Violence+Against+Women;+Epstein,+Miele,+Rogers

Violence Against Women: A look at India, U.S. and Pakistan

[|What is Violence Against Women? (VAW)]

=**INDIA and Dowries**=
 * Dowry: What Is It?**

Dowry often consists of money, animals and other gifts like jewelry or household items that the bridal family is expected to present to the groom's family.

Land and other productive assets were not expected to be given as dowry in order to protect the bride's family from serious economic set-backs. A bride's dowry was reflective of what her family could afford to give.

In the past, Indian society was controlled by a rigid caste system. Under the dowry system, a bride was able to marry a man from a higher status, and the size of the marital gift provided an opportunity for social advancement by attracting a groom from a higher position in the status hierarchy.

Since dowry is symbolic of the social and economic standing of the bride's family, ostentatious dowry payments increased their social status. A bride's parents also believed that a generous dowry would ensure their daughter was treated well in her groom's home.

The rules under this system allowed for a woman of a lower class to marry a man of a higher socioeconomic status and NOT vice versa.
 * Dowry System: History**

The parents of the women considered such a system advantageous to them in bringing their family power and prestige, so the parents of young women wanted to marry them off to economically well-off men. They WILLINGLY paid the cost of such a marriage through providing a huge dowry to the departing bride.

Dowry was considered women's property, and women traditionally had total control of their dowry.

The dowry was presented to the bride by her family to strengthen her own financial position in her in-law's home and to act as insurance in the event that the marriage ended for any reason.

Over time, dowry shifted from being a gift to the bride and began being considered a gift that the groom is entitled to for marrying the bride.
 * Modern Dowry**

Currently, dowry is seen as the property a woman brings to her husband at the time of the marriage and during the marriage to compensate for the financial burden that her very existence places on her in-laws.

Dowry expectations increased in size and flow of dowry became even more one-sided than before - Land and other means of survival which were traditionally excluded from dowries became fair game - Flow of gifts from the bride's family to the groom's family became associated with not only marriage but also with other events such as holidays, anniversaries, births, etc.

Marriage became the most important event in one's lifetime!

The size of dowries changed due to increased consumerism and greed - Rather than items of necessity for newlyweds, gifts have shifted to elaborate commodities such as luxury cars, motorcycles, boats, summer cottages, large sums of money, and expensive household appliances (those in poorer regions do not have access to electricity, but the owning of expensive appliances are seen as status symbols).

When a bride's family is unable to meet the marriage long dowry demands of the groom's family, then she may experience brutal beatings, being doused in a flammable liquid and set on fire, or a long number of horrifically violent actions.
 * How Does Dowry Lead to Violence?**

Unfortunately, dowry related violence continues to occur on a daily basis, even though laws have been put in place to prevent the practice of marital dowry giving.

These women often die or suffer critical injuries that leave them disfigured for the remainder of their lives, and if a women is brought to a health clinic due to dowry related violence she may not give honest incident reports due to the threat of future violence.

The violence is not often publicized or spoken about in the news, unless the dowry violence occurs within a well known family.


 * Jyoti and Shreya's Story**

"In January of 2004, Jyoti Chandra and her little girl Shreya (4) were severely beaten. Jyoti's injuries included bruises and lacerations as well as severe bites to her face. Her husband, Puneet, had bitten off chunks of flesh from Jyoti's face and had tried to bite off Jyoti's and Shreya's fingers. Moreover, teh little girl was brutall assaulted with a windshield-wiper which punctured her colon to the deegree that she will be excreting through her stomach for a long time to come. It seems, Puneet wanted an additional dowry of 200,000 Rupees, since Jyoti had given birth to a daughter rather than a son," (Sev'er, 2008).

Ancient Hindu Sayings: "Raising a daughter is like watering a neighbor's plant", "For fulfillment, many sons, for the sake of beauty, one daughter", "A son spells rewards, a daughter expense"
 * Why are Daughters Not Wanted?**

It used to be that large families with multiple offspring insured that what was given out through their daughters' dowries were recovered in some degree through the marriages of their sons. However, since women "married up" and men "married down" having daughters was considered to be a net loss for most families. -Now having daughters requires extreme financial investments with no material return

A daughter is considered to be another's property, raised in her parental home, and then gifted away with a dowry, and a son is an asset and brings wealth through dowry. -Rates of female feticide (abortion of female fetususes) and infanticide are very high in some parts of India due to this belief

Women are only considered as vehicles for bearing sons, and when they are unfit or unwilling to perform this function then they are considered useless.

