Historical Images December 4, 2009

The two images above represent gender stereotyping (all the way back from the 18th century!)  It was believed that because men and women had different bodies, they therefore had different personal qualities.  According to a project about London’s criminal court:

Men, as the stronger sex, were thought to be intelligent, courageous, and determined. Women, on the other hand, were more governed by their emotions, and their virtues were expected to be chastity, modesty, compassion, and piety. Men were thought to be more aggressive; women more passive. These differences were echoed in the faults to which each sex was thought to be prone. Men were prone to violence, obstinacy, and selfishness, while women’s sins were viewed as the result of their tendency to be ruled by their bodies and their emotions, notably lust, excessive passion, shrewishness, and laziness.

Expectations of male and female conduct derived from these perceived virtues and weaknesses. In marriage, men were expected to rule over their wives, and all property (except in some cases property acquired by the woman before marriage) belonged to the husband. Men were the primary wage earners, while women were expected to be primarily responsible for housework and childcare, though both sexes participated in all these activities. Women’s paid employment was typically low status, low paid, and involved fewer skills and responsibilities than men’s. The types of work available to women were confined to a few sectors of the economy where the work could be seen as an extension of women’s domestic responsibilities, such as domestic service, the clothing trades, teaching, and nursing.

The main message: not much seems to have changed from the 18th century.  We may have the internet and airplanes, but a lot of these stereotypes still stand, for both men and women!

For more on historical perceptions of gender check out:

• History in Focus has a ton of links to resources, websites, articles, bibliographies and more
• The blog Early Modern Notes has a good article on Women’s History and Gender History
• The Internet Medieval Sourcebook has a crazy amount of primary and secondary sources, including a cross-dressing saint from the sixth century

A profile of a violent relationship December 3, 2009

If we’re going to help those in violent relationships, we need to understand their situations.  But sometimes we shy away from stories of violence partners because the stories may seem so extreme, or so shocking, or so far from our own experiences.  It may be hard to imagine how a loving relationship could deteriorate to the point of violence. 

And yet, as we come to understand abusive relationships, we may see that the sources of violence are not so far from any of us.  Violent incidents do not occur in a vacuum.  Though each abusive relationship is unique, common patterns do occur.

The following example is a composite of many stories. 

1. Courtship    

She may be attracted to him because he seems strong, exciting or romantic.  He may be attracted to her because she seems fragile and in need of protection, or because she seems glamorous and independent.  They probably have a strong sexual attraction.

He may be jealous or possessive of her.  She may find this flattering, believing his jealousy is a sign he really loves her.

Though either or both of them may appear confident, it’s likely that inside they are unsure of themselves.  They may have low self-esteem.  Either or both of them may have experience violence as a child.  Almost certainly, being together makes them feel good.

 

2. Commitment

At some point they become a “couple.”  They take on the traditional roles of boyfriend and girlfriend.

He expects her to be a “good girlfriend” who accommodates his needs and cares for him.  She wants to be a “good girlfriend” – one who pleases her boyfriend.  Though she may be assertive in other situations, in her relationship with him she slips into a more passive role, perhaps appreciating that she now has someone who cares about her. 

He is dependent on her for emotional support, to create for him a loving environment, to make him feel masculine.  She is dependent on him to take charge, to be the dominant one, to make her feel feminine.  They meet each other’s needs for a while.  Their mutual dependence draws them together, and they are probably happy with their relationship.

 

3. Tension

Things begin to go sour.  There may be an external source of pressure – trouble at school or pressure at home. 

            She has a harder time anticipating what he wants.  He feels cheated.  He may believe that you have to keep women in line.  He begins to attack her verbally with insults, put-downs, name-calling, and accusations.  He may begin to check in on her, to control where she goes and who she sees.  The mind games begin.

            She is hurt and confused.  She tries harder to please him, maybe special dates, maybe different make-up.  The harder she tries, the less he respects her, the more he blames her, and the more she blames herself.  They both believe her job is to please him.  He is not pleased, so there must be something wrong with her.

            As he becomes more critical and more oppressive, she becomes more passive and less sure of herself.  She feels more guilty.  The tension escalates

 

4. The first violent incident

During an argument, he hits her.  They are both shocked

He begs forgiveness and promises it will never happen again.  He doesn’t know what got into him: a bad grade or maybe a little too much to drink.  She agrees with him.  He wasn’t himself.  Surely if he loved her he wouldn’t hit her, not really.  It must be an isolated incident.

