According to feminist researchers, the intimate violence is widely committed by men against women. In the event of family violence, researches show that the rates of violence are evenly distributed among men and women relatively. Sexual violence is omitted by feminist researchers; they ignore the gendered relationships inequality, reasons, intents, and effects of any violence. The fact that women are on average in terms of strength, they are weak compared to men physically. For example, men punched stronger than women do and caused more injuries. However, there are instances that it is hard to identify who first initiated the fight or violence. It can be said whether a woman just responded through self – defense or shown anger to her abusive partner. Greater sensitivity is used in feminist researches that concerned most to women in unsafe situations from any present or previous violence, academics, and in the society as well. In Johnson research, there are two kinds of violence against women such as common couple violence and patriarchal terrorism. According to Johnson, the general population surveys with Conflict Tactics Survey as its tool used captured rates of common couple violence while the feminist researches measured patriarchal terrorism.
A number of significant shifts in research are allowed in a debate about gender symmetry with intimate violence. As suggested by Kimmel, he acknowledged as women commit any violence, at the same time it assist to understand more the violence in the same sex relationships. In addition, relationships among gay, lesbian, and transgendered interrupt the thinking of feminist binary of victims or batterer and good violence, the defensive side, or bad violence, the aggressive side. In the violence of women, it allows researchers the chance to consider and understand the different kinds of violence in women enacted in some heterosexual relationships. In addition, to understand the differences between women’s violence and violence committed by men.
As a result, in the family violence research, the perspective of a feminist on the case about the abuse of women is definitely not an isolated dispute in a certain bad men or relationship. Instead, it represents an important range of violence that has taken place. As focused in patriarchal terrorism and couple violence extremely differ from each other. It also understands that both intersect on an oppression structure; it helps people understand the various ways of violence in the community as practiced through gender differences and inequality . There is justice done by feminist researchers toward man and woman or family violence research, there should be no gender discrimination, racism, colonialism, and class exploitation respectively. The family violence has several specific causes, to mention are the lack of familiar connections and community, cultural values differences, traditional roles interventions, and immigration failures that nullifies the whole immigration plan and the posttraumatic stress disorders . The causes and consequences are analyzed further showing importance to conduct a family research formed through the perspective of feminists.
An experiential knowledge and intercultural knowledge are used in intercultural feminist interventions. It involves a well – developed intercultural understanding on a condition of violence. This intervention occurred in two significant steps; counselor, and women who seek assistance to recognize every right to provide meaning to situations as experienced, the second step is the existential, cultural, ethical issues as one that involves recognition mutually . The symbolic resources are redistributed by women with a purpose to let the people understand the significance of culture about women . Disapproval, liberation, and oppression are acted by women at a possible cause, where they belong in the community with its symbolic world as a clear position. As shared in the narrative effect of the story is said to be interactional wherein emotions are the impact . However, after an intervention relationship that aimed to manage a dispute in a community or a cooperative level, certain amount of proportion is needed accordingly. The client should be prioritize and considered as the subject and not just an object of the intervention. Those women who asked for assistance can interpret her story and the professional knowledge is deconstructed in the field of health and welfare. Through women’s experience, everything can be expressed accordingly in action that includes the story itself. The method of intervention built with its unique relationship between the client and the counselor, it allows a specific epistemology construction to every subject shared among others in accordance to the closeness of its meaning.
Every woman is entitled with possible questions for her to ask and answers at the same time within the period of her story delivered. The closeness of its meaning is used in the intervention of the intercultural feminist served as a basis on the definition of violence . In the framework of an intercultural feminist, the equality of epistemology is maintained. There is an exchange of various interpretation as the client interpreted her story while the counselor has his own interpretation as well in accordance to the story of the client and both interpretation are emerged as one . Therefore, the theory recognized the role of a new framework, however, the role of the intervention in terms of ethical ways applied in every person in their life socially, as he or she seeks to clarify for good result . Every individual should set a role framework with a purpose to control the violence occurrences.
Works Cited
Motoi, Ina. ""Is this violence? Recognizing, defining, and entervening in family violence in a
francophone minority setting." Cruel but not unusual: Violence in Canadian families." Wilfred Laurier University Press (2006): 1-171.
Todd, S. and C. Lundy. "Framing Woman Abuse: A Structural Perspective. In Ramona Alaggia
and Cathy Vine (Eds.) Cruel but not Unusual: Violence in Canadian Families." Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press (2006): 327-369 .
