” name do their utmost to tear Creation asunder. What god could such activity possibly favor but Mars, the bloodthirsty god of war, the slaying of the first born son, the avenging of the sins of the fathers visited generation after generation upon the sons. Can we all agree yet that this is insane and only of benefit to weapons manufacturers who obviously don’t believe in an afterlife, because the trauma their blood profits are setting up will follow them through TIME! If you can get your hands on the out of print (published by The Theosophical Society, Wheel of Rebirth) it explains this legacy. Edgar Cayce did likewise, as does Gordon Michael Scallion in his Notes from the Cosmos. When sources from different time periods and cultures share the same metaphysical point, it begins to hold gravity to my thinking process. Today, much of what is published is Christianity merged with new age merged with mercantilism. The materiality is equivalent to the messages of prophets for profit. The spirit is long gone from the material. “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and all else will be added unto you.” But the LOVE of money as first and primary motivational cause, it brings out the worst in persons and institutions. We are there.
tolerancenow April 29th, 2007 10:43 pm

Until America and Mexico become like the enlightened Middle East countries that truly respect woman’s choice to be mutilated by circumcision or to be gloriously sacrificed in honor killings because they made eye contact with another or were seen in public alone, or become a fourth wife and be proprietary whores, this is a hollow victory.
Should those of us enlightened by tolerance accept the middle eastern treatment of women as a matter of pride because the middle east refuses to abide by the rules of white christian males and encourage this treatment? OR Should we simply accept this as the enlightened alternative to our white christian male oppressors and encourage American women to submit to muslim men and wear the burka like the proud example set by Speaker Pelosi-
Too bad Mexico is not muslim like Saudi Arabia or Iran. Only then could we truly applaud their recognition of how women should be treated, especially if it is the woman’s choice as it is when they are stoned to death in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. How proud and happy those women are when they are burned alive, stoned to death, ritually raped or stabbed to death to know that they never lived under the American white christian male dominated society.
Oh, Pelosi’s message of submission to non- white christian males is so important to our tolerant society. Pelosi should wear the burka for Mexican women as well.
Paul M April 29th, 2007 10:45 pm

Wasn’t Edgar Cayce that guy who prescribed quack remedies for people over the radio? I don’t hold with this mumbo jumbo stuff at all. I read The Satanic Bible - it was rubbish.

Dividing the world into male and female is just a way of simplifying the real world. Why Venus and Mars? Why not Zeus and Hera? What about Apollo? Demeter? Eris? What about the titan Cronos, who ate his own children? The ancients knew that the world was a messy mish-mash, and had more gods than just the two.

And while I’m at it:

You know - all your posts mention that male and female are complementary, but I don’t think I’ve ever seen you write anything complimentary about the male pole. It’s all “man bad, woman good”.

Domestic violence is not about Mars and Venus. It’s about families, and culture, and the media, and the government. Leaving it at “Mars/Jehovah is bad” solves nothing.
thiswoman April 29th, 2007 11:18 pm

Violence against women is advocated in every religious male dominated religion. All the religious books be they christian, islam, or judiac instruct that women are below men and therefore are possessions of men as chattel as (were) their slaves and material goods. It has been thereafter, heartily observed and employed by those men who follow those religions and unfortunately, believed to be true by far too many women.
iwarrior April 29th, 2007 11:51 pm

I think educating women is the first step. If they are educated they will be empowered and will resist subjugation. However, I think also think that men all over the world need to be taught how to truly be men. Men who don’t have positive male influences in their youth often learn how to be men from the wrong people and sources. They end up thinking that Man is supposed to be cruel, mean, nasty, violent, crude, disrespectful, intolerant and lacking in decency, morality, thoughtfulness, and compassion.

I’ve been called homophobic slurs by other men for reading…GASP…books and sections of the newspaper other than Sports! In America no less.

People should check out some dating sites if you want examples of this sort of thing. Young males are being taught that women prefer “jerks” and “bad boys” and don’t like “nice guys” and actually enjoy being treated poorly.

Before America throws stones at other nations for how their women fare, She needs to take a look at her own backyard.
lpenek April 30th, 2007 4:44 am

iwarrior:
“However, I think also think that men all over the world need to be taught how to truly be men.”

Huh? How’s that? A man being taught how to truly be a man will be a man beating a woman. You’re on your own, pal. Most of how I’ve lived I’ve learned from women. I don’t bully or beat women but you want to give me a good example? Yes, we need role models, but the shining examples are few and far between. If you want to be a “good man” you’ve got to be Da Vinci creative, becuase nobody’s going to show you the way.