He is kind and loving, more loving than he has been for months.  Once again they experience tenderness and passion, more intense in the wake of their violent emotions.  The magic is back.

They do not discuss the incident.  They do not want to believe it happened, so it didn’t.  Why take a chance on spoiling their fragile harmony?

The intensity of their emotion, and their mutual denial, draw them closer, making them even more dependent on one another.

But a barrier has been broken.

 

5.  It happens again… and again

Their emotional closeness begins to deteriorate.  Tension begins to build again.  The insults and accusations start’ she tries harder to anticipate his every whim.

Another explosive incident.  This time they are not so shocked when he attacks her.  Again he is contrite and loving.  He says what she wants to hear.  She wants it to be true, so she believes him.  Again they feel closer for a while – another ‘honeymoon’ stage of tenderness and loving, entrapping them further.

The cycle repeats itself more frequently: tension build-up, violent explosion, and the honeymoon.

At this point, she probably does not consider herself an abused woman.  The reality hurts too much to acknowledge, so she denies it.  Instead, she feels guilty, tries to accommodate him (she can’t), tries to make the honeymoon stage last longer (it doesn’t).  He does not consider himself an abusing boyfriend.  After all, he loves her.  She hasn’t required medical attention after the blows.  He didn’t draw blood.  He hasn’t really hurt her, just kept her in line.

They both make excuses for him: he has an unhappy home life, he’s under a lot of pressure, it’s only when he’s drinking.  They both blame her: if she had been more understanding, if she hadn’t said the wrong thing, he would not have exploded.  She should know better than to annoy him when he’s drinking.

They both maintain their cloak of silence.  They don’t want anyone to know what goes on behind closed doors.  Ironically, the worse the situation gets, the more they are cut off from other people, and the more dependent they are on each other.

 

6.  The pattern is set

The cycle continues: tension, build-up, violent explosion, honeymoon.  The violent incidents become more serious and the honeymoons are shorter.

By now their tenderness and affection happen only during the honeymoon periods – after a beating.  But though once the tenderness made her believe he cared about her, now it may feel like another violation.  And though once he kept her with promises (“It will never happen again”) now he may use threats (“I’ll kill myself if you leave me”).

Her anxiety and guilt turn to fear.  She doesn’t know when the next attack will happen or why.  Her self-esteem drops.  She blames herself because she can’t control the situation; she feels helpless and powerless, ashamed and humiliated.  She begins to believe maybe she deserves the assaults.  Maybe if she could be a better girlfriend, he would not be so angry.  But sometimes he is good to her after the beating; he really is a good guy; he really does love her.  Maybe this time of emotional closeness will last.

One day she thinks, “He doesn’t hit me because he is drunk, he drinks for an excuse to hit me.”  As a survival tactic, she may provoke fights, unconsciously wanting to speed up the cycle so they can get the violence over with.  He accuses her of pushing him into violence.  Sometimes she does – as a way to end the unbearable tension.  Physical abuse may be easier to tolerate than the emotional and verbal abuse that precedes it.  Outsiders may see that one or the other of them causes the violence.  In reality, like the jailer and the prisoner, they are both locked in the cycle of violence.

 

7. Coming and Going

Something breaks the cloak of silence.  Perhaps she needs medical attention, or friends and parents start questioning.  Their violence now becomes public.

Now begins the most frustrating stage for those trying to help.  Outsiders do not understand how seductive the cycle of violence is, or how powerful the couple’s bond to one another.  Outsiders see only that he hits her and she goes back to him.  Trying to help the couple may seem futile.

She cannot leave because she needs to believe in the times he is good to her, because she fears his threats, because she does not see any options.  By now, she is a pulverized human being.  She feels worthless, unlovable, humiliated.  She does not believe she could make it on her own, or that she can escape the campaign of terror.

What is less obvious is that, even though he may blame her, beneath his aggressive exterior, he too feels worthless and unlovable.  He cannot imagine being without her.  He needs her emotional support, yet he is good to her only when he fears losing her.  He does everything in his power to drive her away (verbal attacks, beating her, sexual assault,), and then everything in his power to get her back (“I’ll go for counseling, I’ll find you and kill you, I need you, I’ll never hit you again”).

Outsiders find it hard to understand that their need for each other is as powerful as their need to break away.  They are trapped in their violent relationship.  He is compelled to drive her away and win her back; she must leave and return.  Most likely they will advance and retreat numerous times before they can change the cycle of violence.

