Male dominance in the household
According to the United Nations, violence against women refers to any form of gender-based action that may lead to physical, sexual as well as mental harm to women. This may be in the form of threat, coercion, or arbitrary denial of liberty. It may happen either in private life or occur in public. While there are numerous suggestions about the causes of domestic violence against women, there have been claims that women’s paid employment influences the domestic abuse of women. Alonso-Borrego & Carrasco (2017) describes the proactive effect of employment on the domestic abuse of women. According to the research, earned income increases empowerment which is responsible for better household bargaining power (Alonso-Borrego & Carrasco, 2017). It is different from the results posted by Showalter (2016), indicating that women’s employment generates spousal violence as men view it as a threat to their roles as breadwinners. The two studies provide different aspects of how women’s employment influences domestic violence against themselves. Thus, this paper analyzes the effect of women’s employment on their domestic abuse from the two aspects and drive a conclusion based on the evidence from the study.
According to the noncooperative bargaining theory of domestic violence, an increase in woman’s economic stability through financial income gained either from paid work or other sources outside marriage minimizes the rate of violence experienced in the household (Grossbard, 2020). The claim is based on the fact that a woman’s financial stability promotes the possibility of quitting an abusive violent relationship which has a consequence of ending the relationship and decreasing the violence. The Nash-bargaining model, developed in 1991, illustrates how income changes domestic violence. According to the Nash-bargaining model, every individual spouse has a distinct threat-point that offers the minimum level of welfare of each spouse within a relationship. A woman threat-point shows the amount of violence she can tolerate without quitting the marriage based on a given distinct amount of financial transfers from her partner. The theory further indicates that an increase in a man’s income level allows him to buy more violence by increasing the level of financial transfer to the wife (Grossbard, 2020). On the contrary, improvement in a woman’s income restricts a man to reduce violent behavior. The same is witnessed with resource theory, indicating that a woman’s income means higher income in the household. The increase in resources in the household decreases household economic stress consequently eliminating spousal abuse. The models suggest a protective impact on women’s employment.
The sociological model, known as the male-backlash, indicates contrary opinion. According to this model, an increase in women’s wages is directly proportional to violence against them as men consider it a threat to their customary role. Pal (2019) claims, marital relationship is mostly influenced by socially and culturally defined gender roles. When a woman’s independence threatens these roles, men react with violence to recapture the lost authority. The theory claims that women’s employment empowerment, for instance, makes women stubborn, noncooperative, and abusive with the idea that they can take care of themselves. These traits lead to violent reactions from men who fear for their position in society (Pal, 2019). The model further indicates that unemployed women are more cooperative with their spouses and experience less violence. The issue of women employment and domestic abuse is defined by the set social norms about the independence and autonomy level a woman can be accorded. In this model, it is clear that women’s employment as well as their bargaining power cannot save them from domestic violence, only if the socially agreed norms allow employed women to quit violent relationships. The gender roles are grounded in social norms, social norms over the centuries have placed men as sole bread-earners, thus, men are right to fight for their position to maintain social order (Pal, 2019).
The rationale for the Position
While male-backlash theories and bargaining models present interesting claims, it is clear that women’s employment is necessary for the reduction of domestic abuse they experience. Even though these relationships are socially and culturally grounded, that most of the outcomes are influenced by the traditional practices, male-backlash fails to consider that every individual being is protected by these traditions and that women, just as any other member in the society can choose what is best for them, including ending the relationship (Jang, Hong & Hwang, 2017).
The main claim by male-backlash is about the reaction to defend the position in the household. The fear of men can be understood from the anthropological premise arguing that human beings do not exist in isolation but through interaction with others. It means that even if women were to be financially stable and live their lives, they cannot live in isolation, but will still need men and will still require to follow the social norms, or face violence. The premise indicates that as social beings, there are those practices that distinguish human behavior and they have to be preserved at whatever the cost, including violence. While it might be wise to maintain these social orders that make individuals to be recognized as beings, it is also critical to understand that social order must be viewed as a structuring device for reality changes that continue to be restructured. When restructured to permit women to have financial stability, they will be able to withstand domestic abuse since men will equally need women in their lives as women do, consequently withdrawing tough conditions and permitting accommodative ones (Jang et al., 017).
The interesting claim by the male-backlash that power is inherent in any relationship and does not require financial stability to bargain it, it exists on its terms. It is a claim that men are naturally meant to lead their household and any alteration in this trend will always lead to chaos, meaning women will experience more violence. While this might be true, it is also important for male-backlash supporters to understand that social organizations always work as a group towards a common objective, thus, the household group equally applies.
In a study to understand the effect of economic stress on domestic abuse of women, Alonso-Borrego & Carrasco (2017) confirmed that women in relationships with higher economic stress were more likely to experience violence compared to families with less economic strain. In relation to that result, it is evident that women’s employment on paid jobs will reduce their experiences of domestic abuse. It is viewed under the idea that more resources in the household reduces the rate of economic stress and eventually eliminating domestic violence.
In conclusion, while it occurs male dominance in the household has been supported by numerous social norms, some of these traditions have placed women in a compromised situation. Allowing women to have personalized income in the family provides a break-through from family bondages such as domestic abuse. Paid employment offers women the opportunity to defend themselves and stay away from abusive relationships.