BTW — you don’t need to go to the middle east to witness egregious misogynistic woman beating. We’ve got our own home grown variety: it’s called the state of Hawaii. On camping vacation there 15 years ago I nearly went head to head with a chum beating the living crap out of his companion. He desisted, but gee, I wonder if only temporarily…

Paul M:
Cool off baby! I don’t catch that vibe at all from Siouxrose.
hybridoma2001 April 30th, 2007 4:56 am

What always appears in my mind when reading or talking about how women are seen as objects unworthy of kindness or fair consideration is this: the picture we have all seen, on the Flintstones for example, of a caveman with a club dragging a woman from her cave. We men haven’t changed much since those times. I’m not including all men, but certainly many men view woman in this way.
That’s all I can add to what has already been posted above – is how primitive we still are.
edladysmith April 30th, 2007 7:36 am

Neither we nor the ancients fully comprehend the unknown God, who is of both — and neither — gender; complete in oneness. So within our human duality, unknowable. Yet wisdom is seeking understanding of the unknown, so we must try.

And we have, from nourshing mother earth constructs like most ancient Gia, to fractured archetypes like those on Olympus, to the patriachal construct, to some vengeful, to others loving.

Now we re-member those between the Mother and Father, and reconsider ourselves in light of such as Hestia, Apollo, Athena, Hermes, Aphrodite, Dionysus, Artemis, Zeus. As the gods are fixed in virtue and vice, humans are free to choose. “Timshel.”

The way is open, because the choice is ours. We, each of us, is free to experience the full range of humanity, evoking any and all constructs to enhance that one which might by at core. To understand. To love… To evolve.
Siouxrose April 30th, 2007 9:59 am

Tolerance now: It’s interesting how people perceive their own projection of what another states. I certainly was not advocating for the Muslim condition of women! My point was that the 3 major patriarchal religions ALL demean women in their own way. America’s record of domestic violence, rape and porn is its own example of egregious gender-based exploitation. I do not advocate that either gender is “better,” but that as God-given partners we learn to value each other. That cannot happen when religion undervalues one and sets up an asymmetric equation. Paul M: Cayce used unconventional cures, that is true, but he provided enormous insight into the way the mind-body-emotions work together to produce conditons; and also elucidated the karmic implications (as in past lifetime legacy) that often brings conditions into the present that don’t seem fair or logical. As always in these forums, we should show civility and challenge each other’s arguments with facts, not character assassination. When name calling gets into it, generally the person utilizing that strategy has no other weapons, like genuine points of intellect, at their disposal.
Siouxrose April 30th, 2007 10:05 am

Ipenek: thanks for the head’s up. Also Paul, for the sake of brevity, I am not going to explain the value and imprint of all Greek/Roman mythological entities. I fully recognize their importance, and often use the CIRCLE as a reference that does not pit side against side, for the circle HOLDS no sides. Discussions involving gender naturally distill to explanations of the quintessential dyad: he and she. Sun and moon can function as equally apt prototypes for Mars and Venus.
detectivediana April 30th, 2007 2:51 pm

I wish more people were aware of the staggering levels of violence against women throughout the world. If anyone is interested, have a look at Amnesty’s issues regarding violence against women at http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/issues-index-eng. Interesting and educational information.
detectivediana April 30th, 2007 2:51 pm

sorry about the link error:

http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/issues-index-eng
breehmichael April 30th, 2007 4:25 pm

I worked in a domestic violence shelter for three years and the idea that Muslims somehow beat their women more than men of other faiths is laughable. The domination of women by men is enshrined in the holy texts of all three monotheistic faiths, so let’s knock off the pretentiousness against Islam , shall we? (I mean really, do you Muslin-bashers ever find anything that Christians do worse than Muslims? Must every single issue get caught up in “Muslims are worse”??)

Does anybody here know that there are still laws on the books in California that allow a man to beat his wife as long as the strap/belt/instrument he beats her with is less than two inches wide? This is also the basis of the “rule of thumb”; as long as a strap wasn’t wider than a man’s thumb, it was perfectly acceptable to beat his wife with. This is the society in which we live, that glorifies hypermasculinity and machoism, treats women as whores and sex objects (anybody remember the “Hunting Bambi” idea from Nevada???). Domestic violence cuts across all religious and socioeconomic lines and to pretend that one group does it more misses the fact that it happens everywhere.