"8,000 abortions that followed sex determination tests included only one male fetus" (Rastogi & Therly, 2006)

=**U.S. and Domestic Violence in Lesbian Relationships**=

[|Youtube video "Smoke"]


 * Perceptions of Lesbian Domestic Violence**

Lesbian intimate partner violence is assumed to be mutually combative, where there is no clear victim or perpetrator. In a study by Little and Terrance (2010), they wanted to measure the perceptions of lesbian domestic violence. Their conclusion was that the blame depended on how butch or how femme the women involved. They held heterosexist views even though it was two women involved. The femmes were seen more as the victim, while the more butch described women were seen as the perpetrators. Even if the butch was the victim in the scenario, the participants blamed the victim for whatever her role in the fight was perceived to be.


 * The Minority Stress Variable**

Balsam and Szymanski (2005) studied what they called the "minority stress variable" when it comes to lesbian domestic violence. The specific point of interest was internalized homophobia. They found that this minority stress variable can manifest itself into many different forms that lead to domestic violence. Internalized homophobia could lead to aggression toward their partner. It could also lead to dependence on their partner. With internalized homophobia, the partner with have fewer friends in the community and depend more on their partner. The more dependence on the partner, the more likely that violence will occur. Finally, if the victim has internalized homophobia, then they will blame themselves for the violence and will be less likely to get help or escape the relationship.


 * Policies about Domestic Violence**

Guadalupe-Diaz and Yglesias (2013) found that non-white women with a mistrust of police or the government are the least likely to receive a protective order against their attacker.

Helfrich and Simpson (2006) studied how domestic violence shelters could cater more to lesbian clients. They came up with the four following rules:

Participants emphasized the importance of having policies that mandate institutional inclusion as a means to ensure staff competency and accountability. Institutional inclusion refers to the importance of integrating and embracing lesbian clients in all aspects of services. They specifically recommended that agencies do the following: a. Formulate explicit institutional policies as a foundation for inclusion, including the consequences for violating policies, and b. expect all staff to serve all clients rather than placing the responsibility on one individual within the agency to address the needs of lesbians as a “special” population. (p. 352)
 * 1) Policies Regarding Institutional Inclusion

2. Policies Regarding Assessment of Language and Literature Policies addressing the assessment of language and literature are necessary to provide an inclusive environment within the institution. The language on marketing and advertising materials as well as the language used by staff must convey inclusiveness. Participants recommended that agencies perform the following: a. Incorporate materials that emphasize diversity within the institution, that is, use of posters and literature that announce nondiscriminatory practice, and b. revise institutional materials, including screening and assessment tools using gender-neutral language to describe the dynamics of domestic violence (p. 354)

3. Policies Regarding Training and Supervision Participants identified training and supervision as the foundations for change within agencies. Within this foundational change they specified three specific policy recommendations that would improve the quality of services provided to lesbians: a. Incorporate continuous and mandatory staff training to address the needs of lesbians, b. provide routine and thorough supervision to ensure continuous discussion and accountability, and c. recognize staff bias to enhance clinical skills through self-evaluation. (p. 355)

4. Policies Regarding Institutional Evaluation and Quality Assurance Participants recognized that given the wide range of barriers faced by lesbian victims, the task of addressing all of them is difficult for any one agency. To that end, they provided several recommendations to ensure that change occurs: a. Implement policy that requires the notification of client rights and responsibilities to address filing complaints and resolving disputes, <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">b. use LGBT agencies as consultants to assist in initial revisions within the institution, and <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">c. solicit client feedback to assess agency ability to meet inclusion goals (p. 357)

=**PAKISTAN and Honor Killings**=

[|What are Honor Killings in Pakistan?]



This woman, Sharmeen Obeid Chinoy made an Oscar-winning documentary [|(A Girl in the River; The Price of Forgiveness 2015)] on the topic of Honor Killings in Pakistan.

She is the first Pakistani to win an Oscar and only the 11th //woman// in history to win for non-fiction in Direction.

The movie, the award, and the aftermath are historic - policy changes are taking place in Pakistan as a response to the film.

How did Honor Killings come about?



