This article was downloaded by: [Universite De Paris 1]

On: 04 September 2013, At: 09:08

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjmm20

Violence against women: a

cross‐cultural perspective
Nora Almosaed
Published online: 23 Jan 2007.

To cite this article: Nora Almosaed (2004) Violence against women: a cross‐cultural perspective,
Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 24:1, 67-88, DOI: 10.1080/1360200042000212124

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360200042000212124

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Journal of Muslim Affairs, Vol. 24, No. 1, April 2004

Violence Against Women: A Cross-cultural

Perspective

NORA ALMOSAED

Abstract
Examining public attitudes towards violence against women, the paper provides a wider
perspective by discussing violence against women in the Arab world and beyond with a
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

cross-cultural overview followed by a focus on Saudi society. It presents the findings of an

opinion survey conducted among men and women in the city of Jeddah. It examines their
attitudes towards wife abuse and violence against women in the context of Saudi society. The
paper outlines the methodology of the study and analyses the major findings by classifying them
under forms of violence, the perpetrators of violence, rate of occurrence, as well as the cultural
context. The paper concludes with major findings indicating that perpetrators of violence were
themselves victims of violence and abuse; most respondents approved of physical punishment as
necessary; many conclude that violence is an effective way of dealing with female ‘misconduct’,
and the majority of male respondents felt this way, while the majority of women felt that men
who abused women were not ‘real men’ and were only exploiting their positions.

Introduction
Abuse in the Saudi family is a subject that has only recently entered public discourse
but still remains a taboo subject for discussion. This survey is an attempt to explore
Saudi society’s view of domestic violence.
The main argument of the study is that physical chastisement in Saudi Arabian
society is an acceptable act in the learning process as well as in punishment. Learning
is connected to the use of violence against children and punishment is connected to the
use of violence against women. A questionnaire was circulated and 230 women and
men participated in the study. The empirical findings indicated that: most members of
the sample were victims of physical violence in their childhood and adolescence, most
members of the sample are in favour of the use of physical punishment in childhood,
and 30% of men who participated in the sample were violent to female members of
their families.
Other findings in relation to Saudi society’s view of wife abuse showed that women
are abused for their ‘misconduct’ by 52.6% of the male sample and 36% of the female
sample; 57% of the whole sample view women who stay in the marriage despite the
abuse as women staying because they care for their families’ stability; 58% of the
sample view men who abuse their wives as not real men; and the situation where a
woman stays married to a man who abuses her is viewed by 40% of the sample to be
a social problem that has to be addressed publicly.

ISSN 1360-2004 print/ISSN 1469-9591 online/04/010067-22  2004 Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs
DOI: 10.1080/1360200042000212124
 68 Nora Almosaed

Methodology
Objectives
This study attempts to accomplish the following objectives:
• To highlight society’s view of violence against women.
• To examine the influence of sex, education, income, marital status and religious
conviction on attitudes regarding violence against women.
• To highlight society’s view of battered wives.
• To highlight society’s view of abusive men.
Study questions included the following:
• Does the Saudi society tolerate violence against women?
• Do women hold different views than men with regards to the use of violence?
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

• Does the society’s view of violence differ according to education, marital status,
income and religious conviction?
• Is there a relationship between victims of violence and views towards violence?
• How much violence is encountered by the men and women who participated in the
study?
• How much violence are women subjected to in the families of the men and women
who participated in the study?
• How many of the male sample are abusive?
• What is Saudi Arabian society’s view of battered wives, abusive men and domestic
violence?

Methods of Data Collection

Data for this research was derived from 230 questionnaires completed by women and
men over a period of three months. However, questions asked of men were slightly
different from those asked of women as required by their gender differences.

Sample
Out of the 240 questionnaires distributed in the city of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the
snowball sample consisted of only 230 people comprising 118 women and 112 men.
The difference in the number between the sexes is due to the number of questionnaires
that were not included in the analysis as they were not fully answered by the respon-
dents.

Study Limitations
Any conclusions from this research are ultimately limited by the validity of the methods
used, and the conduct of future research may profit from an explication of these
limitations. One of the most common problems with research in this area is the selective
and modest nature of the samples. This research did not use a scientific sampling
procedure despite the fact that the sample represents different ages, educational levels,
income and work status. Thus, the representativeness of the sample is unknown. The
small sample and the unknown representativeness impinge on the generalizability of the
findings presented in this research.
 Violence Against Women 69

Definition of Concepts
Attitude
The concept of attitude has played a significant part throughout the history of social
psychology studies. Ajzen and Fishbein as well as Terry and Hogg argue that the
scientific study of attitudes virtually defined the field of social psychology for many early
theorists.1 But it could be argued that attitude as a concept was not well defined since
different theories propose different elements to the study of attitudes.2
Going through the theoretical and empirical findings of early studies one can reach
the conclusion that attitudes influence people’s thoughts and actions. However, the
argument that assumed attitudes could be used to explain human action, while viewing
attitudes as mental state of readiness, organized through experience, influencing the
individual’s response to all objects and situations; and findings that confirm that people
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

who behave in different ways also differ in their attitudes, went unchallenged until the
late 1960s. Acock and Scott identify three themes in the literature of attitude–behaviour
relationship.3 The first theme relates to social influences, such as relevant social norms
or the orientations of significant others, which may elaborate the relationship between
an attitude and a behaviour or which themselves may have an independent effect upon
behaviour. These are contingent variables, configurations of variables and subjective
norms, as argued by Ajzen and Fishbein.4 The second theme concerns the impact
which the visibility of a behaviour to public inspection may have upon the centrality of
attitudinal concepts as opposed to social pressure as in Warner and DeFleur.5 The third
theme developed in recent attitude–behaviour literature addresses problems of
measurement and the specification of measurement error by Ehrlich.6
Attitude may be seen as an orientation towards certain objects or situations. An
attitude is learned, and may be regarded as a more specific expression of a value or
belief in that an attitude results from the application of a general value to concrete
objects or situations. An attitude involves a positive or negative evaluation and a
readiness to respond to related objects or situations in a characteristic and predictable
manner. Most attitude studies, however, deal with verbal responses rather than obser-
vations of behaviour, but then many studies regard verbal response as a form of
behaviour.7
This study will measure society’s attitudes towards violence in terms of society’s
approval or disapproval of abusive acts against women that are perpetrated by men, but
not society’s attitudes as a reflection of behaviour. This is because people might
disapprove of using violence or becoming a victim of it, but may still act violently in
situations.

Violence Against Women and Wife Abuse

The United Nation’s definition of violence against women includes any act of gender-
based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological
harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary
deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life. Accordingly, physical
violence against women encompasses but is not limited to the following:

• Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including

battering, sexual abuse and rape, dowry-related violence, female genital mutilation
 70 Nora Almosaed

and any traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence
related to exploitation.
• Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring within the general com-
munity, including rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation,
trafficking and forced prostitution.
• Physical, sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the state,
wherever it occurs.