If you or a friend are in an abusive relationship, you can call 604-270-7077 for FREE and CONFIDENTIAL youth counselling from CHIMO Crisis Services.  If you need to talk to someone in a non-judgemental and confidential manner you can call the CRISIS LINE at 604-270-7070.

Quizzes December 2, 2009

I’m a big fan of silly quizzes found on Facebook or in magazines: I’ve always wanted to know which Ninja Turtle I am most like, or whether or not I am psychic. As silly as these quizzes can be, sometimes checking in with ourselves on certain issues, whether with a friend or  in a quiz format, can be helpful. 

The SafeSpace.org has quite a few quizzes:

• Quiz: Is Your Relationship Healthy?
• Quiz: Am I Hurting My Partner?
• Quiz: Is My Abusive Partner Changing?
• Quiz: Is My Relationship Hurting Me?
• Quiz: Know Much About Dating Violence?
• Quiz: Would You Do The Right Thing?

If any of these quizzes bring up negative feelings or make you think that you or a friend is in an abusive relationship, you may want to seek help and talk to a trusted adult.

Using Gender v. Sex December 1, 2009

When I talk about gendered violence, I am usually talking about violence against a certain gender (and in the case of the WRC, I’m talking about violence because of a perceived violation of traditional gender roles).  But why even make the distinction between talking about ‘Sexual Violence’ and ‘Gender Violence’?  For one, when we mention ‘sex’ people tend to think about an action rather than a biological term, and not all violence against women is done in a sexual way.  Second, I think it is really important for us to distinguish between the two terms.

How many forms have you ever had to fill out where they asked you to choose ‘male’ or ‘female’?  What’s the first thing that people ask when a baby’s born?  Identifying the sex of a human being is really important to us.  However, there is a growing awareness about making a distinction between asking and talking about gender versus talking about sex.  And the first step to discussion is understanding the terms involved:

Sex is used to label a person’s biological characteristics, which are divided into three categories: male (with male sex organs, chromosomes, and hormones), female (with female sex organs, chromosomes, and hormones), and intersex (with ‘ambiguous’ or male and female sex organs, chromosomes, and hormones).

Gender is used to label a person’s behaviour according to socially assigned norms.  We normally refer to this as ‘masculinity’ or ‘femininity’.

Why does this matter? Really, it is an issue of how we view relations between genders.  If we think that everything is set in stone, and that being born female or male means that you will act and think a certain way, then arguments can be made that gender inequality is the ‘nature of things’.  By making a difference between sex and gender we try and acknowledge that certain behaviours or traits are socially constructed.  Therefore, females aren’t naturally submissive or are victims nor are males naturally dominant or abusive.  Rather, inequality and abuse is the result of historical, social, environmental, political and economic influences.  As well, it acknowledges that there aren’t just two categories that people are born into: they can be born male or female, and have their bodies reflect that, but identify as the so-called opposing gender.

Sex & gender term cheat sheet:

Sex: characteristics (anatomical, genetic & hormonal) socially identified as male, female or intersex.

Gender: behaviors/norms socially assigned to males & females; masculinity & femininity.

Gender identity: internal sense of gender as man or woman, which may not conform to birth sex.

Gender expression: external signs of “femininity” or “masculinity” via clothing, comportment, etc…

Gender non-conformity: to reject assignment of distinct norms and behaviors to men & women

Genderqueer: freedom and openness of gender expression and sexual orientation, regardless of birth sex or societal norms/expectations. Often working actively to question and redefine established concepts and definitions of gender and sexual orientation.

Transgender: person who transcends behaviors/norms socially assigned to men & women; person who rejects gender binary; gender variant person; person whose gender identity/expression does not conform to birth sex.

www.soysaucecarnival.com/haiku_images/gender_boundaries.png

For more information on this check out:

• The World Health Organization’s distinction between sex and gender
• An awesome article at gurl.com looking at gender (and there’s tons of other links to check out too!)
• If you’re curious about the third sex mentioned above (intersex) there is a ton of information on the Intersex Society of North America’s website

Riddle Me This November 26, 2009

Perhaps you’ve seen this riddle before:

A father and his son were both in a car accident. The father was killed, and the son was rushed to the hospital, where he needed an emergency operation to save his life. The surgeon examined the boy before the operation and said, “I can’t operate on this child. He is my son.” 

How can this be?