1. Pakistan is known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. When we think about Islam many of us associate restriction, and mistreatment of women with the religion. However, this is not only a gross generalization, but a skewed perspective. Christianity - the only religion more widespread than Islam - also includes practices and beliefs that are misogynistic at best. It would seem that any country founded on one of these religions could have the potential to lay groundwork for Violence Against Women to not only be unquestioned, but normalized.

2. Pakistan gained its independence from British India in 1947. Pakistan is a young country in that it only recently established its independence. Despite the fact that honor killings have taken place for centuries, it was the British that drafted a penal code in 1860 that introduced the idea of treating the offenders of honor killings with leniency. In 1990, Pakistan introduced its version of "Islamic'' criminal law which defined the offense of murder not as a crime against the legal order of the State, but as against the legal heirs of the victim, therefore excusing them from punishment (Wasti 2010).

3. 63% of the population in Pakistan live in rural areas. What does this mean for women? Those women in rural areas have limited access to information and resources. Violence is prevalent in these areas and therefor normalizes the mistreatment of women by virtue of the fact that they are in the majority. This lays the groundwork for more egregious acts such as Honor Killings. = = =**As members of another culture what can we do?!**=

Is there something to do? What we see as violent and egregious perhaps is not - in order to find out we have to engage in conversation with those in the culture we are questioning.

Observe those within the culture and their own perspectives of their culture's practice: [|Here is a piece on Chinoy's film] Chinoy's production of art exploring this topic of honor killings helped spark a national dialogue.

We must recognize that Violence Against Women has seeds embedded in the practices and beliefs of many cultures which are seemingly benign, but they grow into larger and more obvious problems. However, this does not mean that that one can apply that same logic in reverse. If we come to acknowledge a practice as unjust within a culture, it does not mean that other ideas or practices within that culture are equally unjust.

In order to move away from ethnocentric to ethno relative stages of sensitivity, we must be willing to engage in dialogue, not simply continue to promote misunderstanding or stereotypes.



=** REFERENCES: **=
 * Ananthaswamy, A. (2002). Till death us do part. New Scientist, 174(2349), 12.
 * Balsam, K. F., & Szymanski, D. M. (2005). Relationship quality and domestic violence in women’s same-sex relationships: The role of minority stress. Psychology Of Women Quarterly, 29(3), 258-269. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00220.x
 * Film on Pakistan 'honor' killing up for Oscar. (n.d.). Retrieved April 23, 2016, from http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/26/entertainment/oscars-pakistan/
 * Govilkar, S. (2015, July 31). 16 things the world has got completely wrong about Indian women. Retrieved April 22, 2016, from http://www.youthconnect.in/2015/07/31/misconceptions-about-indian-women/
 * Guadalupe-Diaz, X. L., & Yglesias, J. (2013). “Who's protected?” exploring perceptions of domestic violence law by lesbians, gays, and bisexuals. Journal Of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 25(4), 465-485. doi:10.1080/10538720.2013.806881
 * Helfrich, C. A., & Simpson, E. K. (2006). Improving services for lesbian clients: What do domestic violence agencies need to do? .Health Care For Women International, 27(4), 344-361. doi:10.1080/07399330500511725
 * Honour killing in Pakistan. (n.d.). Retrieved April 22, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honour_killing_in_Pakistan
 * Little, B., & Terrance, C. (2010). Perceptions of domestic violence in lesbian relationships: Stereotypes and gender role expectations. Journal Of Homosexuality, 57(3), 429-440. doi:10.1080/00918360903543170
 * Sev'er, A. (2008). Discarded daughters: The patriarchal grip, dowry deaths, sex ratio imbalances & foeticide in India. Women's Health & Urban Life, 7(1), 56-75.
 * Srinivasan, P., & Lee, G. R. (2004). The Dowry System in Northern India: Women's Attitudes and Social Change. Journal Of Marriage And Family, 66(5), 1108-1117.
 * Violence against women. (n.d.). Retrieved April 21, 2016, from []
 * Wasti, T. H. (2010). The Law on Honour Killing: A British Innovation in the Criminal Law of the Indian Subcontinent and its Subsequent Metamorphosis under Pakistan Penal Code. South Asian Studies (1026-678X), 25(2), 361-411.
 * Zakar, R., Zakar, M. Z., & Abbas, S. (2015, 06). Domestic Violence Against Rural Women in Pakistan: An Issue of Health and Human Rights. J Fam Viol Journal of Family Violence,31(1), 15-25. doi:10.1007/s10896-015-9742-6