Gelles moreover defines violence as ‘an act carried out with the intention or perceived
intention of causing physical pain or injury to another person. While the physical pain
can range from slight pain, as in a slap, to a murder’.8 Gelles also identifies two
categories of violence, ‘normal’ violence and abusive violence.9 ‘Normal’ violence is the
commonplace slaps, pushes, shoves, and spankings that are frequently considered
normal or acceptable. Abusive violence is the acts that have the high potential for
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

injuring the person being hit, which includes punches, kicks, bites, chokings, beatings,
shootings or attempted shootings and stabbings or attempted stabbings.
Wife abuse may be defined as any act of violence committed against women in a
marital relationship with the perpetrator. Wife abuse, however, is not the only form of
harm that women experience, nor is it the most harmful form of victimization. But
nevertheless, wife abuse is the focus of this study and society’s attitudes will be studied
with reference to this term.

Attitude and Behaviour

Whether the focus is on the effect of attitudes on behaviour or the effect of behaviour
on attitudes, attitude–behaviour consistency has been a significant research question in
the social sciences.
However, as early as the 1930s arguments against the assumption that people known
to differ in their behaviour also differ in their measured attitudes were put forward by
scientists such as Thurstone10 who wrote that although a person’s attitude towards an
object should be related to the pattern of his/her behaviour with respect to the object,
there is no necessary relation between attitude and any given behaviour. And as these
results began to accumulate, it became necessary to consider possible explanations for
the failure of attitudes to predict behaviour. The explanations that some scientists
presented argued that there was no innate relationship between attitude towards an
object and any given behaviour with respect to that object. Two people may learn to
hold the same attitude towards a given stimulus, but they may also learn to emit
different responses, given the same learned attitude. These researchers argue that while
knowledge of a person’s attitude can tell us little as to whether a person will perform
some particular behaviour, it can tell us something about his/her overall pattern of
behaviour.
The studies of attitude–behaviour relationship have also dealt with the influence of
social identity and group membership. Terry, Hogg and White noticed a strong
theoretical assumption that can be made for the view that to understand attitude–be-
haviour consistency it is necessary to take into account the wider social context of group
memberships.11 Attitudes themselves can be regarded as social products to the extent
that they are likely to be influenced by social norms and expectations. Norms of
behaviourally relevant social groups and categories are likely to influence people’s
willingness to engage in attitudinally consistent behaviour. When people define and
 Violence Against Women 71

evaluate themselves in terms of a self-inclusive social category (e.g. gender, class,

religiosity) two processes come into play: (a) categorization, which perceptually accen-
tuates differences between in-group and out-group and similarities among in-groupers
(including self) on stereotypical dimensions; and (b) self-enhancement which, because
the self-concept is defined in terms of group membership, seeks behaviourally and
perceptually to favour things in-group over things out-group.
Terry, Hogg and White furthermore notice that people are influenced by norms not
for social approval, nor because others have told them to, nor because others are
watching but because norms prescribe the context-specific attitudes and behaviours
appropriate for group members.12 Attitudes can be personal, idiosyncratic, and unre-
lated to norms, but they also can be widely shared and normative. These shared
normative attitudes are tied to specific group membership and are part of group
prototypes. Having categorized and defined themselves as members of a distinct social
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

category, people form the context-specific stereotypic norms of the group and these
norms are internalized as their attitudes towards an issue. Thus, a social identity and
self-categorization perspective as argued by Terry, Hogg and White would predict that
psychological group membership should influence attitudes.13

Violence Against Women: A Cross-cultural Overview

Cross-cultural studies suggest the existence of male violence against women in all
societies and throughout history. Dobash and Dobash argue that violence is found in
every socio-economic group, ideology, class, race and ethnic grouping.14 Dobash and
Dobash notice furthermore that in many countries it is becoming known that violence
in the home is commonplace, that women are its usual victims and men its usual
perpetrators.15 And the violence is taking different forms of oppression, including
physical, sexual and emotional. Women across all regions, ages, religions, classes, and
political affiliations are vulnerable to violence, as Sen notices that women’s safety is
guaranteed neither in the home nor in public spaces.16 Furthermore, Gelles argues that
the subordinate status of women in most of the world’s societies makes women easy
victims of violence.17 He writes: ‘because physical force and violence are the ultimate
resources that can be used to keep subordinate groups in their place, the history of
women throughout the world has been one in which women have been victims of
physical assault’.18

Power Relations
The use and meaning of violence is connected with power. It is broadly the case that
in most societies, social, economic, political and interpersonal power remains with men.
Power is socially gendered. In this context Sen argues that violence is an expression of
power, a means through which people seek control.19 Gender violence is not random
violence in which victims happen to be women and girls; rather, the ‘risk factor’ is being
female.
The United Nations sees in violence against women a manifestation of historical
unequal power relations between men and women, which led to domination over and
discrimination against women by men.20 Violence against women throughout the life
cycle derives essentially from cultural patterns, in particular the harmful effects of
certain traditional or customary practices and all acts of extremism linked to race, sex,
 72 Nora Almosaed

language or religion that perpetuate the lower status accorded to women in the family,
the workplace, the community and society.
Violence against women is exacerbated by social pressures as acknowledged by the
UN, notably the shame of denouncing certain acts that have been perpetrated against
women; women’s lack of access to legal information, aid or protection; and the lack of
laws that effectively prohibit violence against women.
Women and children may be the most frequent victims of family violence because as
Gelles points out they have no place to run and are not strong enough or do not possess
sufficient resources to inflict costs on their attackers.21 Battering at home constitutes by
far the most universal form of violence against women and is a significant cause of
injury for women of reproductive age. Yet, it is not the sort of act that commands public
attention because it happens behind closed doors and because victims fear speaking
out. Bunch noticed that only one in 100 battered women in the United States ever
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

reports the abuse she suffers, and most women who are raped know their attackers, as
do 40% of female murder victims.22

Forms of Violence
Data collected by many researchers as well as governmental and non-governmental
organizations and agencies in different societies around the world reveal different forms
of violence and abuse women are subjected to. UN statistics reveal that domestic
violence, especially wife battering, is perhaps the most widespread form of violence
against women. More than 20% of women are reported to have been abused by the
men with whom they live. Also, the World Development Report of the World Bank
shows that rape and domestic violence lead to the loss of more healthy years of life
among women aged 15 to 44 than do breast cancer, cervical cancer, obstructed labour,
war or motor vehicle accidents.23 In 1993, in the first national survey of violence against
women conducted in Canada, Sen reported three in ten women having experienced at
least one incident of physical or sexual violence at the hands of a marital partner.24
According to one report, 51% of women in Canada have experienced some form of
violence in their adult lives, and an average of 75 women are killed each year by their
husbands.25 For each woman killed, 2.25 women experience violence at the hands of
their male partners.