 

Well the answer, quite simply, is that the surgeon was a woman.  Whether you guessed it right away or took a moment to ponder (like I did when I first heard it!), what’s important is not that the right answer was found, but that this is considered a riddle in the first place. A riddle is defined as a “question or statement requiring thought to answer or understand; a conundrum”.  Why would we need to stop and think about whether or not the surgeon is a woman; why would that be considered difficult? 

The answer to that is equally riddling, but has some very plausible answers.  Our society’s view of gender roles tends to place high-status, high-earning, and high-education level jobs in the realm of “men’s work”.  Although we might say to each other than we don’t subscribe to certain gendered ideas, sometimes what we have internalized is more pervasive than we think.

A study published in the journal “Sex Roles” shows just that.  Participants were timed in how long it took them to identify stereotypical roles with certain genders versus counter-stereotypical roles.  What was found was that it took longer for participants to go against the stereotype.  Thinking stereotypically seems to be the default, even if we are willing to take the time to mentally correct ourselves!

Which ultimately makes me wonder: if the above riddle replaced “surgeon” with “nurse” would it still have been a riddle?

For more information on gendered perceptions check out:

•  a great overview of all the studies conducted on Masculinty/Femininity
• Andrew Kimbrell at MENSIGHT Magazine asks “What is a man?”
• a look at “Gender Stereotypes and Sexual Archetypes” with lots of pictures, illustrations and diagrams

Honour Killings November 25, 2009

This morning was the official launch of the White Ribbon Campaign, and therefore the official launch of the blog!  I’ll be posting photos etc. later, but to start us off I thought it would be best to post on something that has sparked some good conversation in the training sessions (and that I’ve tantilizingly told you “I’m sorry to cut you off, but wait for the blog post!”)

In the news we sometimes hear talk of “honour killings” in relation to deaths of women overseas.  I’m always surprised that sometimes we don’t hear more about this topic; the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) estimates that there may be as many as 5,000 honour killings a year in places such as Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Britain, Brazil, Ecuador, Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Pakistan, Morocco, Sweden, Turkey, and Uganda!

Honour killings are an example of gendered violence: violence that occurs against women only and is part of a larger problem of gender inequality.  An ‘honour’ killing is when a male family member commits a violent act against a female family member who is thought to have brought dishonour upon the family or community.  How ‘dishonour’ is defined depends on the culture or family, but some reasons include refusing an arranged marriage, being the victim of sexual assault, wanting a divorce or being suspected of cheating. 

As people with different religious and cultural backgrounds come to Canada, we have seen a rise in honour killings here.  This is not to say that all girls of certain ethnic groups are at risk, but that it is another form of gendered violence that we in Canada are exposed to.  The following list describes some recent Canadian honour killings:

June 2000: Jaswinder Kauer Sidhu, 25, has her throat slit after marrying someone of whom her family disapproved.  Her mother and uncle were charged, as well as seven others.

July 2003: Amandeep Atwal, 17, is murdered by her father who frowned on her relationship with a classmate.

September 2006: Khatera Sadiqi, 20, and her fiancé, Feroz Mangal, 23, are gunned down by her brother, who is later found guilty of first-degree murder.

July  2007: Shemina Hirji, 40, is allegedly murdered by her husband.  Hirji, a school principal, had been married less than a week.

December 2007: Aqsa Parvez, 16, is found strangled in her home.  Her father and brother are charged.  Aqsa had a strained relationship with her family due to her refusal to wear the hijab and fulfill other traditional gender roles.

January 2009: Amandeep Kaur Dhillon, 22, is stabbed in the neck by her father-in-law by an arranged marriage.

June 2009: Three Shafia sisters, Zainab, 19, Sahar, 17, Geeti, 13, are allegedly murdered by their father, mother and brother after their bodies are found in a car in the Rideau Canal.  Zainab had recently become engaged, and was set to announce her engagement the day after her death.

Want to learn more about international honour killings?  Check out Gendercide Watch, this article by National Geographic or this article (which is where I found the above photo) by the BBC.

Want to find out more about honour killings in Canada?  Check out this blog post by a Muslim Canadian in response to the death of Aqsa Parvez or this article on a recent study from the U of T on the rise of honour killings in Canada.

Hello Richmond! August 6, 2009

Welcome to CHIMO’s blog for our White Ribbon Campaign!  Throughout the campaign, from November 25th to December 6th, we will be posting articles, links and information regarding the campaign.

Stay tuned for articles and links pertaining to the campaign.