The purpose of the current article was to examine beliefs and attitudes around partner violence within Muslim society in Israel. The study addressed three gender-asymmetrical aspects of such beliefs: reasons for violence (the belief that men hurt their female partners to control them, and the belief that women hurt their male partners to protect themselves); violent behavior (the belief that men, more than women, are violent in intimate relationships); and the outcomes of violence (the belief that women, more than men, are injured as a result of intimate violence). The study also examines the attitude toward the appropriate social response to the problem (the belief that men who use partner violence should be condemned more than women should). First, the study compares men and women's belief levels and relates these to the accumulating empirical knowledge. Then, the study examines the difference between men and women in the relationship between the beliefs, as well as the effects of this on prevailing attitudes. The study was based on a community sample of 420 Muslim students. The research findings indicate that the belief that men, more than women, use physical violence in intimate relationships was the strongest belief of those tested and it was stronger among women than among men. The findings also indicate that among both men and women, the behavioral aspect does not affect the tendency for condemnation. On the other hand, among both, the consequences of violence affect condemnation. Theoretical and empirical implications of gender differences in physically violent behavior, Gender differences in consequences of physical partner violence, gender differences in condemnation of violent behavior and effects of beliefs on the attitude toward its condemnation were discussed.
This study aimed to examine differences between men and women and between Muslims, secular Jews, and religious Jews in their motivations for using sanctions within their intimate relationships. This work involved heterosexual couples from the general population. The sample included 95 Muslim, 68 secular Jewish, and 70 ultra-orthodox Jewish couples (466 participants). The findings of the study show that sanction use during times of conflict is prevalent among the vast majority of couples. Motivations for the use of sanctions are stronger among women than men. In addition, the strongest motivation expressed by both genders was a motivation for conflict resolution. This is the first time that sanctions, as a tactic to cope with conflict, have been addressed in a scholarly manner. This study provides a preliminary estimate of how commonly these types of behaviors are used in intimate relationships. Theoretical and empirical implications of the theoretical framework and the findings are discussed, including the role of the use of sanction in the escalation of intimate partner conflicts.
The purpose of the current study is to examine attitudes toward two types of violence—that perpetrated by men and that perpetrated by women—among a community of well-educated Muslims living in a Western country. Accordingly, two hypotheses were postulated, the first focusing on attitudes regarding men who perpetrate violence against women and the second focusing on attitudes toward women who perpetrate violence against men. The sample included 420 Muslim students who were studying in Arab institutions of higher education in northern Israel. The findings show that significant rates of both men and women think that “a woman hitting a man” might be seen as funny by their acquaintances. Meanwhile the vast majority of both men and women think that “a man hitting a woman” might be seen as sad by their acquaintances. However, the tendency to believe that such behavior would be viewed with sadness was stronger among women. The study helps to understand what the prevalent attitudes in society are, and has practical implications for raising public awareness around contexts of gender violence, as well as toward attitudes regarding violence among populations in transition from a traditional societal structure to a modern one.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.