Perpetrators
Two national surveys on violence toward women were conducted in New Zealand.26
The first study was a survey of a nationally representative sample of 2000 men, and the
second was a follow-up survey of 200 of the 2000 men. Twenty-one percent of the men
surveyed reported committing one act of physical violence against a partner in the
previous year, and 53% reported committing an act of emotional abuse. Thirty-five
percent of the men reported using an act of physical violence, and 62% reported using
emotional abuse toward a partner.
In the United States, Gelles reports that nine women in 1000, or one million women
each year, experience violence at the hand of an intimate.27 The National Family
Violence Survey revealed in 1992 that 34% of 1000 American women, or one woman
in 22, was a victim of abusive violence during the 12-month period prior to the
interview that was conducted in 1985.28 This rate means that at least 1.8 million
women in America each year experience severe violence or wife abuse.
 Violence Against Women 73

In the UK, Dobash and Dobash estimated that more than 25% of all violent crimes
reported to the police were domestic violence by men against women, and in the same
study, they found that only 2% of domestic violence incidents were reported to the
police.29 According to a study conducted in 1994 and reported by Hague and Malos,
one in ten of the women who participated in the study had experienced violence by
their partners.30 And in the Women’s Aid Federation of England’s (1992) report, it is
estimated that up to one in four women may on occasion experience violence in their
sexual relationships with men.31

Rate of Occurrence
More recent surveys and studies such as the one-day survey conducted in the UK on
28 September 2000 revealed that police receive more than 1300 calls per day—more
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

than 570,000 each year—for domestic violence.32 In the same study, in the Metropoli-
tan Police Service area alone, one in four of all violent crimes dealt with by the police
is a domestic violence incident. Betsy Stanko33 argues on the basis of the British Crime
Survey of 200034 that an incident of domestic violence occurs in the UK every 6 to 20
seconds. The 2001/2002 British Crime Survey35 also found that there were an esti-
mated 635,000 incidents of domestic violence over that period in England and Wales,
and of those, 81% of the victims were women. The same survey also pointed out that
57% of the victims of domestic violence are involved in more than one incident, and
this rate of repeated victimization is the highest among other types of crimes.

The Cultural Context

In other parts of the world and in many Latin American countries, Dobash and Dobash
notice that the image of the macho man continues and violence against women is
perpetuated within that cultural context.36 In Ecuador, over 80% of women interviewed
in one study had been abused by their partners, and that constituted up to 70% of all
crimes reported to the police in Peru. In the two years, 1986 and 1997, 18,000 cases
of woman abuse were reported to the police in Sao Paulo, Brazil. In twelve Latin
American countries, a rapist can be exonerated if he offers to marry the victim and she
accepts. In Costa Rica, he can be exonerated even if she refuses his offer, and the family
of the victim frequently pressure the woman to marry the rapist to restore their honour.
Forms of violence seem to reflect cultural differences as well as patterns of power that
men have over women. Data from China demonstrate that 20% of men are violent to
their wives, and violence increases among the educated and professional classes.37 In
India and Bangladesh, for example, women are abused and killed because of men’s
possessiveness and demands about women’s domestic work, but also because of the
price of a wife and the bereavement of a widow.38 In India, traditions also feed the
practice of ‘dowry death’, in which a woman is harassed, threatened, or abused, and in
extreme cases killed or driven to suicide because she is unable to meet her husband’s
or in-laws’ demands for dowry and additions to it.
The incidence of acid attacks appears to be increasing in Bangladesh. Sen reports
how men often throw acid at young girls’ faces and heads who have refused to conform
to their demands by rejecting or ignoring their attentions.39 This results in visible
disfigurement. Out of 80 cases known to have taken place in Bangladesh in 1996, only
two ended in criminal convictions.
 74 Nora Almosaed

A Matter of ‘Honour’
Cultural attitudes toward female chastity and male honour also serve to justify violence
against women and to exacerbate its consequences. In courts of law, the ‘honour
defence’ is institutionalized in many Middle Eastern and Latin American countries,
allowing fathers, husbands, brothers, and cousins to walk away from murder. Killing
and physical violence is the form of violence associated with honour incidents in the
Arab countries. A study conducted in the year 2001 in Egypt (as quoted in the 2003
Cairo Conference on Violence Against Women) showed that doubting women’s behav-
iour constituted 79% of honour crimes, while admitting misconduct constituted 9%.
The study also showed that 41% of honour crimes were committed against the wife,
34% against the daughter, 18% against the sister and 7% against a female relative.40 In
Jordan, honour crimes made up 23% of crimes of violence against women since 1986.41
The concept of male honour and fear of female ‘misbehaviour’ underlies the practice
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

of female genital mutilation, which reflects a prevailing social consensus that virginity
of girls and women must be preserved until marriage, and that their sexuality must be
controlled. According to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), it is esti-
mated that between 85 to 114 million women and girls, most of whom live in Africa,
the Middle East and Asia, have had their genitals excised to some degree.42
Furthermore, a national survey by the Law Reform Commission in Papua New
Guinea discovered that 67% of women in rural areas and 56% of women in urban areas
had been abused by their husbands.43
Cultural practices continue to subordinate women and girls in the forms of child
marriage and forced marriage conducted often to protect the family ‘honour’. It is
reported by Quattara, Sen and Thomson that early marriage is a common practice in
Southern Benin/Africa, where girls are betrothed at or before birth by their parents, in
respect of friendship or based on a system of exchanging women between ethnic groups
within the community.44 Therefore, girls as young as 10 or 13 are kidnapped from their
families and taken to their husbands. Early marriage according to the 1992 Children’s
Act is defined as marriage under 16 years for girls and 18 for boys, while 90% of boys
and girls are entering marriage between the ages of 12 and 17 years in Nepal.

Public Attitude Towards Violence Against Women

Studies on violence against women have covered areas of great diversity and variety.
Areas covered include: the meaning and explanation of domestic violence, forms of
domestic violence, cross-cultural studies of violence against women, the extent and the
reality of domestic violence, refugees and shelters, violence and social order and abusive
men. However, only a few studies have covered the area of public attitudes. Attitude
towards domestic violence is a critical subject in deciding what kind of support women
will get from family, friends, voluntary agencies and the state.