Last but not least, I agree with iwarrior that men need to be taught how to be REAL men, not wife-beating macho assholes. It’s possible, there are millions of examples all over the world (like my husband) who would never raise his hand to a woman and is fully aware of the fact that men don’t have the right to dominate women (full disclosure: he was indeed raised by his mother and aunt). When I worked at the shelter, many of us had the bumper sticker “Real Mean Don’t Hit” - Ipanek, it is indeed possible to raise real men, not violent, irrational men!
Paul M April 30th, 2007 8:18 pm

Ok, I will try to cool it a little.

I find myself agreeing with the “true manhood” thing happenning here, but it’s too much “true scotsman”.

“No true man beats his wife!”
“Jose over there does, and he is an adult human with a Y chromosome.”
“He may have a Y chromosome, but he’s nae *true* man!”

The fact remains that in all times and places men have punched, slapped, shouted at, and whipped the women in their lives.

There’s not a lot of mention of women behaving badly (google “white gringa”), or engaging in domestiv violence of their own (women tend to use weapons - knives, thrown objects, boiling water) but I have a sneaking suspicion that maybe it’s because women are generally opressed and have less scope to do it. Generally, people of all colours, ages and genders do wrong to the limit of their power to do it.

Which is not to say that domestic violence in someone else’s country is not a terrible thing that we all ought to get huffy over.

BTW: the Aus govt is running a campaign against vioence against women at the moment (or were very recently).

http://www.australiasaysno.gov.au/about/index.htm
iwarrior April 30th, 2007 8:56 pm

“Huh? How’s that? A man being taught how to truly be a man will be a man beating a woman. You’re on your own, pal.”

No, a real man will not physically harm a woman. Men that hit women are cowardly little boys.

“Most of how I’ve lived I’ve learned from women.”

I’ve learned a lot from women also. In fact, I think men and women can learn a great deal from one another. But women aren’t right about everything either. That’s why I think that young men also need good and decent men in their lives.

“I don’t bully or beat women but you want to give me a good example?”

Neither do I. I think my own father is a pretty good example.

It’s not just about beating women. It’s about how women are viewed in general. Part of the problem imo is that in our society women and men are often taught that they are supposed to use each other, which breeds contempt. We’re all encouraged to partake is what is basically a nasty little game.

“Yes, we need role models, but the shining examples are few and far between. If you want to be a “good man” you’ve got to be Da Vinci creative, becuase nobody’s going to show you the way.”

You don’t need to look towards the realms of fame and fortune. Look at your own life. Get to know some men, real men. They are out there. Not all men are brutes and jackals.

“BTW — you don’t need to go to the middle east to witness egregious misogynistic woman beating.”

No kidding.
lpenek May 1st, 2007 4:11 pm

Alright, maybe I was making a point by exaggeration. Yes, there are good men out there, nonviolent ones — the ones able, and most importantly willing, to nurture that side. But even in our so-called enlightened society dark regressivism flourishes, and it’s hidden for the most part. What was that recent report that said that 1/3 of military women are assaulted by their male companions? Aren’t those men our “honorable” troops?
Abuse hasn’t gone away, it’s just a cockroach that’s had a little light put on it and has scurried under the counter. Someone above mentioned that the true scope of abuse against women is staggering. I agree and would argue that it is, in fact, the single largest source of misery across the globe.

iwarrior: I’m glad you have specific examples, but we know that there are communities and societies where there are none, zippo. That’s why I say that for them, if they want to be good, it’s got to come from personal transcendence.
I stick to my statement: for the majority of societies “being a man” is not a good thing.
Smurfy May 2nd, 2007 12:19 pm

Oh my lordy…

The bit about not being restricted to Muslims is true enough but the thing about the rule of thumb is utter garbage.

“Although some may sneer at the idea, it is crucial to realize that the notion of “violence against women” must include the psychological: name-calling, withholding money, forbidding the woman to work or see her family, ridiculing her or insulting her in front of family or friends. Studies make it clear that, in many cases, psychological violence can be as devastating, or even more devastating, than physical violence.”

Yeah and men have a monopoly on such behavior right?

*sigh*

So much ignorance, so little time…

S.
communitarian May 2nd, 2007 3:40 pm

Instead of analysing macho psychology, why not discuss the solution to the basic problem - overpopulation which creates the tensions that lead to war and male oppression?

Give women their right to decide if and when to birth how many or how few children. Then the human population will soon drop down into balance with the Earth’s ability to support us, and we will be better able to live in peace with each other.

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)