A Private Affair
In the past, the overriding attitude to domestic violence as argued by Hague and Malos
was the belief that it is a private affair between husband and wife, and that nobody
should interfere unless it is happening constantly and causing serious and visible injury
to the woman, or more importantly, injury to the children.45 Widespread social
problems such as domestic violence as noted by Hague and Wilson were reduced to
 Violence Against Women 75

abstract or personal situations,46 and most explanations tended to cast blame on the
woman’s personality traits, feelings of inadequacy, background and behaviour. Such
attitude prevailed and tended to excuse the violence and blame the woman. Therefore,
violence against women and between family members has a historical tradition that
goes back generations and crosses cultures and societies. Historically, furthermore, men
were given the right to discipline their wives and children, and women were treated as
men’s property.47 Physical punishment of a wife was acceptable provided that it was not
‘excessive’. Paradoxically, a 1998 British survey by the Zero Tolerance Charitable
Trust of 2039 young people (13–19 years old) found that one in five young men and
one in ten young women thought violence against women was acceptable; one in four
young men thought it could be acceptable to hit a woman if she had ‘slept with
someone else’. Also in this study, one in five young men considered it acceptable to
force a woman to have sex if she were his wife.48
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

Hague and Malos argue further that violent men still believe in their right to control
their wives, and even non-violent men believe so.49 It has been reported that only 37%
of men did not see violence against their partners as an option, while 19% of men
admitted that they had struck their partners. Hague and Malos report that men are
traditionally ‘excused’ for violence including murder if they are ‘provoked’.50 While one
of the most common reasons for ‘understandable’ violence, as research on honour
killing shows, is that they know, or suspect, that their wives are unfaithful.
Therefore, Hague and Malos state that men give different explanations as to why
they act violently, and whatever they might blame is accepted. A man might say he was
jealous; or she spent too much time outside the home, with her family or friends; or she
was a bad housekeeper; or she spent too much of his money; or she was too
independent; or too controlling; or she answered back; or she nagged him; or she did
not control the children properly; or she would not have sex with him; or maybe he
might say she invited aggression because of her passivity. And women most of the time
feel that the violence is their fault.51

Justifications
An early survey in the United States showed that one quarter of all adult men, and one
in six adult women, said they could think of circumstances in which it would be all right
for a husband to hit his wife or for the wife to hit her husband. Overall, about 21% of
those surveyed approved of a husband slapping his wife. The same survey found that
86% of those surveyed agreed that young people needed ‘strong’ discipline, and 70%
thought that it was important for a boy to have a few fist fights while he was growing
up.52
Mooney’s survey of 1000 people in North London shows that one third of all men
said they would be liable to hit their partners in situations of sexual infidelity. A quarter
of men say they would hit their partner if she hit them and 15% of all men would see
this as justified. A smaller percentage, 12%, would be liable to commit violence in the
heat of quarrel.53 In New Zealand, 65% of men blamed the woman for being hit in at
least one of the circumstances presented to them, with infidelity being the most
commonly cited.54 In a New Jersey survey, 68% approved of ‘a man slapping his wife’
in self-defence, and 37% in response to infidelity.55 In Britain, though the domestic
violence legislation improved the formal legal rights of battered women, the real
improvement, as argued by McCann, in the battered women’s position is substantially
less.56 McCann argues, furthermore, that the advances in the rights of battered women
 76 Nora Almosaed

have not been established in practice. Rather this has been undermined both by the
courts and the police.57
In India, moreover, the National Family Health Survey 1998–1999 shows that 56%
of the women studied from all over India thought that wife abuse could be justified.
However, the higher the education level and the better the geographical area, the less
the likelihood of the women justifying wife abuse. Sixty percent of rural women and
62% among illiterate women justified beating, while 40% of urban women and 37% of
women who had completed high school justified beating.58

Changing Attitudes
Gelles argues that attitudes to family violence are changing. He states that evidence
from surveys confirms this change.59 Only 13% of those surveyed approved of a
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

husband slapping his wife in some situations in 1985, which fell to 12% in 1992 and
further declined to 10% in 1994. Gelles argues furthermore that public tolerance for
violence against women is also declining. About 87% of those surveyed in 1995
compared with 80% in 1994 believed outside intervention is needed if a man hits his
wife. Also, 57% of men agreed that abusers should be arrested compared with 49% in
1994.60
Cheetham’s workshop on violence against women argues that over the last 20 years
awareness of the nature and extent of violence against women has grown dramatically,
leading to the development of an extensive range of social, economical and legal
support. Cheetham argues that community attitudes towards violence against women
have also changed.61 Violence in the home is now recognized as a crime, not a private
matter. But while community attitudes have changed for the positive, there is still scope
for improving community attitudes and knowledge about the realities of violence
against women. A 1995 survey as quoted by Cheetham of the Office of the Status for
Women generated the following findings:

• Violence is of particular concern to the community in general.

• Women are more fearful of violence and are seen as a particularly vulnerable
group.
• There is a much greater awareness and understanding of domestic violence;
however, the community continues to be judgmental of women who experience
violence and does not want to get involved.
• Community understanding of sexual violence is not as well advanced as domestic
violence.
• Some population groups are much better informed than others. Women exhibit a
higher level of awareness and understanding than men.62

Violence Against Women in the Arab World

In Arab societies, information suggests that the work on female victims of violence is
always hindered by the lack of statistical and official data, i.e. police and courts records.
That also includes difficulties faced by researchers into the area due to subject
sensitivity and personal relevance. In Lebanon in 1997, a study showed that 33.5% of
women participating in the study were victims of at least one form of violence.63 Verbal
 Violence Against Women 77

violence is the most frequent act faced by women and physical violence comes as
second on the list. Furthermore, in a study presented to the Arab Organization for
Human Rights, it is reported that in Egypt in 1995, 14,700 women, about 52%
of the women who took part in the study, were beaten by their husbands who
came from different age, class and educational backgrounds.64 In the same year
and until 2002, 97% of the women and girls in Egypt were subjected to some form
of genital mutilation. In Yemen in the year 2000 about 70% of Yemeni women
were circumcised. The same study reports that while 47% of the Yemeni women
were abused by a male family member; only 3.4% of the incidents were reported
to the authorities. In Morocco, unemployed women are more subjected to violence
than economically independent women: eight out of every ten Moroccan housewives
are beaten by their husbands. The number of women escaping marital violence
is 17% and physical violence is 5.1%. In Bahrain, in a study conducted on 31
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

cases treated for marital violence, 30% of the cases were victims of severe beating, 18%
were subjected to attempted murder, and 8% were threatened to be killed by their
husbands.
Baobeed’s paper presented at the regional meeting on the prevention of honour
crimes reported that crimes of violence against women in Yemen are estimated to be
around 5.5% for each 100,000 women.65 The paper also reported that direct and
indirect killing is the number one form of violence against women. The total percentage
of honour killing crimes to the total percentage of violent crimes against women was
46.4% in 1996 and 43% in 1997. Honour killing is most common in the rural and
mountain areas. Women are also the victims of kidnapping crimes: of the total
percentage of kidnapping crimes registered in the year 1997, women were the victims
in 68% of the cases. Suicide, rape and physical violence is more common in the coastal
area of Yemen, and 41% of suicidal cases are committed by women. Single women are
the targets of rape attempts, while girls under the age of 15 are more often victims of
rape than of killing, which is 66.6% of all rape crimes in Yemen. In general most of the
violence directed towards women is taking place within the family structure; therefore,
married women are more subjected to violence than single women, that is, physical
violence and killing attempts. Married women are also the highest percentage of women
committing suicide. Women less than 18 years of age are the victims of 39% of violent
crimes against women in Jordan, and 32% of women victims of violent crimes are under
the age of 27.66
Arab culture has also subjected women to other forms of violence that put strains
on their freedom of movement. It has been reported at the 1995 Fourth World
Conference on Women in Beijing that 69% of women are prevented from travelling
by their husbands, 82% of women are prevented from going out of the house, and 93%
of married women are at one time or another subjected to forced sex by their
husbands.67
Violence against women does not only violate women’s basic right to safety, it is also
a health issue. According to the World Health Organization, violence against women is
a major health concern, for violence against women and girls has serious consequences
for their physical and mental health. Abused women are more likely to suffer from
depression, anxiety, psychosomatic symptoms, eating problems and sexual dysfunc-
tions. Violence against women also may affect the reproductive health of women
through unplanned and unwanted pregnancies, HIV/AIDS and various gynaecological
problems.68
 78 Nora Almosaed

Findings of the Study

Demographic Characteristics of the Sample
The total number of women and men who participated in this survey of society’s
attitude on violence against women was 230. A large proportion of women were
between the ages of 20 and 25 (33% of the total female sample), while a large
proportion of men were between the ages of 26 and 30 (27.7% of the total male
sample). The largest age group in the sample is the 20–25 age group. The second is the
26–30 age group. These two age groups add up to 42% of the sample. Seven of the
women participants are above the age of 50, and they make up 6% of the sample. The
highest age for male respondents is 50 years; along with the women in the same age
group (46–50) they make up 6% of the sample.
Sixty-eight percent of the total sample were married (79 women and 77 men).
Twenty-seven percent were single, 4% divorced and the two widowed respondents
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

were women. Nine percent of the married women and men were involved in polygamist
marriage. Polygamy ranged around two and three wives. About 80% of the respondents
were born in Jeddah or another city, while 20% were born in a village or a small town.
Fifty-five percent of the sample has or is in the process of getting a university degree.
While 3% of the sample has a Masters or a PhD degree, 23% of the sample has a high
school diploma. About 53% of the women in the sample do not work, while the
majority of working women, 79%, are employed by the government. Eight percent only
of the men in the sample were not working. Also the majority of the working men, 46%,
are employed by the government. Fifteen percent of the men in the sample have their
own business. Forty-one percent of the women in the sample were economically
dependent, either on their fathers or husbands. Twenty-two percent of the working
women were not on good pay scales, and 10% of the men were on the same pay scale
as women.
Thirty-seven percent of the sample comes from a middle and upper middle class
income level, where their income provides a standard of life with comfort. However,
combining income and educational level, only 16% of the sample will qualify for a
middle class classification.
Sample religiosity is high; the percentage of women wearing the hijab is 90%; 99%
of the women pray some or all five of the day’s prayers; but only 26% of the female
sample thought of themselves as religious. Twenty percent of the male sample thought
of themselves as religious; however, 5% of the sample prays only on occasions, and 18%
of the male sample did not think of themselves as religious. Forty percent of those were
in the age group 20–25, and 30% were in the age group 31–35. However, only 6% of
the female sample thought of themselves as not being religious.
The question of religion becomes a variable just as age, education, marital status and
income where society’s view could be referred to. However, physical punishment is an
option given by religion in dealing with children as well as women even though there
are terms and conditions in using this option for both parents with children and
husbands with wives. These terms and conditions are as follows: physical punishment
is only a last resort to be used after admonition, verbal warning and enough time are
given to refrain from misbehaviour. These terms also specify the way in which physical
punishment is to be used; that is, not on the face and not severe where marks might be
left on the body. As for wives, the principle of physical punishment becomes an option
after admonition, verbal warning and not sleeping with them. Physical punishment
against women, however, is a right given to men to be used for its symbolic value rather
than its immediate effect.
 Violence Against Women 79

History of Physical Violence in the Sample Population

The use of corporal punishment was experienced by 65% of the men and women
who participated in the study: that is, 72% of the men’s sample and 58% of the
women’s sample. Obviously, the use of physical chastisement is more common to boys’
upbringing than it is with girls’. However, fathers are using physical chastisement with
the boys more than the mothers, and mothers are using the physical chastisement with
the girls almost the same as the fathers. Fifty-eight percent of the men experienced
physical violence in childhood and were beaten by their fathers, only 9% by their
mothers and the rest were beaten by both parents. Thirty-four percent of the women
experienced physical violence in childhood. Thirty-nine percent of the women were
beaten by their mothers and 30% by their fathers, while the rest experienced corporal
punishment at the hands of both parents. Generally, fathers and husbands have
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

absolute authority over children and wives. However, their authority, as some studies
report, is increasingly being questioned and challenged.69 Absolute obedience is a
stronger value among the population with rural backgrounds than it is among popu-
lation with city backgrounds. In general girls are more obedient to the male authority
than are boys and that might explain why the male members of the sample experienced
abuse at the hands of their fathers more than at the hands of their mothers.
Our experiences, as we grow up, often form our attitudes. Because physical punish-
ment was part of 65% of the sample’s growing up experience, it forms their view of the
way Saudi families’ bring up their children. Seventy-five percent of the sample view the
use of physical punishment as associated with being brought up in a Saudi family and
23% of the sample view the use of physical violence as rather excessive. Eighty-six
percent of the sample who experienced physical violence experienced it during their
childhood and adolescence. For 16% of them the experience of violence continued
through their youth.
Alsomari’s study on violence in the family in Egypt argues that the use of physical
violence is experienced more by fathers’ and mothers’ generation then sons’ and
daughters’. Alsomari points out that the group that experienced most physical violence
was the women, victims as well as abusers. In his study, mothers came first on the list
by 36.5%, secondly, the daughters at the hand of their mothers by 32%, thirdly, the
daughters at the hand of their fathers by 32%, fourthly, the fathers by 29%, fifthly, the
sons at the hand of their fathers by 27% and, finally, the sons at the hand of their
mothers by 26%.70
Thirty percent of the men were physically abusive of women, while 41% of the total
sample of men and women has women in the family who were victims of physical
violence. Their relationship to the participants in the sample is as follows: 25%
sisters, 17% mothers, 10.5% sisters-in-law, 5% aunts and 10% are wives; they are
either the wives of the male participants or the fathers’ wives of the female participants.
Husbands have been identified by the female participants to be in 34% of the cases as
the perpetrators, fathers in 5% of the cases and 2% of the cases were experiencing
violence at the hands of their sons. About 53% of the male participants, who physically
abused women, thought using violence was necessary; 17.5% felt guilty for using
violence; another 17.5% felt that it was not the right thing to do. The remaining 12%
of the male respondents were satisfied with the action they took, i.e. beating the
woman.
 80 Nora Almosaed
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

FIG. 1. Male and female attitudes towards the use of violence against women.

Attitudes Towards Wife Abuse

Most studies on violence against women discussed the question of why the violence
occurred. As shown earlier, the answer relies mainly on the unequal power relations
between women and men. Men were given the ‘right’ to correct women’s conduct even
if that required using violence against them. However, 32% of the men in the sample
that have used violence against women justified their actions by women’s misbehaviour,
29% for answering back, 17% for family disagreement, which is more appropriate in the
cases where wives are the victims of the violence. Family disagreement might be caused
by problems with the husband’s family, disagreement over issues relating to the
children, disagreement over household budget or disposal of wife’s income, husband’s
relations with other women and the husband’s use of alcohol. Nine percent of the men
also justified their action by women’s immoral behaviour, which always implies ‘rela-
tionship’ with men. The rest of the men moreover used violence in cases of personal
disagreement.
On the question of why the female member in the family has become a victim of
violence, the women in the sample stated that it was because of family disagreement.
Sisters, mothers and sisters-in-law were the most likely victims of violence among the
women’s sample, and family disagreement in the case of unmarried women might imply
male disapproval of the woman’s style in dressing and general appearance and conduct.

The Use of Violence

Figure 1 shows the male respondents justified the use of violence against women by
52.7% as ‘it is the appropriate way to deal with women’s misconduct’. Alsomari finds
that girls are likely to be punished for leaving the house without permission; 42% of
girls compared with 28% of boys. Similarly, the figures for physical punishment for
having contact or relationship with the other sex are 49% for girls and 32% for boys.
In general, occasions that led to physical violence included alleged relationships with
men, answering back, not dealing respectfully with male family members, and finally
not doing what you are expected to do as a woman. As expected, women approved less
of women being beaten by men (55.9% of the women respondents), and only 16% of
 Violence Against Women 81
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

FIG. 2. Male and female attitudes towards women staying in abusive relationships.

the male respondents thought that beating a woman is an aggressive way in dealing with
whatever comes from the woman. Men, furthermore, seem to justify the use of violence
against women as the appropriate way to deal with women’s misconduct. However,
women’s rights are a negotiable issue among men in society, but the agreement seems
to be on the man’s right to decide what a woman’s right is. Some men (husbands and
fathers) might accept women’s right to have an opinion and a say in what happens in
their lives, some men might even deal with wives as partners, and some fathers might
have better relationships with their daughters than their daughters’ relationship with
their mothers. But also some men have no space in their mind for a woman’s input in
any matter whether it is related to the family as a whole or it is related to her personal
life. Women also oppress other women and deny them the right to choice, a reality that
feminism came to accept; therefore, 36% of the women’s sample thought violence is the
appropriate way to deal with women’s misconduct.

Women Staying in Abusive Relationships

Figure 2 shows that 57% of the male sample and 47.5% of the female sample view
women who are abused by their husbands as women staying in the marriage because of
their children. The law in Saudi Arabia gives mothers the right to keep their children
when the father dies or a divorce takes place until they reach the age of seven years. At
the age of seven, girls are placed in the custody of their father or his family and boys
get to choose in the court which parent they want to be with. In reality, a husband can
deny his wife the right to see her children, and if they are at the age where the law gives
her the right to keep them she has to go to court to maintain that right, and with her
family’s support and an understanding judge she could have them within a short period,
otherwise it could take years. Therefore, men usually threaten their wives who ask for
divorce with preventing them from seeing their children, so it is no surprise that this
situation is well understood by the majority of the sample. However, even if the
husband would not take the children, then the woman must have an income to support
her children. Even if the wife’s family is willing to support their daughter, her children
usually ‘belong’ to the father and therefore he has to provide for them. Since the legal
 82 Nora Almosaed
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

FIG. 3. Male and female attitudes towards abusive men.

system in Saudi Arabia does not yet have an enforceable system for men who do not
pay their children’s allowances, mothers have no choice but not to ask for divorce and
stay in the marital home or leave the house without the children when violence takes
place in the relationship. Figure 2 also shows that more women than men think that a
woman staying in a marriage where she is beaten is a woman without dignity.

Attitude Towards Abusive Men

Figure 3 shows that most women and men seem to view men using their power and
physically abusing women as not meeting the expectation of masculinity. The sample
also agrees that men with such a tendency are misusing the power they have over the
female members of their family.

Situational Attitudes
Even when women put up with abusive relationships for their children’s sake, the
society views that situation as a social problem. About 40% of the sample believes that
the state should introduce regulations to tackle this problem. However, the support for
leaving the solution to the individuals concerned is reflected by a substantial 34% of the
sample.
In theory, as Hague and Malos argue, assault is a crime wherever it happens, in the
home or outside, and whoever does it, a spouse or a stranger.71 In practice, it has made
a great deal of difference. Many researchers argue that statistical data prove that women
are safer in the street than they are in their home.72 Young men are in more danger on
the street than women are; however, many cultures have considered the marital
relationship in particular, and the family more generally, as a private sphere in which
others should not interfere with the freedom of the male household head to control
events and decisions, and also to punish challengers to his authority.
 Violence Against Women 83
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

FIG. 4. Male and female attitudes towards situations of violence against women.

This notion of private sphere has not only affected the number of cases that
are reported officially; it is also shared by institutions including the police and the
judiciary. What makes violence within the family a reality to many women and children
is not the fact that the family is a private institution, insulated from the rules of the
wider society, but rather the fact that the social organization of the family exists within
a cultural context where violence is tolerated, accepted and even mandated.73 There-
fore, the fact that wives are abused within the privacy of the home and within marriage
alters the way in which the problem is perceived and the way in which agencies/the state
respond.74
Figure 4 shows that about 41% of the male sample and 40% of the female sample
expressed that wife abuse is not a private affair where men can abuse their wives, and
others in the family as well as outsiders such as the police cannot take action against
abusers. Furthermore, 27% of the male sample and 25% of the female sample believed
that the state has an obligation towards women to protect them from being abused by
their husbands.

Demographic and Social Differentials

Age
In all age groups, the percentage who had experienced violence in childhood and
adolescence is higher than the percentage of those who did not. Men, however, who
were not exposed to physical violence are against the use of physical punishment.
Abusive men were mostly within the age group of 31–35; 45.2% of the men in this age
group have beaten a woman before the study took place. While 91% of men within the
age group of 41–45 said they never abused a woman before, 81% of the men within the
age group of 20–25 also said the same.
 84 Nora Almosaed
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

FIG. 5. Male perpetrators of physical violence by age groups.

Figure 5 shows the largest proportion of males (41.2%) who admitted to have
perpetrated physical violence on women fall in the age group 31–35. The percentages
are lower in the youngest and the older age groups (2.9% for the 41–45 age group and
11.8% for the 20–25 age group).
Age, however, did not make a significant difference in people’s responses to the main
questions that are related to society’s attitudes towards wife’s abuse; these are: Why do
some husbands abuse their wives? What do you think of the women who get abused by
their husbands and stay in the marriage? What do you think of men who abuse their
wives? On the question of their view of the situation where a woman is abused by her
husband, all age groups seem to have their choice around the same views, except for the
age group 31–35. About 92% of this age group, which makes 50% of the total sample,
view this situation as a social problem.
As with the male members of the sample, the female members with abusive experi-
ence in childhood are less supportive of the use of physical punishment, though the
majority of women had experienced violence across age groups. The age groups of
20–25 and 46–50 were less exposed to physical punishment. Different age groups
among the women’s sample have also shown no real significance in the sample
responses to the main four questions.

Marital Status
The majority of married as well as single men thought physical abuse is justified when
misconduct is committed by the wife. This opinion was held by 54.5% of married men
and 43.8% of single men. Equal numbers of married men thought wife abuse is a family
affair, 33.8%, and a crime, 33.8%. However, 62.5% of single men thought it is a social
problem.
Divorced women, more than any other women, view the situation where a wife puts
up with a violent marriage as because she lacks the support of her own family. About
43% of divorced women thought a woman still in a violent marriage is weak and
without anyone to support her. However, the one man and one woman respondent who
thought women deserve to be dealt with by violence are both married.
 Violence Against Women 85

Educational Level
Despite the high educational level for 55% of the sample including Bachelor’s, Masters’
and PhD degrees, the majority of the male sample approved of the use of physical
punishment. The highest percentage of the sample who viewed the use of physical
punishment as an aggressive way of dealing with women’s misconduct were the
respondents who had no degree higher than a high school diploma. In general, negative
attitudes towards wife abuse are more evident among less educated men than among
highly educated men.
The same argument applies to women. Most women who view the situation where
women become a victim of physical violence as an act of aggression are the women with
a low educational level. This includes 100% of those who have never been to school but
can read and write and 85% of the women with an elementary level of education.
However, women with a high educational level saw the situation where women are
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

abused as a social problem as did 76% of women with a university degree.

Income
Difference in income level does not seem to influence society’s view on violence against
women. It could be because most low income members of the sample are the young
members in the sample who have just started their working life and have a high
unemployment rate.
The results are conflicting in the women’s sample with relation to their views on
violence against women. In general, women with and without personal income have
similar views, but in certain areas the similarity in the views of the women without
personal income and the women with low or medium income become stronger. For
example, women without income and those of medium income viewed the situation
where women become victims of violence as aggression. Also the women without
income did not consider men who beat women to be masculine in a percentage as high
as among the women with low income.

Religiosity
Data on different degrees of religiosity do not show any significant difference in
attitudes toward violence against women. The results showed no difference in the
men’s response to the support of the use of physical punishment, the men who
admitted beating female members in the family, the men’s justification for the use of
violence against women, the view of women who stay in the marriage despite the abuse,
the view of violent men and the view of the situation where women are victims of
violence.
Despite their major agreement on most views, the highest percentage among the
women who did not view themselves as religious was towards viewing the act by which
men beat women as an aggressive act (71% of the non-religious group). The same
percentage also view women who stay in the marriage despite the violence as women
who do not get enough support from their families. Women of mild religious affiliation
and no religious affiliation are more with the view that abusive men do not fit the
masculine stereotype, 62% and 71%, respectively. Women with strong religious
affiliation share this view but only by 45%.
 86 Nora Almosaed

Conclusion
The main empirical findings of this study are as follows:

• Seventy-two percent of the men’s sample and 58% of the women’s sample were
physically punished as children and adolescents. Both parents were equally abusive
in the female sample, but it was mainly fathers who were abusive in the male
sample.
• Seventy-five percent of the sample view the use of physical punishment as very
much associated with the Saudi family. Twenty-three percent of the sample
thought that Saudi families use an excessive amount of physical violence in
punishing their children.
• Thirty percent of the male sample have abused female members of their families,
and 41% of the total sample have female members of their families who are victims
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

of physical violence.
• Husbands were seen as the main perpetrators in 34% of the violent cases.
• Fifty-three percent of the 30% of men who physically abused women in their
families thought it was an act that had to be undertaken. Women were beaten by
them for answering back in 29% of the cases, 17% for family disagreement, 9% for
immoral behaviour and the rest were abused over personal disagreements.
• Forty-six percent of the sample thought women are generally abused by their
husbands because violence is an effective way of dealing with female misconduct,
and a majority of the men’s sample (53%) thought violence is the appropriate way
to deal with female misconduct.
• A majority of the sample view women who keep the marriage going despite the
abuse are mothers who had to put up with such relationships in order to keep their
family stability.
• Almost half of the sample view men who abused women as not real men (48%)
and more men than women thought abusive men have misused the power they
have over women when they became violent toward them.
• A substantial portion of the sample view wife abuse as a social problem that has to
be discussed publicly (40%), and among 34% of the sample, it is a private affair
that is of concern to the woman and man involved only.

As the Saudi society is a heterogeneous society, and sex, age, income, education and
religious affiliation do make a difference in people’s attitudes as well as behaviours, the
case of abused women presents a situation where similar attitudes are shared by people
despite their socio-economic differences. In fact, no major differences were found in the
sample’s attitudes toward violence against women with regard to their difference in sex,
age, income, education and religiosity.
The most striking finding seems to be the degree of acceptance of violence against
women and the lack of clear differences between men and women in their attitudes to
this sort of violence.

Acknowledgements
This study was conducted on a scholarship offered by the British Council Office in
Saudi Arabia. My thanks to them and to Professor Jan Pahl of Kent University at
Canterbury for her comments on an earlier draft of this paper.
 Violence Against Women 87

NOTES
1. See I. Ajzen and M. Fishbein, Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, New Jersey:
Prentice–Hall, 1980; D. Terry and M. Hogg, eds, Attitude, Behavior and Social Change: The Role
of Norms and Group Membership, London: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000.
2. A. Acock and W. Scott, ‘A Model for Predicting Behavior: The Effect of Attitude and Social Class
on High and Low Visibility Political Participation’, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 1,
1980, pp. 59–72.
3. Ibid., pp. 59–60.
4. I. Ajzen and M. Fishbein, Understanding Attitudes, op. cit.
5. L. Warner and M. DeFleur, ‘Attitude as an Interactional Concept: Social Constraint and Social
Distance as Intervening Variables between Attitudes and Actions’, American Sociological Review,
Vol. 34, 1969, pp. 153–169.
6. H. Ehrlich, ‘Attitudes, Behavior, and the Intervening Variables’, American Sociologist, Vol. 4, 1969,
pp. 29–34.
7. A. Wicker, ‘Attitudes v. Actions: The Relationship of Verbal and Overt Responses to Attitude
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

Objects’, in eds N. Warren and M. Jahoda, Attitudes, London: Penguin Education, 1973,
pp. 167–194.
8. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, London: Sage, 1997, pp. 14–15.
9. Ibid., pp. 14–15.
10. L. Thurstone, ‘The Measurement of Attitudes’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Vol. 26,
1931, pp. 249–269.
11. D. Terry, M. Hogg and K. White, ‘Attitude–Behavior Relations: Social Identity and Group
Membership’, in eds D. Terry and M. Hogg, Attitude, Behavior and Social Change: The Role of
Norms and Group Membership, London: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000, pp. 67–94.
12. Ibid., p. 72.
13. Ibid., p.73.
14. R. E. Dobash and R. Dobash, ‘Cross-border Encounters: Challenges and Opportunities’, in eds
R. E. Dobash and R. Dobash, Rethinking Violence Against Women, London: Sage, 1998, pp. 1–22.
15. Ibid., pp. 3–4.
16. P. Sen, ‘Development Practice and Violence Against Women’, in ed. C. Sweetman, Violence
Against Women, Oxford: Oxfam, 1998, pp. 7–16.
17. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit.
18. Ibid., p. 21.
19. P. Sen, ‘Development Practice and Violence Against Women’, op. cit., p. 8.
20. United Nations, FWCW Platform for Action: Violence Against Women, Beijing, China, 1995,
available online at: ⬍ http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/*platform/violence.gtm ⬎ .
21. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit., p. 71.
22. C. Bunch, ‘The Intolerable Status Quo: Violence Against Women and Girls’, 1997, available
online at: ⬍ http://www.unicef.org/pon97/women1.htm ⬎ .
23. World Health Organization, available online at: ⬍ http://www.who.int/inf-fs/en/fact239.html ⬎ .
24. P. Sen, ‘Development Practice and Violence Against Women’, op. cit., p. 9.
25. The FREDA Centre for Research on Violence against Women and Children, Canada, ‘Violence
Against Women: Statistical Highlights’, available online at: ⬍ http://www.harbour.sfu.ca/freda/arti-
cles/statsw.htm ⬎ .
26. New Zealand, ‘Survey on Violence Against Women’, 1994, available online at: ⬍ http://www/min-
cava.umn.edu/library/dv/ ⬎ .
27. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit.
28. Ibid., p. 91.
29. R. E. Dobash and R. Dobash, Violence Against Wives: A Case Against Patriarchy, London: Open
Books, 1979.
30. G. Hague and E. Malos, Domestic Violence: Action for Change, Cheltenham: New Clarion Press,
1998.
31. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit., p. 71.
32. One-Day Survey (28 September 2000), available online at: ⬍ www.domesticviolencedata.org ⬎ .
33. B. Stanko, ‘Enough is Enough’, 2000, available online at: ⬍ http://www.eurowrc.org/01.eurowrc/
04.eurowrc-en/45.en-ewrc.htm ⬎ .
34. The 2000 British Crime Survey/England and Wales, London: Home Office, Research and
Statistics Directorate.
 88 Nora Almosaed

35. The 2002 British Crime Survey/England and Wales, London: Home Office, Research and
Statistics Directorate.
36. R. E. Dobash and R. Dobash, ‘Cross-border Encounters’, op. cit., p. 10.
37. M. Hester, ‘Domestic Violence in China’, in eds J. Radford, M. Friedberg and L. Harne, Women,
Violence and Strategies for Action: Feminist Research, Policy and Practice, Philadelphia: Open Univer-
sity Press, 2000, pp. 73–85.
38. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit., p. 72.
39. P. Sen, ‘Development Practice and Violence Against Women’, op. cit., p. 9.
40. ‘Violence Against Women: Aspects and Consequences’, Conference in Cairo, Egypt, 12–13 May
2003, available online at: ⬍ www.peacewomen.org/newx/mayper cent2003/newsindex.html ⬎ .
41. First Regional Meeting on Crimes of Honour, Amman, Jordan, 1999, available online at:
⬍ http://www.jordanembassyus.org/060199004.htm ⬎ .
42. United Nation Population Fund (UNFPA), available online at: ⬍ www.un.org/esa/population ⬎ .
43. P. Sen, ‘Development Practice and Violence Against Women’, op. cit., p. 8.
44. M. Ouattara, P. Sen and M. Thomson, ‘Forced Marriage, Forced Sex: The Perils of Childhood
for Girls’, in Violence Against Women, op. cit., pp. 27–33.
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 09:08 04 September 2013

45. G. Hague and E. Malos, Domestic Violence: Action for Change, op. cit.
46. G. Hague and C. Wilson, The Silenced Pain: Domestic Violence 1945–1970, Bristol: Policy Press,
1996.
47. J. Brophy and C. Smart, eds, Women-in-Law: Explorations in Law, Family and Sexuality, London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985.
48. Zero Tolerance Charitable Trust Survey, BBC, Fact File, 1998.
49. Ibid.
50. Ibid., p. 50.
51. Ibid., p. 49.
52. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit., p. 36.
53. J. Mooney, Gender, Violence and the Social Order, London: Macmillan Press, 2000.
54. National Youth Affairs Research Scheme, ‘Young People’s Perceptions of and Attitudes to Sexual
Violence Survey’, Hobart, Australia: National Clearinghouse for Youth Studies, 1995.
55. J. Mooney, Gender, Violence and the Social Order, op. cit., p. 186.
56. K. McCann, ‘Battered Women and the Law: the Limits of the Legislation’, in Women-in-Law, op.
cit., pp. 89–102.
57. Ibid.
58. National Family Health Survey, 1998–1999, available online at: ⬍ http://www.changemakers.net/
journal/00december/ray.cfm ⬎
59. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit., p. 37.
60. Ibid.
61. J. Cheetham, ‘Violence Against Women: It’s Against All the Rules’, NSW Statewide Campaign to
Reduce Violence Against Women, NSW Attorney General’s Department, 2001.
62. Ibid.
63. ‘Violence Against Women: Aspects and Consequences’, Conference in Cairo, Egypt, 12–13 May
2003, available online at: ⬍ www.peacewomen.org/newx/maypercent2003/newsindex.html ⬎ .
64. Ibid.
65. M. Baobeed, First Regional Meeting on Crimes of Honour, Amman, Jordan, 1999, available
online at: ⬍ http://www.jordanembassyus.org/060199004.htm ⬎ .
66. Princess Basmah Center for Women Affairs, Jordanian Women between Present and Past, 1999,
available online at: ⬍ http://www.mosd.gov.jo/violence-pastw.html ⬎ .
67. United Nations, Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, China, 1995, available online at:
⬍ www.eurowarc.org/13.institutions/5.un/un-en/04.un-en.htm ⬎ .
68. World Health Organization, available online at: ⬍ http://www.who.int/inf-fs/en/fact239.html ⬎ .
69. M. Alsaif, An Introduction to the Study of the Saudi Society, Riyadh: Dar Alkerajee, 1999.
70. A. Alsomari, ed., Violence in the Family, Cairo: Dar Almareefa Aljameeia, 2000.
71. G. Hague and E. Malos, Domestic Violence: Action for Change, op. cit., p. 60.
72. See C. Sweetman, ed., Violence Against Women, op. cit.; M. Borkowski, M. Murch and V. Walker,
Marital Violence: The Community Response, London: Tavistock, 1983.
73. R. Gelles, Intimate Violence in Families, op. cit., p. 125.
74. J. Pahl, ‘Introduction’, in ed. J. Pahl, Private Violence and Public Policy: The Needs of Battered Women
and the Response of the Public Services, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985, pp. 1–19.